Delhi District Court
State vs . Vishnu Lakra on 6 June, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SH. JITENDRA SINGH
ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE : WEST
TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI
FIR No. 1222018
U/S. 3 DPDP Act
PS Ranhola
State Vs. Vishnu Lakra
Case ID No. 11802018
JUDGMENT
1. Sr. No of case 11802018
2. Date of commission of offence 12.02.2018
3. Name of complainant ASI Parminder Singh
4. Name of accused Vishnu Lakra
S/o. Sh. Harish Chander
R/o: H.No. 97A, Near Krishna
Mandir, Village Ranhola, Delhi.
5. Offence complained of U/s. 3 DPDP Act
6. Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
7. Final order Convicted
8. Date of such order 06.06.2018
1. FACTS IN BRIEF/ CASE SET UP BY PROSECUTION: Accused has been sent for trial on the allegations that on 12.02.2018 at Nazafgarh Nangloi Road, Ganga Dharam Kata, Ranhola, Delhi, accused had put the iron board on the side of the main (government land) and thereby committed an offence State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 1/8 punishable u/s. 3 of DPDP Act (hereinafter referred as Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007).
2. MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS: After completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed by the police against accused. Cognizance of the offence was taken and the accused was summoned. Copy of the chargesheet was supplied to the accused and the matter was adjourned for arguments on charge.
3. NOTICE FRAMED AGAINST THE ACCUSED: Notice for offence punishable u/s. 3 DPDP Act was given to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. EVIDENCE LED BY THE PROSECUTION: In order to prove its case, prosecution has examined two witnesses. The testimony of the said witness in brief is as under :
(a)PW1 is ASI Parminder. PW1 is the IO. PW1 deposed that on 12.02.2018, he was posted as PS Ranhola as ASI. On that day, he alongwith Ct. Vishwas were on patrolling duty and while patrolling when they reached at Nazfgarh Nangloi Road, Ganga Dharam Kanta, Ranhol, Delhi, they saw that a iron board was affixed on the side of the main road. He clicked the photograph of the said board. He further deposed that after that tehrir was prepared by him, which is Ex. PW1/A, bearing his signature at point A. FIR was got State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 2/8 registered under section 3 of DPDP Act, through Ct. Vishwas. He further deposed that after that he prepared the site plan of the spot, which is Ex. PW1/B, bearing his signature at point A. He further deposed that on 14.02.2018, he alongiwth Ct. Vishwas visit the spot again and met with the owner/accused Vishnu Lakra and informed the entire incident. He further deposed that after that he arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/C, bearing his signature at point A and he was also personally searched vide memo Ex. PW1/D, bearing his signature at point A. After that accused was released on police bail after furnishing of appropriate surety. He recorded the statement of Ct. Vishwas. After that he filed the chargsheet before the court.
(b)PW2 is Ct. Vishwas. PW2 deposed that on 12.02.2018, he was posted as PS Ranhola as Constable. On that day, he alongwith ASI Parminder were on patrolling duty and while patrolling they reached at Nazfgarh Nangloi Road, Ganga Dharam Kanta, Ranhola, Delhi, they saw that a iron board was affixed on the side of the main road. After that ASI Parminder clicked the photograph of the said board. He further deposed that after that tehrir was prepared by the IO, which is Ex. PW1/A. FIR was got registered under section 3 of DPDP Act, through him. He further deposed after that IO prepared the site plan of the spot, which is already Ex. PW1/B, State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 3/8 bearing his signature at point B. He further deposed that on 14.02.2018, he alongiwth ASI Parminder visit the spot again and met with the owner/accused Vishnu Lakra and informed the entire incident. He further deposed that after that he arrested the accused vide arrest memo already Ex. PW1/C, bearing his signature at point B and he was also personally searched vide already memo Ex. PW1/D, bearing his signature at point B. After that accused was released on police bail after furnishing of appropriate surety. His statement was recorded by the IO.
5. STATEMENT OF ACCUSED: Statement of accused was recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. wherein the incriminating evidence was put to the accused. In the said statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C, accused has admitted the allegations however stated that he was not aware about the Defacement of Property Act. Accused had not led any evidence in his defence.
6. ARGUMENTS OF LD. APP FOR STATE AND ACCUSED: Ld APP for the State had argued that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Ld APP for the State had also argued that the factum of defacement of the public property by accused has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and therefore, accused is liable to be convicted in this case.
State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 4/8 On the other hand, accused has stated that he was not aware about the Act and has stated that the said board was put just to bring to the notice of public about the advertisement of his Dharm Kata.
7. REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
(i) Before proceeding further, I need to discuss the relevant legal propositions applicable on to the facts of the case. It is a settled proposition of criminal law that the prosecution is supposed to prove its case on judicial file beyond reasonable doubt by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence & that in order to prove its case on judicial file, the prosecution is supposed to stand on its own legs whereby it cannot derive any benefit whatsoever from the weaknesses, if any, in the defence of the accused. Further settled it is, that the primary burden of proof for proving the offences in a criminal trial rests on the shoulders of the prosecution, which burden never shifts on to the accused.
(ii) It is no longer Res Integra that accused is entitled to benefit of every reasonable doubt(s) appearing qua the material facts of the prosecution's story whereby such reasonable doubt(s) entitles the accused to acquittal.
(iii) In the light of the above discussed legal position, I shall now step forward to divulge my opinion on the respective fate of the accused.
State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 5/8
(iv) PW1 has placed on record the photographs. Bare perusal of the testimony of PW1 who is the material witness shows that the accused had committed the offence of defacement of the public property by putting board on the side of the main road (government wall). Moreover, accused has also admitted the allegations of putting of iron board in his statement recorded u/s. 313 cr.p.c. The relevant extract of the examination in chief of PW1 and PW2 are reproduced below for ready reference: "PW1: On 12.02.2018, I was posted as PS Ranhola as ASI. On that day, I alongwith Ct. Vishwas were on patrolling duty and while patrolling we reached at Nazfgarh Nangloi Road, Ganga Dharam Kanta, Ranhola, Delhi, we saw that a iron board was affixed on the side of the main road. I clicked the photograph of the said board. Thereafter, tehrir was prepared by me which is Ex. PW1/A, bearing my signature at point A. FIR was got registered under section 3 of DPDP Act, through Ct. Vishwas. After that I prepared the site plan of the spot, which is Ex. PW1/B, bearing my signature at point A. Thereafter, on 14.02.2018, I alongiwth Ct. Vishwas visit the spot again and met with the owner/accused Vishnu Lakra (who is present in the court today, correctly identified by the witness) and informed the entire incident. After that I arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/C, bearing my signature at point A and he was also personally searched vide memo Ex. PW1/D, bearing my signature at point A. After that accused was released on police bail after furnishing of appropriate surety. I recorded the State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 6/8 statement of Ct. Vishwas. After that I filed the chargsheet before the court.
PW2: On 12.02.2018, I was posted as PS Ranhola as Ct.. On that day, I alongwith ASI Parminder were on patrolling duty and while patrolling we reached at Nazfgarh Nangloi Road, Ganga Dharam Kanta, Ranhola, Delhi, we saw that a iron board was affixed on the side of the main road. After that ASI Parminder clicked the photograph of the said board. Thereafter, tehrir was prepared by the IO which is Ex. PW1/A. FIR was got registered under section 3 of DPDP Act, through me. After that IO prepared the site plan of the spot, which is already Ex. PW1/B, bearing my signature at point B. Thereafter, on 14.02.2018, I alongiwth ASI Parminder visit the spot again and met with the owner/accused Vishnu Lakra (who is present in the court today, correctly identified by the witness) and informed the entire incident. After that I arrested the accused vide arrest memo already Ex. PW1/C, bearing my signature at point B and he was also personally searched vide already memo Ex. PW1/D, bearing my signature at point B. After that accused was released on police bail after furnishing of appropriate surety. My statement was recorded by the IO.
(v) The testimony of PW1 and PW2 have remained uncontested and unrebutted. There is nothing on record to doubt the same.
(vi) Reliance can be placed upon Anil Bhatia vs. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors reported as WP(C) NO. 6711/2013 wherein the court held that State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 7/8 "unregulated putting up of Poster/ Banners/ Hoarding on the public property lead to public nuisance and runs counter to public order within the meaning of Article 19(2) of the Constitution."
(vii) Thus, the prosecution has successfully brought on record that defacement of the public property was done by the accused. The cumulative and corroborating testimony of PW1 and PW2 also clearly prove that the accused has committed the offence under Section 3 DPDP Act.
8. CONCLUSION: Keeping in view the facts and circumstances and the discussion made hereinabove, I am of considered view that prosecution has succeeded in proving offence punishable u/s. 3 DPDP Act against accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, accused is hereby convicted for said offence.
Digitally signed by JITENDRA JITENDRA SINGH SINGH Date: 2018.06.06 15:42:01 +0530 Judgment dictated and JITENDRA SINGH pronounced in the open Court ACMM:WEST DISTT:DELHI i.e. the 6th of June, 2018 (This judgment consists of 8 pages) State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 8/8 IN THE COURT OF SH. JITENDRA SINGH
ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE : WEST TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI FIR No. 1222018 U/S. 3 DPDP Act PS Ranhola State Vs. Vishnu Lakra Case ID No. 11802018 ORDER ON POINT OF SENTENCE Present: Ld APP for state.
Convict in person.
I have heard Ld APP for State as well as Convict on the point of sentence and have perused the record.
It is submitted by Convict that he is the sole bread earner for his family. It is further submitted that he is not a previous convict and he is first time offender. Convict has prayed for a lenient view.
On the other hand Ld APP for State submitted that the convict be sentenced to maximum punishment as prescribed for the offence in question.
In the present case convict has been convicted for offence punishable u/s. 3 DPDP Act. No previous conviction has been alleged or proved against convict. The convict is not involved in any such case, as stated by him. Convict is having a family to support.
State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 2/2 Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the accused/convict is facing trial for defacing the public property by putting board for advertisement of his Dharam Kata and he is first time offender. I am of considered view that ends of justice would be met if the convict is admonished u/s. 3 of The Probation of Offender's Act, 1958. Further u/s. 5 of The Probation of Offender's Act, 1958, convict is directed to deposit Rs. 1000/ as the cost of the proceedings of the court. The same has been deposited. Receipt be issued.
Announced in open Court JITENDRA SINGH
i.e. the 6th of June, 2018 ACMM:WEST DISTT:DELHI
State Vs. Vishnu Lakra; FIR No. 122/18; PS Ranhola 2/2