Delhi District Court
State vs . Om Prakash & Ors. on 30 March, 2015
IN THE COURT OF RAKESH KUMAR RAMPURI
MM-8 (CENTRAL):DELHI
State Vs. Om Prakash & Ors.
FIR No. : 761/1994
PS : New Delhi Railway Station
U/s : 147/148/149/353/186/34 IPC
Date of Institution : 09.01.1995
Date of reserve of order : 26.03.2015
Date of announcement : 30.03.2015
JUDGMENT
Unique I.D No. 02401R0566822003
1. Serial No. of the case : 972/2
2. Name of the Complainant : SI R.D.Sharma
3. Date of incident : 02.08.1994
4. Name of accused person : 1. Om Prakash Kaushik S/o Sh. Hori Lal R/o Gali No. 7, Padam Nagar, DELHI
2. Manoj Kaushik, S/o Sh. Om Prakash Kaushik R/o Gali No. 7, Padam Nagar, DELHI
3. Rishi Pal, S/o Sh. Balwant Singh, R/o H.No. 176/1, Gali No. 1, Padam Nagar, Delhi (Proclaimed Offender)
5. Offence complained of or proved : U/s: 186/332/353/34 of IPC & 141/145/174 of Railway Act.
6. Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty FIR No. 761/1994 No. 1 of 7
7. Final Order : Acquitted
8. Date of such Order : 30.03.2015 BRIEF REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
1. The prosecution wanted to prove that accused persons alongwith some other unidentified persons obstructed police officials (public servant) in discharge of their public function on 02.08.1994, at about 11.30 PM near Kishan Ganj Railway Station Platform No. 1. It is alleged against accused persons that they alongwith some other unidentified persons Voluntarily caused hurt to Ct. Ravi Karan and Ct. Naresh, who were discharging their official duty. On said date, time and place, accused persons alongwith some unidentified persons assaulted said police officials who were executing their public duty in order to prevent them for exercising their duty. It is also alleged against accused persons that they alongwith some unidentified persons interfered with the means provided by Railway Administration in a train for communication between passengers and Railway and also commit nuisance at said Railway Station. Lastly, it was alleged by the prosecution that accused persons obstructed the Toofan Udhan Abha Express Train by "Rail Roko" agitation for supply of electricity in their residential area. Accordingly, Charge had been framed by the court against accused Om Parkash Kaushik, Manoj FIR No. 761/1994 No. 2 of 7 Kaushik and Rishipal for committing offence punishable u/s 186/323/353/34 of IPC and u/s 141/145/174 of Railway Act. The prosecution had produced as many as 16 witnesses to prove its case against accused persons. Statement of accused persons u/s 313 CrPC, r/w 281 CrPC were also recorded wherein they raised plea of false implication and their innocence. Accused Om Parkash had also appeared as sole defence witness u/s 315 CrPC. Ld APP for the State and Ld defence counsel had made detailed oral arguments on behalf of respective parties. Ld defence counsel had also filed written submissions on record. It is noticeable that in course of trial accused Rishipal had been declared Proclaimed Offender vide order of Ld Predecessor dated 12.04.2012.
2. I have given due consideration to the rival submissions of both parties and I have gone through the testimonies of all witnesses as well as the material on judicial record of the case. Now, the question arises whether the prosecution had proved that accused persons Om Parkash and his son Manoj had committed said offences as leveled against them beyond all reasonable doubts.
3. The detail facts of the prosecution side, as reflected in chargesheet and testimony of some witnesses are that on 02.08.1994, FIR No. 761/1994 No. 3 of 7 at about 11.30 PM near Kishan Ganj Railway Station Platform No. 1, some 500-600 persons were standing in the front of the engine of the train Toofan Udhan Abha Express Train and SI R. D. Sharma had given message on wireless to Zullu 58. Subsequently some police officials reached at the spot and assembly of said public persons were declared unlawful and they were asked to clear the track. Accused Om Parkash had allegedly asked public to break the hosepipe of said train and did not allow the train to go till light comes. Hosepipes of the train was broken and stones were thrown on the police and thereafter, some lathi charge was done after warning to the public. Consequently two - three police officials received injuries.
4. After going through testimony of witnesses and submissions of both the parties, I am of considered view that accused Om Prakash Kaushik and his son Manoj should be acquitted in this case. The reasons supporting said opinion are following:-
a) The prosecution failed to prove that accused persons facing trial had actually refused to disassociate themselves from alleged unlawful assembly despite declaration of gathering of 500-600 as unlawful assembly by the Ved Pal Rathi, then SHO of PS Bara Hindu Rao. Ved Pal Rathi (PW-1) himself admitted that when he made the announcement, people started moving and after slight lathi-charge, the FIR No. 761/1994 No. 4 of 7 mob started disbursing. PW-1 further admitted that since there were 500
-600 persons in gathering, he can not say which person was making which comment. It is noticeable that PW-1 had reached at the spot within 5-7 minutes alognwith his staff after receiving message at 10.25 PM and he left the spot at around 12.15 AM midnight.
b) The prosecution has also failed to prove whether accused persons facing the trial had provoked the gathering to break hosepipe of the train. SI Abihimanu PW-2 admitted that he had not seen the accused persons making any provocation and saying that unless hosepipes of the train are broken and they will not allow to move the train. It is noticeable that train driver Teju Ram had also not attributed any wrong act to the accused Om Prakash and Manoj. Moreover, Ld. counsel for accused contended that alleged hosepipe has not been seized by the IO and non production of crucial case property goes to the root of the case.
c) PW-7 Ashok Saxena had received information at 12.00 O'Clock in the night and he made improvement from his previous statement Ex. PW7/DA. Further more, there is some contradictions between statement of PW-1 and PW-7 on the story of the prosecution in material sense. PW-9 SI Kitab Singh stated that he received massage at about 12.00 O'clock in the night and accused persons were present at the spot. PW-9 also stated that accused persons were raising slogan against FIR No. 761/1994 No. 5 of 7 Government and Electricity department as they were protesting against not providing electricity in the colony and surrounding area. However, it is note worthy that PW-1 Ved Pal Bhari had stated that the whole mob disbursed within 15 minutes from him reaching at 10.25 PM.
Other prosecution witnesses are either formal in nature or they did not depose any material thing on the core of issue qua accused in question.
d) Mere statement of some police officials, that too, contrary to the testimony of crucial prosecution witness PW-1, can not be sole basis for placing conviction on the accused. The case of prosecution has to stand on his own legs and it can not take benefit of any lacuna in the defence of accused. Moreover, accused is entitled to benefit of any reasonable doubt surfaced in the case of prosecution. Moreover, peaceful agitation for legitimate demand of supply of essential thing like electricity may not always be offence. I is also noticeable that the prosecution could not secure presence of other accused or public persons constituting admitted gathering of 500-600 people.
Resultantly, this court is of considered opinion that the prosecution could not prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused persons Om Prakash and Manoj had entertained common intention to be part of alleged unlawful assembly of 500-600 persons and obstructed the working of any public servant and also caused injury to two police FIR No. 761/1994 No. 6 of 7 constable. Accordingly, accused persons are acquitted in this case.
File be consigned to record room and same be revived as and accused Rishi Pal apprehended.
Announced in the open court (Rakesh Kumar Rampuri)
on 30.03.2015 MM-08 (Central)
THC/Delhi
FIR No. 761/1994 No. 7 of 7