Delhi District Court
State vs Sunit Chopra on 19 October, 2024
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-05 (SOUTH-WEST),
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
PRESIDED BY : SH. NITESH GOEL
STATE V SUNIT CHOPRA **
FIR No. 420/24
Police Station: VIKAS PURI
Under Section: 188 IPC
Date of institution : 20.08.2024
Date of reserving : 19.10.2024
Date of pronouncement : 19.10.2024
JUDGMENT
a) CIS Number 202002/24
b) Date of commission of offence 06.08.2024
c) Name of the complainant HC Girraj
d) Name, parentage and address Sunit Chopra s/o Sh. Prem
of the accused Nath Chopra r/o House no. C
189 NDMC Society H Block
Vikas Puri Delhi.
e) Offence complained of U/s 188 IPC
f) Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
g) Final order Acquitted
h) Date of final order 19.10.2024.
BRIEF REASONS FOR THE JUDGMENT
1. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 06.08.2024 at about 6:00 pm at KG 1/292 Vikas Puri, Delhi within jurisdiction of PS Vikas Puri, belong- ing to accused, accused had employed one employee namely Rahul without police verification at the above mentioned shop thereby accused violated the notification STATE V SUNIT CHOPRA FIR No. 420/24 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s: 188 IPC 1 no. 9238-9337/SO-ACP/Tilak nagar dated 27.07.2024 and thereby committed of- fence u/s 188 IPC. At the complaint of complainant, the present case was regis- tered and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the ac- cused for the offences punishable under section 188 IPC.
2. After going through the chargesheet and entire material available on record, cognizance was taken and the accused was summoned. Copy of charge sheet was supplied to him and provisions of Cr. P. C. were complied with. On the basis of prima facie evidence, notice was framed against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 188 IPC vide order dated 16.10.2024, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. PW1 Sh. Rahul Kumar has deposed that he resides on the above said address along with his family. He is working as sales boy at Export Surplus shop in Vikas Puri, Delhi. He handed over his Adhar Card to his employer namely Sunit Chopra for police verification however no police verification was done by him. Witness correctly identified the accused.
4. PW2 HC Ram Kishan has deposed that on 06.08.2024 he was posted at PS Vikas Puri as HC. That day he along with HC Girraj were on patrolling duty and during patrolling they reached at KG1/292 Export Surplus Vikas Puri, New Delhi at around 6:00 pm. There they met one sales boy namely Rahul employee of the accused was found to be working and the accused was also found present at that STATE V SUNIT CHOPRA FIR No. 420/24 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s: 188 IPC 2 time. On inquiry he informed about the police verification was not done. IO prepared rukka and handed over to him for registration of FIR. He went to the PS and got the FIR registered. He came back at the spot and handed over copy of FIR and rukka to IO. Accused was arrested in his presence vide arrest memo Ex. PW 2/A. Personal search of accused was conducted vide personal search memo vide Ex. PW 2/B. Witness correctly identified accused. IO prepared site plan vide Ex. PW 2/C.
5. PW 3 HC Girraj deposed that on 06.08.2024 has deposed on the lines of PW
2. During investigation he prepared rukka vide Ex. PW 3/A. Witness correctly identified the accused in the court.
6. Accused has admitted the Certificate u/s 63 (4) (C) BSA, FIR , Complaint u/s 215 BNSS and notification dated 27.07.2024 vide Ex. A1 to Ex. A4 u/s 294 Cr. PC.
7. No other witness has been examined by the prosecution. Prosecution evidence was closed. Statement of the accused was recorded under section 313 r/w 281 Cr.P.C. Accused stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Accused did not opt for defence evidence. Thereafter, final arguments were heard at length.
8. Ld. APP for the State argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It is contended that the witnesses have STATE V SUNIT CHOPRA FIR No. 420/24 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s: 188 IPC 3 given corroborative statements and the accused is liable to be convicted in this case.
9. It is contended by Ld. Counsel for the accused that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case.
OBSERVATION
10. As per notification no. 9238-9337/SO-ACP/Tilak nagar dated 27.07.2024 the direction had been given to affix the copy of this order on the notice boards of all district DCP/ Addl. DCP/ Tehsil Office, all PS concerned and all MCD offices so that the people would get sensitized about the said order. However, the prosecution has failed to place on record any evidence which shows that the said order was published in the newspaper or had been affixed on the notice board of the office of the said agencies which might have made the people sensitized of the direction given in the order.
11. In view of the same the court is of the view that the order has not been enforced by the said agencies in the letter and spirit, therefore the court is of the view that as the offender was not aware of the offense enforced recently therefore he cannot be held liable for it. Accordingly, the accused deserves to be acquitted of the offence punishable under 188 IPC.
Announced in open court on 19.10.2024.
(Nitesh Goel) Judicial Magistrate First Class -05 (South-West) 19.10.2024.
Digitally signed by Nitesh Goel
Nitesh Goel Date: 2024.10.19 15:21:07 +0530 STATE V SUNIT CHOPRA FIR No. 420/24 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s: 188 IPC 4