Delhi District Court
State vs . Mahender Singh on 4 June, 2012
IN THE COURT OF MS. TYAGITA SINGH: METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
(SOUTH EAST), SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
STATE VS. Mahender Singh
DD NO: 12 dt. 01.06.2002.
P. S. Kalkaji
ID no. 02403R0227432002
Date of institution of case : 05.06.2002
Date on which case reserved for judgment : 04.06.2012
Date of judgment : 04.06.2012
Advocates appearing in the case :
Sh. Manish Kumar, Ld. APP for State
Sh. D.K. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for accused
JUDGEMENT U/S 355 Cr.P.C.:
a) Date of offence : 04.06.2002
b) Offence complained of : U/S 28/112 Delhi Police Act
c) Name of complainant : HC Jagpal Singh
d) Name of accused, his parentage, : Mahender Singh
local & permanent residence S/o Sh. Radhey Shyam
R/o H. no. C-64,
Panchsheel Vihar
Malviya Nagar, New Delhi
e) Plea of accused : He is falsely implicated.
f) Final order : Accused is acquitted
BRIEF FACTS OF CASE OF PROSECUTION ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. In the present case, accused Mahender Singh has been charged for offence u/s 28/112 Delhi Police Act that on 04.06.2002 at about 11:25 am at Shop no. 6, DDA Mini Market, Nehru Place, within the jurisdiction of PS Kalkaji, the accused was found running an eating house / dhaba in the name of "Mama Bhanja Dhaba", without having valid licence issued by a competent authority and therefore, committed an offence punishable u/s 28/112 Delhi Police Act.
DD no. 12 dt. 01.06.2002 ; PS: Kalkaji St vs. Mahender Singh Page no. 1/3
2. To prove the said allegations, the prosecution has examined two witnesses. PW1 is the complainant / IO namely HC Jagpal Singh, who in his examination-in-chief has stated that on 04.06.2002, he alongwith Ct. Parabjeet were on patrolling duty and reached at DDA mini Market, near Paras Cinema, Nehru Place, Shop no. 6, where dhaba by name and style of "Mama Bhanja Dhaba" was being run and a person was sitting on a counter who disclosed his name as Mahender and he was asked to produce licence but he failed to do so, therefore kalandara u/s 28/112 Delhi Police Act was framed against him and he was arrested and released on bail. The Kalandara is Ex.PW1/A and copy of DD no. 12 is Ex.PW1/B. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he did not take any photographs of the shop in question. He also admitted that he did not verify about the ownership of dhaba. He stated that about 20 persons were present at the spot, but he did not make any public persons witness.
3. PW2 Ct. Parabhjeet who accompanied the IO also deposed on same lines. Both the witnesses correctly identified accused in court.
4. After closure of PE, statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which accused stated that he was falsely implicated in the case. He produced two defence witnesses, DW1 Sh. Sanjay Patel and DW2 Sh. Yogender Kumar who were running shops adjacent to the dhaba and they stated that accused was only a manager in the dhaba and Sh. Raj Narain is the owner. After closure of DE, final arguments were heard.
DD no. 12 dt. 01.06.2002 ; PS: Kalkaji St vs. Mahender Singh Page no. 2/3 BRIEF REASONS FOR DECISION AND DECISION THEREOF The perusal of case file and above stated evidence reveals that accused Mahender Singh is only a worker in the dhaba "Mama Bhanja Dhaba"
and the police had challaned accused without further investigating who is the real owner of the Dhaba and who is responsible for getting licence as prescribed u/s 28(za) r/w section 112 Delhi Police Act. During cross-examination, PW1 who is the complainant as well as IO of the present case admitted that he had not investigated about the real owner of the "Mama Bhanja Dhaba" and he had not recorded statements of any of the public persons present at the Dhaba to prove that eatables like roti and dal were being served in the "Mama Bhanja Dhaba" in contravention of Provision Section 28 (za) r/w section 112 Delhi Police Act. He only stated that accused was sitting at the counter of the Dhaba and he stated that he is the owner, hence he was chargesheeted in this case. Hence, it can not be said that accused is responsible for obtaining the licence u/s 28/112 Delhi Police Act. Prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against accused Mahender Singh. Hence, no case u/s 28/112 Delhi Police Act is made out against accused Mahender Singh. Accused mahender Singh stands acquitted of offence u/s 28 r/w section 112 Delhi Police Act. Personal bond and surety bond of accused stands discharged. Original documents if any be released to the authorised persons on proper receipt and endorsement, if any, be cancelled. File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ( TYAGITA SINGH ) TODAY ON 4th JUNE, 2011 MM-03(SE) NEW DELHI DD no. 12 dt. 01.06.2002 ; PS: Kalkaji St vs. Mahender Singh Page no. 3/3