Delhi District Court
Fir No. 223/10 St vs . Sonu And Rakesh Ps: Sarojini Nagar on 4 March, 2011
Page no. 1/6
FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar
IN THE COURT OF MS. TYAGITA SINGH: METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
(SOUTH), SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
STATE VS. Sonu and Rakesh
FIR NO: 223/10
P. S. Sarojini Nagar
Date of institution of case : 15.12.2010
Date on which case reserved for judgment : 04.03.2011
Date of judgment : 04.03.2011
Advocates appearing in the case :
Sh. Ashesh Changkum, Ld. APP for State
Ms. Shimla Tomar, Legal Aid Counsel for accused persons
JUDGEMENT U/S 355
Cr.P.C
.:
a) Date of offence : 01.11.2010
b) Offence complained of : U/S 379/411/482/471/34 IPC
c) Name of complainant : Sh. Mayank Yadav
d) Name of accused, his parentage, : 1). Sonu
local & permanent residence S/o Sh. Vijay Pal
R/o Jhuggi No. J11,
Sidharth Basti, Hari Nagar,
Ashram, New Delhi
2). Rakesh
S/o Sh. Tara Chand
R/o Jhuggi no. J11,
Sidharth Basti, Hari Nagar,
Ashram, New Delhi
e) Plea of accused : They are falsely implicated.
g) Final order : Accused have been convicted
Page no. 2/6
FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar
BRIEF FACTS OF CASE OF PROSECUTION ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Brief facts of the case are that the present FIR was lodged on complaint of Sh. Mayank Yadav that his motorcycle number DL9ST6625 was stolen on 01.11.2010 from in front of house no. B249, Sarojini Nagar by some unknown persons. FIR was lodged u/s 379 IPC and investigation was started by IO HC Sher Singh. Both the accused persons Sonu and Rakesh were apprehended alongwith one motorcycle at Sanjay Jheel Picket on 12.11.2010 by Ct. chander Prakash and HC Sher Singh when they were on picket duty for checking the vehicles. A fake number plate DL9ST6675 had been displayed on the motorcycle but on checking of chassis number & engine number, it was found that the motorcycle was same which had been stolen on 01.11.2010 from possession of complainant Mayank Yadav and actual number of motorcycle was DL9ST6625. Hence, both the accused persons were arrested and after completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed.
2. Charge u/s 379/411/482/471 r/w section 34 IPC were framed against both the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined five PWs on its behalf.
3. PW1 Ct. Chander Prakash has stated that he was present on picket duty alongwith IO HC Sher Singh on 12.11.2010 at Sanjay Jheel and they asked the accused persons to stop motorcycle, and on interrogation, no ownership proof of motorcycle was given by accused persons, therefore after checking chassis number and engine number of motorcycle and after verification from PS Sarojini Page no. 3/6 FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar Nagar, it was found that it was the same motorcycle which had been stolen from possession of complainant on 01.11.2010, hence both the accused persons were arrested and motorcycle was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B and the fake number plate of the motorcycle was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/A. Arrest memo of both the accused persons and personal search memo have been exhibited by PW1 as Ex.PW1/C to Ex.PW1/F. Disclosure statement of accused Sonu has been exhibited as Ex.PW1/H and disclosure statement of accused Rakesh has been exhibited as Ex.PW1/I. The pointing out memo of accused Rakesh and Sonu have been exhibited as Ex.PW1/J and Ex.PW1/K.
4. PW2 DO ASI Savitri Devi has exhibited the copy of FIR Ex.PW2/A. PW3 Ct. Ritesh exhibited the copy of DD entry no. 50B dated 12.11.2010 as Ex.PW3/A regarding departure of police officials for picket duty at Sanjay Jheel. Pw4 complainant Mayank Yadav exhibited the superdarinama of motorcycle as Ex.PW4/A and the case property i.e. motorcycle number DL9ST6625 as Ex.P1.
5. PW5 IO HC Sher Singh stated that on 04.11.2010, after the lodging of FIR, he had gone to the house of complainant Mayank Yadav at B249, Sarojini Nagar and prepared site plan at the instance of complainant which is Ex.PW5/X, and carried out investigation. IO stated that he was on picket duty at Sanjay Jheel on 12.11.2010 alongwith other police officials when he saw accused Sonu and Rakesh coming on motorcycle being driven by accused Rakesh and when he signalled them to stop, they tried to turn the motorcycle and tried to run away but they slipped down and they were caught at the spot. On asking the documents of ownership of motorcycle, they failed to show any documents, hence on checking, Page no. 4/6 FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar it was found that motorcycle was stolen one from PS Sarojini Nagar and FIR had already been lodged on 04.11.2010 regarding the theft of the motorcycle. He stated that fake number plate DL9ST6675 were taken into police possession and accused persons were arrested on the spot. He exhibited the fake number plates as Ex.P2.
6. Though, legal aid counsel was provided to both the accused persons but despite wait, legal aid counsel had not appeared due to his busy schedule in some other cases, hence opportunity of cross examination was treated as nil. After closure of PE, statements of accused persons was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. in which they stated that they do not even know how to drive the motorcycle and there is no question of their stealing the motorcycle and running away on the motorcycle. They did not lead any defence evidence. Hence, final arguments were heard and case was kept for order.
BRIEF REASONS FOR DECISION AND DECISION THEREOF:
7. As far as charge u/s 379 IPC is concerned, it is clear from the above stated facts and evidence that there was no eye witness of the theft of motorcycle of complainant and nobody knew who had stolen the motorcycle of complainant on 01.11.2010. The prosecution has failed to link the accused persons to the crime of theft dated 01.11.2010 and has failed to produce any substantive material on record to link the accused persons with the place of theft, hence the accused persons are acquitted from charge of theft u/s 379 IPC. Page no. 5/6
FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar
8. Regarding charge u/s 411 r/w section 34 IPC, it is clear from the above stated facts and circumstances that the prosecution has been able to prove the fact of recovery of the stolen motorcycle number DL9ST6625 from the accused persons on 12.11.2010 at Sanjay Jheel Picket. The DD entry of departure of police officials from police station to Sanjay Jheel Picket has been proved on record and the recovery of motorcycle from both the accused persons at Sanjay Jheel Picket have also been proved on record by the prosecution by leading above stated evidence. Hence, it can be reasonably concluded that the accused persons have received or retained the above said motorcycle with knowledge or having reason to believe that the same was stolen property, hence both the accused persons are convicted u/s 411 IPC r/w section 34 IPC.
9. At the time when accused persons were apprehended by the police alongwith above said motorcycle, the number plate displayed at the motorcycle was DL9ST6675 though the actual number of motorcycle was DL9ST6625. Both the front and backside fake number plates have been exhibited as Ex.P2 collectively in evidence. Thus, it has been proved by prosecution that fake number plate was being used on the motorcycle on the date of recovery on 12.11.2010. Hence, both the accused persons are convicted u/s 471 r/w section 34 IPC for using the forged number plate as genuine one. Since the accused persons have been convicted u/s 471 r/w section 34 IPC, there is no need of charge u/s 482 IPC. Fix for order on sentence today itself.
Page no. 6/6
FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar ORDER ON SENTENCE Both the convicts are in J/C since the day following their arrest on 12.11.2010. The convicts state that they are poor persons and they have no history of criminal record and no criminal antecedents, hence they have prayed for lenient view be taken in their favour. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and that they have been in J/C since past more than three months, lenient view is being taken in their favour. Both the convicts are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment of three months u/s 411 IPC. Besides this, both the convicts are sentenced to 15 days simple imprisonment u/s 471 IPC. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
The convicts have been in J/C from 13.11.2010 till date and they have already undergone detention period of three months and 21 days in custody till date. Since the convicts have already undergone detention period of more than the sentence awarded today, hence they are directed to be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Superdarinama stands cancelled. File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ( TYAGITA SINGH )
TODAY ON 4th MARCH 2011 MM07(SOUTH) NEW DELHI
Page no. 7/6
FIR no. 223/10 St vs. Sonu and Rakesh PS: Sarojini Nagar FIR no. 223/10 PS: Sarojini Nagar 04.03.2011 Present: Ld. APP for State Both accused produced from J/C. Final arguments heard. Vide separate judgment of even date, accused have been convicted u/s 411 and section 471 IPC r/w section 34 IPC. Accused have been heard on quantum of sentence. Sentence of three months simple imprisonment u/s 411 IPC and 15 days simple imprisonment u/s 471 IPC have been awarded against convicts to run concurrently. Since convicts have already undergone detention period of three months and 21 days in J/C, and benefit of set off u/s 428 Cr.P.C. is given to convicts, no imprisonment remains due and convicts are directed to be released forthwith. Copy of the judgement be given dasti to both the convicts. The jamatalashi items of both the convicts are directed to be released by the IO as per personal search memos. Superdarinama stands cancelled. Notice be sent to Jail Superintendent alongwith copy of this order for release of the convicts. File be consigned to record room.
( TYAGITA SINGH ) MM07(South)Saket 04.03.2011