Delhi District Court
State vs Gourav on 22 April, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. JYOTI NAIN
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-07: ROHINI COURTS: DELHI.
FIR No. 227/2014
U/s 457/380/511/186/353/332 IPC
PS: Swaroop Nagar
State vs. Gourav
Date of Institution of case:-14.07.2014
Date of Judgment reserved:-17.03.2025
Date on which Judgment pronounced:-22.04.2025
CNR No.DLNT020015482014
JUDGMENT
CIS Number : 5285729/2016 Date of Commission : 16.05.2014 of offence Name of the : Ct. Naveen, No.2193/NW complainant Name of the accused : Gourav s/o Hutashah Offence complained : 457/380/511/186/353/332 IPC of Plea of accused : Not guilty Date of order : 22.04.2025 Final Order : Acquitted for offence u/s 457/380/511/186/353/332 IPC Digitally signed JYOTI by JYOTI NAIN Date: NAIN 2025.04.22 17:54:00 +0530 FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 1 The story of prosecution is as under :
1. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.05.2014, at about 02:25 pm, at PNB ATM Booth, Rajiv Gandhi Road, Beat No.1, Swaroop Nagar, Delhi, accused Gourav committed house breaking in night with the intention to commit theft from the abovesaid place. Further, accused attempted to dishonestly remove money from above mentioned ATM without the consent of the owner. Further, accused voluntarily obstructed complainant Constable Naveen and DHG Ct. Bintoo who were public servant in discharge of their public functions. Further, accused assaulted and used criminal force against complainant Ct.Naveen and DHG Ct. Bintoo while they were executing their duty as such public servant and voluntarily caused hurt to them by rod while they were discharging their duty as such public servant.
An FIR was registered and investigation was done in this case and then chargesheet u/s 457/380/511/186/353/332 IPC was filed against the accused. Accused was summoned and document was supplied to the accused in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.
Investigation
2. After registration of the case, necessary investigation was carried out by the IO concerned. Site plan was prepared. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 [hereinafter to be referred as Cr.PC. for brevity]. The accused was arrested. Relevant record was collected. The final report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C., was prepared against the above named accused and challan was presented in the Court.
3. Copies of challan and relevant documents were supplied to the accused free of costs as envisaged under Section 207 of Cr.P.C.
Digitally signed JYOTI by JYOTI NAIN Date: NAIN 2025.04.22 17:54:05 +0530 FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 2 Charge
4. Thereafter, charge was framed u/s 457/380/511/186/353/332 IPC was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. Matter was listed for prosecution evidence.
6. PW1 HC Bhagwan Singh deposed that on 15.05.2014, the DD No. 60B was lodged for the departure of Ct. Naveen and Ct. Bintoo which was Ex.PW1/A. On 15/16.05.2014, he was posted at PS Swaroop Nagar as HC and working as duty officer. At about 02:30 am, he received an information from Ct. Naveen and he explained with the facts and after that, he wrote the DD No.6A Ex.PW1/B. On that day, at about 04:10 am, he received a rukka through Ct. Anand sent by HC Balram and on the basis of which, he registered FIR No.227/14 Ex.PW1/C. He also made an endorsement on rukka Ex.PW1/D and Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW1/E. He was not cross-examined by the Ld. Defence Counsel.
7. PW2 is Sh. Mohan Singh Jandoo deposed that he was working in the PNB Swaroop Nagar bank and branch since 19.06.2012. On 16.05.2014, he received a call from the person residing in the vicinity of that ATM booth stating that the bank ATM had been tried to break and some person had been arrested.
On the next day, in the morning, the police officials came at his bank and asked for the CCTV footage and he assured them to provide the said CCTV footage as soon as possible. After 2-3 days, the said CCTV footage was handed over to the police officials. He also handed over the estimate of the damage caused to the ATM machine Ex.PW2/A (colly) running into 3 pages. He also gave reply Ex.PW2/B to the police officials about the deputation/ posting of security guard in the said ATM.
He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTI Date:
NAIN NAIN 2025.04.22 FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 3 17:54:14 +0530
8. PW3 is Vineet Tyagi deposed that on 16.05.2014, he was sleeping with his father at his house. At about 02:30 am, he heard a noise as some one was shouting " bachao bachao". He came outside his house and found that accused was hitting Ct. Naveen with iron rod and found that Ct. Naveen was bleeding. When, he tried to save Ct. Naveen, accused hit him by iron road on his leg. Accused was in muffled face at that time and he had removed that cloth from the face of the accused. He apprehended the accused and Ct. Naveen called at police station. There was one another constable namely Bindu at the spot. After some time the police officials came at the spot in a jeep and took the accused to PS. He had also accompanied the accused in the same jeep to the PS. Thereafter, he returned to his home. He admitted seizure memo EX. PW3/A of iron rod (chenni numa). He also admitted that seizure memo of cloth Ex. PW3/B bearing his signatures at point A, the cloth was having stripes and was some what blue in colour. The arrest memo of the accused was Ex. PW3/C. He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
9. PW-4 is Ct. Naveen deposed that on the intervening night of 15- 16.05.2014, he was on patrolling duty along with Ct Bintoo. At about 2:25 AM, while patrolling when they reached at ATM PNB Bank at Rajiv Gandhi Road, he saw the shutter of the ATM was down and they stopped their motorcycle and got suspicious. Usually the shutter of ATM was opened. They heard some noise inside the place where the ATM was installed. They opened the shutter and found one boy in muffled face with one rod in his hand. The ATM machine was already destroyed by the said boy. As soon as they opened the shutter the said boy hit him with the rod which he was carrying and tried to escape from the said place. Thereafter he along with Ct Bintoo apprehended the accused Gaurav. Accused Gaurav had a scuffle with them and accused also bite on his arm. Due to the scuffle, Ct Bintoo also sustained injuries. Thereafter he started shouting" Pakdo Pakdo". In the meantime one person Vinit came at the spot Digitally signed JYOTI by JYOTI NAIN Date: NAIN 2025.04.22 17:54:20 +0530 FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 4 who also helped them in apprehending accused Gaurav. Thereafter he called at PS Swaroop Nagar. After that police officials from PS Swaroop Nagar came at the spot. Thereafter he handed over accused Gaurav and recovered iron rod to IO HC Bal Ram. HC Bal Ram recorded his statement ExPW4/A. Thereafter IO seized the recovered rod and the cloth from which he tied his face vide memos ExPW3/A and ExPW3/B at the spot. Thereafter, he alognwith Ct. Bintoo went to BJRM hospital for medical examination. They got themselves medically examined and came to PS Swaroop Nagar.
He was cross examined by Ld. Defence Counsel.
10. PW5 Ct. Sandeep Tomar deposed that on 16.05.2014, he alongwith SI Naresh Pal and HC Shree Krishan went to ATM booth of PNB situated at Rajiv Gandhi Road, Swaroop Nagar, Delhi where they met HC Balram. Thereafter, they inspected the ATM booth and he clicked photographs of ATM booth from different angles. HC Shree Krishan took chance print of the spot. After developing the said photographs, he handed over the same to IO.
He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
11. PW6 Ct. Bintu deposed that around two years back on 16-17 in the month of May, he alongwith Ct. Naveen were on patrolling duty at Swaroop Nagar. While patrolling when they reached in front of ATM Punjab National Bank, they saw that the shutter of the ATM was half down. Thereafter, they opened the shutter and went inside the ATM. He again said, they were standing in front of ATM and heard the noise of "Khat Khat". Thereafter, they opened the shutterr and went inside the ATM and found that one person was inside the ATM and on seeing them, the person attached them with the rod. Thereafter, some scuffle took place between them and the person who was removing the ATM. Thereafter, while scuffiing they came on the main road. The said person also hit Ct. Naveen with the rod and Ct. Naveen sustained injuries due to that.
Digitally signedJYOTI by JYOTI NAIN Date: FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 5 NAIN 2025.04.22 17:54:24 +0530 Thereafter, Ct. Naveen shouted "Chor Chor" and crowd gathered at the spot. Thereafter, they took the person ie., accused Gaurav to PS. After that they took the accused Gaurav to BJRM hospital for his medical examination. Thereafter, they came back at PS. He was cross examined by Ld. APP for the State, since, he was not disclosing complete facts.
He was also cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
12. PW-7 Retd. ASI Naresh Pal deposed that on 16.05.2014, he was posted as I.C Crime Team of North-West District. At about 4:30 am they received a call from Control Room upon which he along with his team HC Shree Krishan (fingerprint expert), Ct Sandeep (photographer) reached at spot ie.. PNB ATM Booth Rajiv Gandhi Road, Swaroop Nagar, Delhi, where they found out the ATM in a damage condition. He got the spot photographed and chance print were lifted by the expert from the glass of the ATM and he prepared his report Ex.PW-7/A on his own handwriting. While rest of the investigations were being done by other police officials from the PS. IO recorded his statement to this regard. IO also prepared CD as to the photographs as Ex.CD-1. He had not seen the accused persons and his arrest procedure was carried out by the local police from the PS. He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons.
13. PW-8 HC Anand Singh deposed that on 16.05.2014, he was posted at PS Swaroop Nagar as Ct. On that day at about 3:50 am, when he was on patrolling duty. When he reached at the spot ie., PNB ATM Booth Rajiv Gandhi Road, Swaroop Nagar, Delhi where he met HC Balram. HC Balram prepared tehrir and handed it over to him at about 4:00 am. Thereafter, he accordingly went to PS and got the FIR registered. After registration of FIR, he returned back at the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and original tehrir to HC Balram.
JYOTI Digitally signed
by JYOTI NAIN
Date:
FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 6 NAIN 2025.04.22
17:54:30 +0530
Thereafter, the 10 arrested the accused vide memo already Ex.PW-3/C. IO had personally searched the accused vide personal search memo Ex.PW-8/A. Thereafter, IO recorded the disclosure statement of the accused Ex.PW-8/B. IO recorded my statement to this regard.
He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
14. PW-9 HC Shri Krishan deposed that on 16.05.2014, he was posted at Crime Team, North West District and he was working as Finger Print Expert in that team. On that day at about 04:30 am, his crime team consisting In charge, photographer, driver of the vehicle and he went to PNB Bank ATM. Gali no. 1. Rajiv Nagar, Gandhi Marg, Swaroop Nagar, Delhi after receiving a call from control room regarding the theft in the ATM. They went there and saw that the screen glass of the ATM was broken. He lifted two finger prints from the screen of the PNB ATM. The said finger prints were taken on specialized tape and sent it to the crime record bureau for forensic examination. IO recorded his statement.
He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
15. PW 10 ASI Balram deposed that on 16.05.2014, he was posted at PS Swaroop Nagar as HC. On that day he was on night emergency duty vide DD no. 60 B Ex PW I/A. On that day. after receiving DD no. 6A regarding the theft in PNB Bank ATM. On that day, he went to the spot ie PNB Bank ATM. Rajiv Gandhi Road, Swaroop Nagar where CL Naveen, DHG Bintoo were present with accused Gaurav and eye witness Vipin Tyagi. Some public persons were also gathered at the spot. He recorded the statement of Ct. Naveen already Ex PW 4/A. He prepared rakka Ex PW 10/A. Meanwhile, Ct. Anand came at the spot and he handed over him original rukka for registration of FIR. Ct. Naveen handed over to him one iron road and cloth which was used by the accused used to cover his Tace during the incident. The articles were seized vide seizure Digitally signed JYOTI by JYOTI NAIN Date: NAIN 2025.04.22 17:54:33 +0530 FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 7 memo already Ex PW VA and B. The said rod and cloth was sealed with the seal of BS. He prepared at the instance of Ct. Naveen which is Ex PW 10/B. Injured Ct. Naveen and injured DHG Bintoo were sent to the hospital through ERV. He recorded the statement of eye witness Vipin Tyagi and other Pws present at the spot. The accused who was apprehended at the spot was arrested by him vide memo already Ex PW 3/C and his personal search was conducted vide memo already Ex PW 8/A. He recorded the disclosure statement of the accused already Ex PW 8/B. Meanwhile crime team reached at the spot. The crime team lifted the finger print from the spot. Crime team also took photographs of the spot. IC crime team handed over the crime team report to him. The said PNB branch Manager handed over a complaint already Ex PW 2/A to him from his bank already Ex. PW2/A. He asked him to hand over the CCTV footage upon which the bank manager Mohan Singh handed over a CD containing the CCTV recording and 28 photographs. The same were seized by him vide seizure memo Ex PW 10/C. Said CD and photographs were Ex M-1 & M-2 (colly) respectively and the same were shown to the witness who correctly identified the same. The crime team officials had also handed over the photographs to him alongwith the CD Ex C-1 collectively. Same were correctly identified by the witness. He collected the finger print report and place it on the file. He also collected the MLC of the injured. He collected the crime team report marked as Mark B. He recorded the statement of Pws. He also collected the complaint under section 195 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, he prepared charge sheet and filed it in the concerned court.
This witness was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused.
16. PW11 is Dr. Neeraj Chaudhary, SMO, BJRM Hospital. He deposed that he deputed by MS BJRM Hospital to depose MLC No. 78350 and MLC No. 78349 which was prepared by Dr. Ranjeet Kumar and Dr. Vikas respectively. Both the Doctors have left the hospital and there whereabouts are not known.
Digitally
signed by
JYOTI JYOTI NAIN
FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 8 NAIN
Date:
2025.04.22
17:54:37
+0530
He deposed that on 16.05.2014, Patient Naveen aged about 29 years brought in casualty with alleged history of physical assault. The said patient was examined by Dr. Ranjeet Kumar in the supervision of Dr. Prem Singh. Dr. Prem Singh opined injury as simple. The MLC Ex.PW11/A bearing the signatures of Dr. Ranjeet at Point A and the nature of injury at Point B. On 16.05.2014, Patient Bintu aged about 24 years brought in casualty with alleged history of physical assault. The said patient was examined by Dr. Ranjeet Kumar and he referred the patient to Ortho Department. The patient was examined by Dr. Vikas in the supervision of Dr. Prem Singh. Dr. Prem Singh opined injury as simple. The MLC Ex.PW11/B bearing the signatures of Dr. Ranjeet at Point A and Dr. Vikas at Point B and the nature of injury is at Point C.
17. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 13.10.2022.
Statement under section 313 Cr.PC
18. After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was separately recorded. All incriminating material brought on record were put to the accused to which he denied the allegations made against him and claimed himself to be innocent and pleaded that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Accused did not wants to lead evidence in his defence.
19. Thereafter, matter was listed for final arguments and arguments were adduced at length by both the sides. On the basis of the above oral and documentary evidence on record, Ld APP requested for conviction of the accused. Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTI NAIN Date:
NAIN 2025.04.22
17:54:42
+0530
FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 9
20. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the accused contended that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly, he prayed for the acquittal of the accused.
21. It is the case of the prosecution that on the night of 16.05.2014 at about 02:25 am, accused committed house breaking by night with intention to commit theft at the PNB ATM Booth, Rajiv Gandhi Road, Swaroop Nagar. That accused also attempted to dishonestly remove money from the ATM without the consent of the owner and also obstructed, assaulted and used criminal force against public servants i.e. complainant Ct. Naveen and DHG Ct. Bintoo who were executing their duties and also caused hurt to them.
Case of the prosecution mainly relies upon the testimonies of complainant Ct. Naveen , DHG Bintoo and one public eye-witness namely Vineet Tyagi. Prosecution also examined IO i.e. ASI Balram as PW10 who deposed that on the date of incident, he was on night emergency duty and on receipt of DD entry regarding the theft in the PNB Bank ATM, he went to the spot where Ct. Naveen , DHG Bintoo were present with the accused and eye- witness Vineet Tyagi. That he recorded statement of Ct. Naveen and prepared Rukka and handed over the same to Ct. Anand who also had come to the spot for the registration of FIR. Ct. Naveen handed over him one iron rod and cloth used by the accused to cover his face during the incident. The articles were seized and seizure memos Ex.PW3/A and Ex.PW3/B were prepared. Injured Ct. Naveen and DHG Bintoo were sent to the hospital in ERV. That he recorded the statement of eye-witness Vineet Tyagi and other prosecution witnesses at the spot. He arrested the accused and his disclosure statement was recorded. Meanwhile, the crime team reached at the spot. It lifted finger prints from the spot and also took photographs and crime team handed over its report to him.
FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 10But the sole public eye-witness to the incident i.e. PW3 Vineet Tyagi has differed from the IO on various aspects. He stated that he along with Ct. Naveen and Ct. Bindu apprehended the accused and after some time, police officials came to the spot in a jeep and took the accused to the P.S. and that he also accompanied them. During cross examination, he further stated that there were two police officials in the jeep when it arrived at the spot. That as soon as the police jeep arrived at the spot, they sat in that and went to the PS. That he remained in the PS for 5 minutes. Police recorded his statement at his house on 16.05.2014 at around 09:00 am. He further stated that the pullanda in which the case property was kept was sealed in the PS. That signatures on the arrest memos and seizure memos were done by him in the PS. He signed the statement taken by police at his home. That he had not gone through the contents of the documents signed by him in the PS i.e. arrest memo and seizure memo and did not know as to who else had signed on the documents beside him.
Not only does this eye-witness PW3 differed from the prosecution story, one of the other eye-witnesses to the incident i.e. PW6 also differed. He deposed that a scuffle took place between him, Ct. Naveen and the accused. That Ct. Naveen shouted "Chor Chor" and a crowd gathered at the spot. Thereafter, they took the accused to the PS and after that, they took him to the BJRM hospital for medical examination.
22. It is admitted fact by the prosecution that the ATM machine was never sealed. If the version of PW3 is believed then the ATM machine remained unattended before the crime team arrived for inspection, giving ample time for tampering to a third party. PW4 has admitted that there is no distinct identification mark on the case property i.e. iron rod and the cloth. IO during his cross examination stated that after use, the seal was handed over to Ct. Anand, further deposed that he did not remember as to whom he handed over FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 11 the seal after use. It is pertinent to mention that no seal handing over memo has been prepared and filed on the record. Further, contradiction in the deposition of PW3 with the prosecution story creates doubt over the veracity of seizure memo of the case property as prepared by IO. The photographs of the place of incident are not accompanied by the requisite certificate u/s 65-B Indian Evidence Act, more so, in none of the photographs, face of the accused could be seen, even though, it had been stated by PW3 that CCTV camera were installed both inside as well as outside the ATM Booth. The report from Finger Print Bureau regarding comparison of chance prints with the specimen finger prints of accused is inconclusive, since, chance prints were unfit for comparison.
23. Owing to the various contradictions in the testimonies of eye-witnesses as well as faulty investigation, this court is of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, accused Gourav stand acquitted from the charges U/s 457/380/511/186/353/332 IPC IPC.
24. Previous Bail bond cancelled and surety discharged. Endorsement if any, be cancelled and documents if any, be returned, against acknowledgment after due verification. File be consigned to Record room after necessary compliance.
25. This judgment contains 12 pages and each page bears my signature.
Announced and dictated directly
into the computer in open court
JYOTI Digitally signed
by JYOTI NAIN
Date: 2025.04.22
on 22nd Day of April, 2025.
NAIN 17:54:50 +0530
(JYOTI NAIN)
JMFC-07, NORTH DISTRICT,
ROHINI COURT, DELHI
FIR No. 227/14 State Vs. Gourav 12