Delhi District Court
State vs Ashok Gupta on 11 June, 2025
IN THE COURT OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE-01
EAST DISTRICT, KKD COURTS, DELHI.
TITLE: : State v. Ashok Gupta
FIR No. : 136/2007
CNR No. : DLET020005802010
P.S. : Gandhi Nagar
Date of commission of offence : 29.01.2007 to 28.03.2007
Name of Informant/complainant : Sanjay Gupta
Name of accused : Ashok Gupta
Offence/s complained of : s. 409/420 IPC
Cognizance under section/s : s. 409/420 IPC
Charges framed under section/s : s. 409/477A IPC
Plea of the Accused : Not Guilty
Date of hearing Final Arguments: : 23-05-2025
Date of pronouncement : 11.06.2025
Final Order : Acquittal
For the Prosecution : Ld. APP
For the accused. : Sh. Manish Srivastav and Ms. Aditi Sharma.
Present : Pritu Raj
J.M. F.C.-01,
KKD Courts, Delhi. Digitally signed
PRITU by PRITU RAJ
Date:
RAJ 2025.06.11
16:45:01
+0530
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 1 of 18
JUDGEMENT
1. The accused Ashok Gupta is facing trial for offences u/s 409/477-A Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter IPC).
2. Stated succinctly, the facts germane for the prosecution of the case is that the complainant lodged a complaint alleging that for the last 1.25 years, he and his father Mr Mahavir Prasad had bank accounts at Vaish Co-operative bank, Mukherjee Gali, Gandhi Nagar with his account number being 4330, whereas the account number of his father was 4329. In January 2007, his account had around ₹5,60,000/- and the account of his father had around ₹4 lakhs in balance. On 26.04.2007 upon checking, he got to know that ₹5,55,000/- has been withdrawn from his account and ₹4,08,000 has been withdrawn from the account of his fa- ther. Upon inquiry, the branch manager, Mr Anil Kumar Jain told him that assis- tant accountant in the bank, namely Ashok Gupta (accused herein) had taken out money from the account of the complainant and his father and transferred the same to the account of his daughter. Subsequently, the complainant talked with the accused, Ashok Gupta upon his mobile number which was provided by the bank manager and who further informed him that that he had been suspended vide. Order 23.04.2007. Upon talking, the accused came to the shop of the com- plainant and told him that he had taken out around ₹9,63,000/- in total from the account of the companion and his father. Upon being asked by the branch man- ager, Ashok Gupta gave ₹1,65,000/- and in the meantime, the complainant had FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 2 of 18 called the media namely Star News at his shop. In front of news channel, the ac- cused admitted to taking out money from the account of the complainant and while handing over ₹1,65,000/- undertook to make the remaining payment within one month. The complainant alleged that Ashok Gupta further told him that he had put ₹45,000/- in the account of the complainant, but the same could not be verified by the complainant. It is the case of the complainant that the accused Ashok Gupta had committed fraud with the complainant by taking out money from the account of the complainant and transferring the same to the account of his daughter. Hence, the present case.
3. On the written application of the complainant Sanjay Gupta, Gandhi Nagar PS. registered in relation to the above incident FIR no. 136/2007 on 27.04.2007 and, after investigation, submitted the charge sheet on 09.06.2010 against the accused. Cognizance was taken vide. order of the same date and accused entered appear- ance on 14.02.2011. Provisions of section 207 Cr.P.C. were complied on the same date.
4. Charges were framed against the accused u/s 409/477-A IPC on 24.09.2011 and read over to the accused, in Hindi, to which he denied the incident and claimed to be tried.
5. During PE, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses in support of its case. FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 3 of 18
6. PW1 Anil Kumar Jain deposed that on 28 April 2007, he was posted at Vaish co- operative Adarsh Bank, Mukherjee Gali Delhi as branch manager. On that day, he handed over the attendance register of bank employees starting from Septem- ber 2006 to IO ASI BB Tyagi vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/A. The attendance register of Vaish cooperative Adarsh Bank Limited is EX P1.
7. PW2 Sanjay Gupta deposed that he was having a saving bank account number 4330 at Vaish cooperative Adarsh Bank, Gandhinagar, Mukherjee Gali, Delhi and his father was also having a saving bank account number 4329 in the same bank. In January 2007, the FDR in the name of this witness for an amount of ₹5,60,000/- was mature and the amount was deposited in his above-mentioned account. He deposed that his father was having ₹4,25,000/- in his account as maturity amount of FDR in his name. In the month of April 2007, on dishonour of cheque issued by him, he came to know that bank amount of ₹5,55,000/- from his account and cash of ₹4,08,000/- was withdrawn from the account of his father. He talked to the bank manager, Anil Kumar in this regard, who told him that accountant Ashok Gupta was suspended as he had transferred the above mention amount in the account of his daughter after withdrawing the same from the account of his father and the complainant. This witness talked with the accused Ashok Gupta on his mobile number, which was provided to him by the bank manager. The bank manager also told him that Ashok Gupta was suspended. FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 4 of 18 The accused came at his house and told him that he had withdrawn the total amount of ₹9,63,000/- from the account of his father and this business. On the asking of the bank manager, Ashok Gupta returned Rs. 1,65,000/- to the complainant. In between this witness called the reporter of Star News and in their presence, the accused confessed of withdrawing the cash from the accounts and returning an amount of ₹1,65,000/-. This witness stated that the accused, whom he correctly identified in court, had assured him to return the remaining amount within one month. Then he reported the matter through the police when the entire amount was not returned by the accused and he cheated this witness by withdrawing the amount from his account. The statement recorded by the police of this witness is ESP W2 over A. Accuse was arrested by EXPW2 over B and his personal search was conducted by personal memo, EXPW2 over C. PW-2 relied upon Ex. PW-2/A i.e. his statement which was recorded by police, Ex. PW-2/B i.e. arrest memo and Ex. PW-2/C i.e. personal search memo.
8. PW3 retired ASI Hardwari Singh deposed that on 27/04/2007, he was posted at PS Gandhi Nagar. On that date, his duty hours from 4 PM to 12 midnight. On that day, he recorded FIR no. 136/2007 at around 6:10 PM on the basis of rukka given by ASI Brij Bhushan to him in the PS. After registration of FIR, he handed over a copy of original to constable Shagun to be handed over this to ASI Brij Bhushan. PW-3 relied upon Ex. PW-3/A i.e. copy of FIR and Ex. PW-3/B i.e. rukka. FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 5 of 18
9. PW4 Shri Mahavir Prasad depose that at relevant point of time he was maintaining savings bank account at Vaish Co-Operative Adarsh Bank. He did not remember this account number as it was already 10 years and he's around 68 years old. He deposed there was approximately ₹10,00,000/- in total in his and his son, namely Sanjay Gupta's account. His son was also maintaining one saving bank account in the bank. He was informed that the money in his account and his sons account was very less and taken out by someone.
10. PW5, Miss Nidhi Goyal deposed that he was maintaining one saving bank account at one cooperative bank at Main Road Gandhinagar. He does not remember the bank account number. There was some dispute regarding her bank account. However, later on the dispute was settled after writing a letter to Daryaganj branch. She also received some letters from RBI regarding the settlement of dispute.
11. PW6, Smt Pramila Goyal that she was maintaining one saving bank account having account 1979 with Vaish cooperative Bank at Main Road, Gandhinagar. There was some dispute regarding her bank account. Later on the dispute was settled after writing some letter to the Daryaganj branch. She also received some letters from RBI regarding the settlement of dispute.
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 6 of 18
12. PW7 Rakesh Kumar Gupta deposed that on 10.03.2018, he was posted as accountant at Vaish cooperative darsh bank Limited, Daryaganj, New Delhi. Ashok Kumar Gupta was working as accountant at Gandhinagar branch of the said bank. He deposed accused had unauthorisedly debited various accounts of various account holder of Gandhinagar branch without written mandate of the account holder whose accounts were debited. This witness correctly identified the accused and further deposed that the accused unauthorisedly debited a sum of ₹5.55 lakhs from saving account number 4330 of Sanjay Gupta on 29.01.07 and unauthorisedly credited the same to saving account number 4393 of his daughter, namely Atika Gupta. The accused unauthorisedly debited a sum of ₹65,000 on 29 January 2007 from saving account number 4329 of Shri Mahavir Gupta. The same amount was unauthorisedly credited to saving account number 2714 of Anil Agarwal. On 27th Feb 2007 accused again unauthorisedly debited a sum of ₹2,00,000/- from saving account number 4329 of Mahavir Gupta and unauthorisedly credited the same to saving account number 4160 of Smt. Shalini Devi. The accused further unauthorisedly debited ₹90,000/- on 20 March 2007 and ₹53,000 on 28 March 2007 from account number SB-4329 and both amounts were credited in account number SB-4330 of Sanjay Gupta. All the accounts debited by accused to SB account no. 4329 4330 were done without passing of any voucher and without consent of the account holder. All unauthorized debit and credit entries were passed in the computer system by accused through his password 'AGA'. The statement of the witness was recorded by the police on 10 FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 7 of 18 March 2008. In the examination-in-chief of this witness recorded on 23rd of June 2018, which was done after the application section 11 CRPC was allowed, PW-7 Rakesh Kumar Gupta further deposed that on 12 May 2008, he had handed over the copy of bank statement of bank account number SB-4330 of complainant Shri Sanjay Gupta and SBI account number 4329 of Shri Mahavir Prasad, total 34 pages were seized through season memo was exhibited as PW7. All the above documents were exhibited as Ex. P1 to Ex.P 34.
13. PW-8 SI Satyapal Singh deposed that on 27.04.2007, he was posted at PS Gandhinagar Delhi as HC. On that date, he joined the investigation of the present case with ASI Bhushan Tyagi and at around 6 PM, they left the PS for House Number 9/6517, Nehru Gali, Gandhi Nagar Lal Batti, Delhi where Sanjay Gupta met them and he was enquired by the IO. At around 7.00 PM, Ct. Chaggan came to the spot and handed over a copy of original to IO/ASI B.B. Tyagi who recorded the statement of the said constable and the said constable was relieved from the said place. Thereafter, this witness along with IO and complainant, Sanjay Gupta visited Geeta Gali, Gandhi Nagar Delhi were outside house number 3841, the accused Ashok Gupta was present. This witness correctly identified him. The accused was apprehended and he was enquired and interrogated by the IO. arrest documents of the accused which are already exhibit EXPW2/B and EX PW2/C. Disclosure statement of accused, EXPW8/A, being the signature of this witness at point A was recorded and the accused was brought to the police station FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 8 of 18 and statement of this witness was recorded by the IO. On the next day on 28 April 2007, this witness joined the investigation of the present case with IO/ASI B.B. Tyagi, SI Praveen Kumar and visited Vaish cooperative bank Mukherjee Gali Gandhinagar where bank manager. Shri Anil Jain met them and handed over one attendance register pertaining to the year 2006 to the IO. Again said September 2006. The said register was seized by IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/A. The attendance register of the above mentioned bank, which is already Ex P-1 was shown to the witness, who correctly identified the same as handed over by above mentioned Anil Jain to IO. The statement of this witness was recorded by the IO.
14. PW-9 Inspector Praveen deposed that on 28 april 2007, he was posted at PS Gandhi Nagar as sub-inspector. On that day, he joined the investigation of the case with IO/ASI BB Tyagi. During investigation, he visited Vaish Co-Operative Adarsh bank situated at Mukherjee Gali Gandhi Nagar, Delhi where the bank manager produced one attendance register to the IO which was seized by him. The attendance register was exhibited as EXPW9/A. Further on 29.04.2007, the IO interrogated accused Ashok Gupta in his presence in the police station and recorded a supplementary disclosure statement. The supplementary disclosure statement was exhibited as Ex. PW9/B. The same bears the signature of this witness, at point A. During investigation, three passbooks of aforesaid bank along with one id-card of accused were recovered at the instance of the accused from FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 9 of 18 his house i.e. house number 3841, Geeta Gali, Gandhi Nagar and the same was seized vide seizure memo, Ex PW9/C bearing his signature at point A. One passbook in the name of Nidhi Goyal is already exhibited as EX PW5/A and another passbook in the name of Pramila Goyal is already exhibited as EX. PW 6/A. The third passbook is in the name of Shani dDevi is exhibited as EX. PW 9/D. The identity card of the accused is exhibited as Ex. PW9/E. IO recorded the statement of this witness.
15. PW 10 ASI Chagan Singh deposed that on 27 April 2007, he was posted at Gandhinagar and on that day he was present in PS and concerned DO had handed over him the copy of FIR and original rukka of the present case for handing over the same to ASI Brij Bhushan. He accordingly went to house number 9/6517, Nehru Gali, Lal Batti Chowk, Gandhinagar, Delhi at about 6:45 PM and handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to IO at about 7 PM. He left the spot at about 7:15 PM and came back at PS. This witness got his statement recorded by the IO.
16. PW 11 ASI Tehzeeb Haider deposed that on 29 April 2007, he was posted at PS Gandhinagar and head constable. On that day, he joined the investigation of the present case with ASI Brij Bhushan. On that day, IO had interrogated the accused after getting him exited from lock up and had recorded his disclosure statement. SI Praveen Kumar was with them at that time. Thereafter, accused took them to FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 10 of 18 his house at Geeta colony, Dharam pura and had given them a bag which was kept on TV and there were three passbook and one ID card of Ashok Gupta. He does not remember as to whom those passbook belonged to, but the said passbook was of account holder in which manipulation was done by accused Ashok Gupta. IO had seized the three passbook and ID card vide memo EX PW9/C. The passbook of Nidhi Goyal and Pramila Goyal and Shanti Devi have already been exhibited along with ID card of accused. The statement of this witness was recorded by IO who correctly identified the accused in court. The supplementary disclosure statement of the accused is also really exhibited in the testimony of PW9 as Ex. PW9/B bearing the signature of this witness at point B.
17. PW 12 inspector, Mangesh Tyagi deposed that on 2 November 2007, he was posted at PS Gandhinagar as SI. On that day, investigation of the present case was marked to him. On 12 May 2008, accused who was the accountant of Vaish cooperative Adarsh Bank Limited had come to him in police station and handed over to him the account details of statement of complaint Sanjay Gupta and his father Mahavir Prasad, having account numbers 4330 and 4329 respectively. He had seized the said statements through seizure memo, already exhibited testimony of PW 7 and the same have also been exhibited as EXP1 to EX P34. This witness recorded the statements of Mahavir Prasad, Rakesh Gupta, Nidhi Goyal, Pramila Goyal, Shani Devi, Mohan Singh and Anil Jain. This witness FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 11 of 18 prepared the charge-sheet and filed the same before the concerned court and correctly identified the accused in Court.
18. PW 13 retd. SI Brij Bhushan deposed that on 26.04.2007, he was posted at PS Gandhinagar as ASI. On that day on receiving DD number 28A, he visited - Vaish Cooperative bank Mukherjee Gali, Gandhinagar, where he met the complainant, Sanjay Gupta, who informed him about the fraud committed upon him by the said bank. This witness recorded the statement of complainant, EXP2/A and on enquiry from bank manager, Anil Jain, it was found that accountant Ashok Gupta had committed fraud upon the complainant. This witness came back to PS after conducting enquiry and on 27.04.2007. He prepared the rukka on basis of complaint already exhibited in testimony of PW2 as PW2/A and the rukka being Ex PW13/A. He handed over the rukka to DO for registration of FIR and along with HC Satyapal reached the complainant Sanjay Gupta, where he conducted enquiry from him. Constable Chagan Singh had reached there along with copy of original rukka and copy of FIR and IO recorded the statement of Ct. Chagan Singh and discharged him from the spot. This witness along with Ct. Satpal and complainant Sanjay Gupta had reached at house of accused Ashok Gupta, where he was standing outside his home. On the instance of the complainant, he apprehended the accused Ashok Gupta and conducted enquiry from him and recorded his disclosure statement which is already EX PW8/A. This witness arrested the accused videc arrest memo and FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 12 of 18 conducted his personal search. This witness recorded the supplementary statement of complainant and statement of HC Satpal and he along with SI Praveen Kumar and Ct. Haider Ali produced accused Ashok Gupta before the concerned court on the next date. This witness took Police custody of accused for two days from the concerned court and visited to the bank after seeking police custody along with accused where he conducted enquiry from Branch manager, Anil Jain who handed over to this witness the attendance register of accused Ashok Gupta. Same as already EXP1. However, the details of transaction could not be collected on that day due to non-functioning of computer. This witness recorded the statement of SI Praveen and Ct. Haider Ali. On next day, this witness along with accused, Ct. Haider and SI Praveen again visited the bank where he collected one ID card of accused Ashok Gupta and three passbook from his house and this witness seized the same vide seizure memo already exhibited as EX PW9/C. This witness again recorded the statement of SI Praveen and Ct. Haider and produce the accused before the concerned court on 30.04.2007. He was subsequently transferred to PS Kotla Mubarakpur and investigation of the present case was conducted by some of the police official. This witness correctly identified the accused in Court.
19. PE was closed on 27.04.2024 and SA was recorded on 03.07.2024, wherein accused chose not to lead DE.
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 13 of 18
20. Written arguments were filed on 08.01.2025 and matter was fixed for judgment.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE
21. In criminal proceedings, the case of the prosecution must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt. Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of reasonable doubt and an accused is innocent unless proved guilty. (Raja Naykar v. State of Chattisgarh 2024 INSC 56). With this backdrop, this Court will proceed to examine whether the prosecution has proved it's case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
Determination qua 409 IPC
22. The first charge against the accused is that between 29.01.2007 to 28.03.2007, he was entrusted with money in his capacity as a banker by Sanjay Gupta and Ma- havir Prasad and while being so entrusted, he committed criminal breach of trust in respect of the total amount of Rs. 9,63,000/- (Rupees nine lakh and sixty three thousand only) thereby, committing an offence u/s 409 IPC.
23. The requirements to bring home a charge u/s 409 IPC, which pertains to criminal breach of trust by a public servant or a Banker, is: (i) accused must be a public servant or Banker, (ii) accused must have been entrusted in such capacity with property and (iii) accused must have committed breach of trust in respect of such property.
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 14 of 18
24. At the outset, the question which assumes paramount importance is, whether the relation between a customer and a Banker falls within the definition of 'entrust- ment'. The law in this regard is well settled. It would be trite to state that a Banker is someone who receives money to be drawn out again when the owner has occasion for it. In a conventional bank transaction, the customer is a lender and the Bank is the borrower with the money that a customer deposits in a bank becoming part of bankers' fund who is under a contractual obligation to pay the sum deposited by a customer to him on demand at the agreed rate of interest. The relation is essentially, that of a creditor and debtor and money is not held by the bank on trust for the customer. Reliance placed on N. Raghavender vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2021) 18 SCC 70. Hence, the essential requirement of en- trustment has not been proved by the prosecution in the present matter. In the ab- sence of the same being proved, the charge u/s 409 IPC cannot be said to have been proved beyond all reasonable doubt against the accused. The accused is accordingly, acquitted of offence u/s 409 IPC.
Determination qua s. 477-A IPC
25. The second charge against the accused is that he had willfully, with intention to defraud, altered the above mentioned account details attracting the offence u/s 477-A IPC. The requirements to be proved for securing conviction u/s 477-A IPC have been detailed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in N Raghavender (supra), where it was held as follows:
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 15 of 18
9. The last provision of IPC with which we are concerned in this appeal, is Section 477A, which defines and punishes the offence of 'falsification of accounts'. According to the provision, whoever, being a clerk, officer or servant, or employed or acting in that capacity, wilfully and with intent to defraud, destroys, alters, mutilates or falsifies any book, electronic record, paper, writing, valuable security or account which belongs to or is in possession of his employer, or has been received by him for or on behalf of his employer, or wilfully and with intent to defraud, or if he abets to do so, shall be liable to be punished with imprisonment which may extend to seven years. This Section through its marginal note indicates the legislative intention that it only applies where there is falsification of accounts, namely, book keeping or written accounts.
In an accusation under Section 477A IPC, the prosecution must, therefore, prove--(a) that the accused destroyed, altered, mutilated or falsified the books, electronic records, papers, writing, valuable security or account in question; (b) the accused did so in his capacity as a clerk, officer or servant of the employer; (c) the books, papers, etc. belong to or are in possession of his employer or had been received by him for or on behalf of his employer; (d) the accused did it wilfully and with intent to defraud.
26. Now, coming to the merits of the case, the accused has been charged of falsifying the bank accounts of Mahavir Prasad and Sanjay Gupta, as per the charges framed on 24.09.2011. Bare perusal of section 477-A IPC shows that the actus reus of the crime u/s 477-A IPC is 'destroys, alters, mutilates or falsifies any book, electronic record, paper, writing, valuable security or account'. The pri- mary witness to bring home the charge under this section is, PW-7 who, at the time of examination-in-chief, was the Manager of Vaish Co-operative Adarsh Bank Ltd. He brought on record the handed over copies of bank statement of ac- count no. SB-4330 and SB-4329, belonging to Sanjay Gupta and Mahavir Gupta, respectively, duly exhibited as Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-34. Apart from this, no other evi- dence has been brought on record by the prosecution qua the charge u/s 477-A FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 16 of 18 IPC. The IO, examined as PW-13, has admitted in his examination in chief recorded on 24.08.2023 that the details of transaction could not be collected due to non-functioning of the computer. Hence, it remains to be seen whether Ex. P- 1 to Ex. P-34 is sufficient to bring home the charge u/s 477-A IPC.
27. A perusal of the aforesaid documents shows that it essential shows the various entries vide. which, the accused had transferred money from the account of com- plainant Sanjay Gupta, his father Mahavir Gupta and other customers of the bank. PW-7 while being examined in chief has nowhere stated that the entries in the aforesaid documents were either destroyed, altered, mutilated or falsified by the accused. The same is apparently clear from the perusal of Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-34 wherein, the transactions of transfer of money from the account of complainant Sanjay Gupta, his father Mahavir Gupta and other customers of the bank have been shown. The essential requirement of 'destroys, alters, mutilates or falsifies any book, electronic record, paper, writing, valuable security or account' remains unproved. These entries, at the mac, prove that the accused had transferred the entries and cannot be stretched to include the alteration or mutilation of account required by s. 477 A IPC. Further, as already held above, the transfer of money by the accused from the accounts does not amount to criminal breach of trust. Hence, the prosecution has not been able to prove the charge u/s 477-A IPC against the accused. The accused is accordingly, acquitted of charge u/s 477-A IPC.
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 17 of 18 DECISION
28. In light of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to establish the primary burden in order to bring home the guilt of the accused. It is well settled that the burden which lies on the prose- cution is to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt and not merely on the pre- ponderance of probabilities. The case of the prosecution must stand on its own two legs. Reliance in this regard is placed on S.L.Goswami v. State of M.P, 1972 CRI.L.J.511(SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that:-
"...... In our view, the onus of proving all the ingredients of an offence is always upon the prosecution and at no stage does it shift to the accused. It is no part of the prosecution duty to somehow hook the crook. Even in cases where the defence of the accused does not appear to be credible or is palpably false that burden does not become any the less. It is only when this burden is discharged that it will be for the accused to explain or controvert the essential elements in the prosecution case, which would negate it. It is not however for the accused even at the initial stage to prove something which has to be eliminated by the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offence with which he is charged, and even if the onus shifts upon the accused and the accused has to establish his plea, the standard of proof is not the same as that which rests upon the prosecution..........................."
29. The accused Ashok Gupta is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 409/477-A IPC.
30. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance. Digitally signed by PRITU PRITU RAJ Date:
RAJ 2025.06.11
16:45:39
+0530
Announced in open Court (PRITU RAJ)
on 11th June 2025 Judicial Magistrate-01
East, KKD Courts, Delhi
FIR No. 136/2007 State vs Ashok Gupta Page 18 of 18