Delhi District Court
Cr. Case/5283866/2016 on 29 January, 2021
State v. Rajesh Sharma @ Babbal
IN THE COURT OF MS. RASHMI GUPTA, MM06, NORTH
DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS, NEW DELHI
State v. Rajesh Sharma @ Babbal CNR no. DLNT02
0008242013
s/o Late Om Prakash Sharma
FIR no. 258/11 Date of Institution 08.07.2013
Police Station Adarsh Nagar Judgment Reserved on Not reserved
Sections 385/34 IPC Date of Judgment 29.01.2021
JUDGMENT
a) CIS Number of the case 5283866/16
b) Date of offence 29.09.2011
c) Name of Complainant Dr. Vijay Jindal S/o Shri /S C Das R/o
E24, Sushila Road, Adarsh Nagar,
Delhi33
d) Name and address of the Rajesh S/o Om Prakash R/o KI/42,
accused person Budh Vihar, PhaseI, Delhi.
e) Offence complained of 385/34 IPC
f) Plea of accused person Not guilty
g) Final Order Acquittal
h) Date of Order 29.01.2021
JUDGMENT:
1. Accused person namely Rajesh @ Babal has stood trial for offence under section 385/34 IPC on the allegation that in the year 2011 at E24, Sushila Road, Adara Nagar, Delhi, he alongwith coaccused Om Prakash(his father) and Ashwani(his brother) demanded Rs. 3,00,000/ from the FIR No. 258/11 PS Adarsh Nagar Page 1 of 4 State v. Rajesh Sharma @ Babbal complainant in order to release the documents and also put him in fear of implication in false case.
2. After taking the cognizance and compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C, charge against the accused Rajesh @ Babal was framed for offence under section 385/34 IPC vide order dated 16.11.2015.
3. Coaccused Om Prakash expired during the trial of the case and accused Ashwani absconded and failed to appear before the court. The case qua the accused Om Prakash was abated and accused Ashwani was declared a proclaimed offender, before the charge could be framed, vide order dated 01.04.2015.
4. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 07 witnesses.
5. Dr. Vijay Jindal has been examined as PW1; Shri Vishal Jindal has been examined as PW2; Smt. Shalini Jindal has been examined as PW3; SI Shashi Kumar has been examined as PW4; WSI Raj Rani has been examined as PW5 and SI Rajiv has been examined as PW6; Inspector Afaque Ahmed has been examined as PW7;
6. The Prosecution has relied upon and proved the following documents. Statement of complainant has been proved as Ex. PW1/A; Arrest memo of accused Rajesh Kumar has been proved as Ex.PW1/B; Personal search memo of accused Rajesh Kumar has been proved as Ex.PW1/C; Seizure memo of documents has been proved as Ex. PW2/A; Endorsement on Rukka has been proved as Ex. PW4/A; Copy of FIR has been proved as Ex.PW5/A; Arrest memo of accused Om Prakash has been proved as Ex.PW7/A; Personal search memo of accused Om Prakash has been proved as Ex.PW1/B. Letter dated 14.05.2011 written by Vishal Jindal to Minister of Immigration and FIR No. 258/11 PS Adarsh Nagar Page 2 of 4 State v. Rajesh Sharma @ Babbal Citizenship, Australia is Mark V1; Letter dated 14.05.2011 written by Vishal Jindal to Minister of External Affairs, New Delhi is Mark V3.
7. Thereafter, the prosecution evidence was closed and statement of accused was recorded on 23.12.2020 wherein he stated that he was innocent and opted not to lead evidence in his defence.
8. Thereafter, the matter was fixed for final arguments.
9. Arguments on behalf of the accused had been advanced by Sh. Jogesh and for prosecution by Sh. Raghav Khurana, on behalf of the State.
10. Both the sides have been carefully heard and the record have been perused.
11. In a nutshell it is the case of the prosecution that accused Om Prakash used to visit at the clinic of Dr. Vijay Jindal for the purpose of his treatment. Om Prakash proposed that Vishal Jindal s/o Vijay Jindal and Shalini Jindal daughter in law of Dr. Vijay Jindal could stay at the house of his son at Melborne, Australia when they were to visit Australia after grant of permanent residency. Accused Om Prakash in return demanded Rs.80,000/ in cash and also asked for the operation of his eyes done free. Complainant Vijay Jindal gave Rs.40,000/ to him and also got operated his one eye. On 31.03.2011 his son Vishal Jindal alongwith his wife and minor daughter went to Melbourne and stayed at the house of Ashwani Sharma for few days. Accused Ashwani Sharma was residing at House no.117, Eureka Drive, Manore Lake, Wyndham Vale, Victoria, Melbourne City. On 07.04.2011 when they returned back after day out accused Ashwani Sharma denied them entry in the house and took possession of all their belongings including two gold bangles, 1500 Australian dollars, clothes and documents pertaining to identity, education, residence of Vishal Jindal and Shalini Jindal. Thereafter they stayed at Gurudwara and also at some relative's place. On 14.04.2011 Vishal Jindal went to the house of FIR No. 258/11 PS Adarsh Nagar Page 3 of 4 State v. Rajesh Sharma @ Babbal Ashwani Sharma for the purpose of taking his belongings, he was made to stand outside the house for several hours and was given entry into the house only in the evening by the wife of accused Ashwani Sharma. Accused was not present in the house at that time. Vishal Jindal was made to talk to Ashwani Sharma on phone wherein he demanded Rs. 3 lakhs for returning their belongings and also threatened him. Accused asked Vishal Jindal that the money can also be paid to his father and brother Babbal in India by Vishal's father. Thereafter, on 22.04.2011 they returned to India and also lodged complaint with Immigration Department.
12. I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove and substantiate allegations of extortion against accused Rajesh qua whom charge was framed u/s 385 IPC vide order dated 16.11.2015. Discussion pertains only to accused Rajesh as qua coaccused Om Prakash the case had already been abated and coaccused Ashwani had already been declared PO.
13. There is no direct or circumstantial evidence on record to prove the demanding of money by the accused Rajesh. Prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges of extortion qua the accused Rajesh and what to say beyond reasonable doubt. There is no concrete evidence on record against the accused Rajesh.
14. Thus, in view of the above, accused Rajesh Sharma @ Babbal S/o Om Prakash Sharma is acquitted in the present case i.e FIR No.258/11 PS Adarsh Nagar u/s 385/34 IPC.
15. Put up for furnishing bonds under section 437A Cr.P.C for 01.02.2021.
Digitally signed by RASHMI Announced in open court RASHMI GUPTA GUPTA Date: 2021.02.01 18:34:15 +0530 on 29th day of January, 2021 (Rashmi Gupta) MM06, North District Rohini Courts, Delhi/29.01.2021 FIR No. 258/11 PS Adarsh Nagar Page 4 of 4