Delhi District Court
State vs 1. Pratap @ Pappu on 24 February, 2010
-: 1 :-
IN THE COURT OF Dr. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, ASJ-01(OUTER)ROHINI: DELHI
IN RE: Sessions case No.723/06
FIR No. 820/02
PS: S.P. Badli.
U/s: 459/380/34 IPC.
Date of Institution: 28.06.2003
Arguments heard on: 22.02.2010
Judgment pronounced on: 24.02.2010
State Versus 1. Pratap @ Pappu
S/o Sh. Babu Ram,
R/o Jahangirpuri, Delhi
(declared as P.O. vide order dated 16.09.2009).
2. Satpal @ Gopa
S/o Sh. Babu Ram,
R/o Khanpur Kalan,
P.S. Jhinjhana,
District Mujaffarpur, U.P.
(declared as P.O. vide order dated 05.02.2009).
3. Roop Basant
S/o Sh. Kalu,
R/o Alladinpur,
P.S. Jhinjhana,
District Mujaffarpur, U.P.
4. C.K. @ Raju
S/o Sh. Kewal @ Mohan
R/o Khanpur Kalan,
P.S. Jhinjhana,
District Mujaffarpur, U.P.
JUDGMENT
1. Kamal Chand Pandey and Kiran Pandey were residing at House No.D-23, Gali No.8, Swarup Vihar, Delhi. They were sleeping in their State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 2 :-house in the intervening night of 30/31.12.2002. They heard noise at about 3.30 am. Kiran Pandey woke up and saw that three persons followed by another person in their house and out of those three persons, two persons were stealing the articles lying in the house. One out of said three persons given danda blow on the head of Kiran Pandey and she raised alarm. Kamal Chand Pandey also woke up and the same man also gave danda blow on the head of Kamal Chand Pandey. The said four persons had taken away the jewellery articles and cash amount. PCR was called. Kamal Chand Pandey and Kiran Pandey were removed to the hospital. SI Pradeep Kumar and Ct. Rajbir were also reached at House No.D-23, Gali No.8, Swarup Vihar, Delhi and thereafter they went to BJRM Hospital. The statement of Kiran Pandey was recorded. Rukka was prepared. FIR No.820/02, u/s 459/380/34 IPC was got registered.
2. Accused Roop Basant, Pratap @ Pappu and Satpal @ Gopal were arrested by SI Dhananjay Gupta in case FIR No.158/03, u/s 307/186/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act, P.S. S.P. Badli.They disclosed about their involvement in the commission of the offence, subject matter of the present case. They were arrested. They refused to join Test Identification Parade on 03.04.2003. They were identified by Kamal Chand Pandey and Kiran Pandey on 05.04.2003 as the person who entered their house bearing No.D-23, Gali No.8, Swarup Vihar, Delhi in the intervening night of 30/31.12.2002. Accused Roop Basant was also identified as the person who gave danda blow to Kamal Chand Pandey and Kiran Pandey. Accused C.K. @ Raju was arrested by SI Dharam Pal State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 3 :-vide FIR No.117/03, u/s 402/399/34 IPC r/w section 25 Arms Act. He disclosed about his involvement in the commission of offence, subject matter of the present case. Accused C.K. @ Raju was arrested in the present case. Accused C.K. @ Raju refused to participate in Test Identification Parade. The stolen articles were not recovered. During investigation all the accused also disclosed about the involvement of Rajpal @ Bhairo, Baira and Vinod, who could not be arrested and were declared P.O. by the trial court vide order dated 08.09.2003. All the accused after completion of investigation were charge sheeted for the offence punishable u/s 459/457/380/34 IPC and sent to the court of concerned Metropolitan Magistrate.
3. All the accused were supplied with the copies of charge sheet alongwith annexed documents in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. Trial court vide order dated 18.10.2003 framed the charge for the offence u/s 459/457/34 IPC. Trial court vide order dated 14.11.2003 noticed that offence u/s 459 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions and accordingly the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter, the case was assigned to this court for trial in accordance with law.
4. Charge for the offence punishable u/s 460/308/323/380/34 IPC was framed against all the accused vide order dt. 11/12/2003 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. The prosecution examined ASI Prem Singh as PW-1, Ct. Rajbir State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 4 :-Singh as PW-2, complainant Smt. Kiran as PW-3, Kamal Chand Pandey as PW-4, SI Dhananjay Gupta as PW-5, Dr. Sanjay Kumar as PW-6, SI Dharampal as PW-7, SI Pradeep Kumar as PW-8 and Dr. Nimit Gupta as PW-9.
PW ASI Prem Singh being the Duty Officer recorded the FIR No.820/02 and made endorsement on rukka. PW-2 Ct. Rajbir Singh had taken the rukka to the police station for registration of the case. PW-3 Kiran Pandey is the complainant. PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey is one of the injured. PW-5 SI Dhananjay Gupta arrested Roop Basant, Pratap @ Pappu and Satpal @ Gopal in FIR No.158/03 u/s 307/186/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act. PW-6 Dr. Sanjay Kumar and PW-9 Dr. Nimit Gupta proved the MLC of Kamal Chand Pandey. PW-7 SI Dharampal arrested accused C.K. @ Raju vide FIR No.117/03, u/s 402/399/34 IPC r/w section 25 Arms Act. PW-8 SI Pradeep Kumar being the investigating officer conducted the investigation.
6. The prosecution proved the rukka as Ex.PW-1/A, carbon copy of FIR as Ex.PW-1/B, endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW-1/C, complaint made by the complainant Kiran Pandey as Ex.PW-3/A, MLC of Kamal Pandey as Ex.PW-6/A, disclosure statement of accused C.K. @ Raju made in FIR No.117/03 as Ex.PW-7/A, Crime Team Report as Ex.PW-8/A, site plan as Ex.PW-8/B, arrest memos of accused Pratap @ Pappu, Satpal @ Gopal and Roop Basant as Ex.PWs-8/C to 8/E, pointing out memo prepared at the instance of accused Roop Basant and Satpal @ Gopal and Partap @ Pappu as Ex.PW-8/F, arrest memo of accused C.K. @ Raju as Ex.PW-8/G, pointing out memo prepared at State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 5 :-the instance of accused C.K. @ Raju as Ex.PW-8/H, DD No.33B as Ex.PW-8/J, MLC of Kiran Pandey as Ex.PW-8/K, TIP proceeding in respect of accused C.K. @ Raju as Ex.PW-8/L, TIP proceedings in respect of accused Pratap @ Pappu, Satpal @ Gopal and Roop Basant as Ex.PW-8/M, 8/N & 8/O and their carbon copies as Ex.PW-8/P, 8/Q & 8/R, the disclosure statements of accused Roop Basant, Satpal @ Gopal and Pratap @ Pappu recorded in FIR no.158/03 as Ex.PW-8/S, 8/T & 8/U. The prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 22.02.2010.
7. Accused Satpal @ Gopal and Pratap @ Pappu have absconded during the trial. Accused Satpal @ Gopal was declared as P.O. vide order dated 05.02.2009. Accused Pratap @ Pappu was also declared as P.O. vide order dated 16.09.2009.
8. The respective statements of accused Roop Basant and C.K. @ Raju were recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they pleaded innocence and denied the incriminating evidence against them. Both the accused preferred not to lead defence evidence.
9. Shri Atul Kumar Gupta, CPP for State and Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, advocate/Amicus Curiae for both the accused heard. Record perused.
10. Section 441 IPC deals with criminal trespass and provides that whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intend to commit an offence, is said to commit "criminal trespass".
State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 6 :-Section 442 IPC deals with house trespass and provides that whoever commits criminal trespass by entering into or remaining in any building, is said to commit "house trespass". Section 444 IPC deals with lurking house trespass by night and provides that whoever commits lurking house trespass after sunset and before sunrise, is said to commit "lurking house trespass by night". Section 457 IPC deals with lurking house trespass by night in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment. Section 460 IPC deals with all persons jointly concerned in lurking house trespass or house breaking by night punishable where death or grievous hurt caused by one of them. Section 308 IPC deals with attempt to commit culpable homicide. Section 380 IPC deals with theft in dwelling house.
11. The prosecution in support of its case examined complainant Kiran Pandey as PW-3 and injured Kamal Chand Pandey as PW-4. Both of PWs have supported the case of the prosecution. PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey deposed that in the intervening night of 30/31.12.2002 they were sleeping in the night and at about 3.30 am PW-3 Kiran Pandey heard noise of opening the door, then she woke up. PW-3 Kiran Pandey saw that three persons followed by another persons were present in their house and out of which two persons were stealing the articles in the house. The said persons were identified as accused Roop Basant, Pratap @ Pappu, Satpal @ Gopal and C.K. @ Raju. The testimony of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and Kamal Chand Pandey further reflects that accused Roop Basant inflicted danda blows on the head of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and thereafter on the head of PW-4 Kamal Chand State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 7 :-Pandey. The accused have also given beatings to PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey. PW-3 Kiran Pandey received simple injuries as reflected from the MLC as Ex.PW-8/K and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey received grievous injuries as per MLC Ex.PW-6/A. PW-9 also deposed that Dr. Parmatma who examined PW-4 vide MLC Ex.PW- 6/A, had also opined injuries as grievous.
12. The respective testimonies of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey also reflect that all the accused have taken away the ornaments worn by PW-3 Kiran Pandey at the time of commission of offence and other jewellery articles and cash amount kept in a box and in the house. The testimony of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey further reflects that the police also came and both PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey were removed to the hospital. All the accused were arrested subsequently.
13. The defence counsel has argued that all the accused have not been arrested at the spot and they were identified by PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey in the court as such there is serious doubts about the identity of all the accused as the persons who committed the alleged offence. The defence counsel further argued that the stolen articles were also not recovered from the possession or at the instance of any of the accused. The defence counsel further argued that serious doubts are appearing from the evidence led by the prosecution as to the guilt of accused C.K. @ Raju and Roop Basant.
State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 8 :-14. The prosecution examined the Investigating officer SI Pardeep Kumar as PW-8. All the accused were not arrested at the spot. Accused Roop Basant, Pratap @ Pappu and Satpal @ Gopal were arrested by SI Dhananjay Gupta in case FIR No.158/03, u/s 307/186/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act, P.S. S.P. Badli and accused C.R. @ Raju was arrested vide FIR No.117/03, u/s 402/399/34 IPC r/w section 25 Arms Act, P.S. Alipur by PW-7 SI Dharampal. Disclosure statements Ex.PW-7/A and Ex.PW- 8/S, 8/T & 8/U in the said FIR's bearing No.117/03 & 158/03 were recorded. The accused disclosed about their involvement in the commission of offence, the subject matter of the present FIR no.820/02. All the accused were arrested in the present case also. All the accused have refused to participate in the TIP and the TIP proceedings are Ex.PW-8/L to 8/O. All the accused have refused to participate in TIP despite the warning that an adverse inference shall be drawn against all of them. Subsequently as per testimony of PW-8 SI Pradeep Kumar reflects that the accused Roop Basant alongwith accused Satpal @ Gopal and Pratap @ Pappu were identified by PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey on 05.04.2003 and accused C.K. @ Raju was identified on 06.05.2003. PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey also identified the accused Roop Basant as the person who gave danda blow on the head of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey. Accused C.K. @ Raju was identified as the person who was stealing and taking away the articles from the house of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey. There is no reason to disbelieve the testimony of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 9 :-Chand Pandey, which are corroborating each other, cogent, consistent appears to be natural and narrative of all the material facts. There appears to be contradictions in the respective testimony of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey regarding the identity of all the accused by them on 05.04.2003 and 06.05.2003. However, PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey have identified accused Roop Basant, C.K. @ Raju alongwith accused Pratap @ Pappu and Satpal @ Gopal as the person who have entered in their house in the intervening night of 30/31.12.2002.The respective testimonies of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey inspire confidence and can be safely relied upon.
15. The prosecution has also examined PW-8 IO SI Pradeep Kumar, who completed all the formalities of investigation. PW-8 after receipt of DD No.8B alongwith PW-2 Ct. Rajbir Singh went to the spot. PW-8 recorded the statement Ex.PW-3/A of the complainant PW-3 Kiran Pandey. PW-8 prepared the rukka Ex.PW-1/A, FIR Ex.PW-1/B was also registered, site plan Ex.PW-8/B was prepared, all the accused were arrested. PW-8 also made efforts to recover the case property. If the case property is not recovered from the possession or at the instance of any of the accused, is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey clearly deposed that accused C.K. @ Raju and Roop Basant has taken away the gold ornaments and cash amount as detailed in their respective testimonies.
16. From the quality and quantity of the evidence lead by the State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 10 :-prosecution, the prosecution proved that accused Roop Basant and accused C.K. @ Raju alongwith Satpal @ Gopal and Pratap @ Pappu entered in the house of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey bearing No.D-23, Gali No.8, Swarup Vihar, Delhi in the intervening night of 30/31.12.2002. Accused Roop Basant caused grievous injuries to PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey and simple injuries to PW3 Kiran Pandey and also stolen gold articles and cash amount. As per the mandate of section 460 IPC. Accused C.K. @ Raju is also liable for causing grievous injuries on the person of PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey.
17. Accordingly, all the accused are convicted for the offence punishable u/s 460/34 IPC and section 380/34 IPC. There is no need to pass separate conviction u/s 308 & 323 IPC as the said offences are covered within the ambit of section 460 IPC.
Announced in open court ( Dr.Sudhir Kr. Jain )
on 24th February, 2010 ASJ-01 (Outer)/Rohini/Delhi
State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 11 :-
IN THE COURT OF Dr. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, ASJ-01(OUTER)ROHINI: DELHI IN RE: Sessions case No.723/06 FIR No. 820/02 PS: S.P. Badli.
U/s: 459/380/34 IPC.
Date of Institution: 28.06.2003 Arguments heard on: 22.02.2010 Judgment pronounced on: 24.02.2010 State Versus 1. Roop Basant S/o Sh. Kalu, R/o Alladinpur, P.S. Jhinjhana, District Mujaffarpur, U.P.
2. C.K. @ Raju S/o Sh. Kewal @ Mohan R/o Khanpur Kalan, P.S. Jhinjhana, District Mujaffarpur, U.P. Convicts ORDER ON SENTENCE Shri Atul Kumar Gupta, APP for the State.
Convict C.K. @ Raju and Roop Basant in JC.
Heard on the quantum of sentence.
i) Convict Roop Basant states that he is aged about 30 years and is married having one child. He further states that he is in custody since 2003 and already suffered sufficient punishment. Convict C.K. @ Raju State vs. Roop Basant and ors.-: 12 :-
states that he is aged about 27 years and is unmarried. Both the convict state that they belonged to lower state of society and have already suffered a lot.
The CPP argued that the convicts C.K. @ Raju and Roop Basant are the habitual offender and are involved in many cases. CPP further stated that the maximum punishment be awarded to the convict C.K. @ Raju and Roop Basant.
ii) Both the convicts alongwith accused Pratap @ Pappu Satpal @ Gopal(since declared as P.O.) have entered into the house of PW-4 in the intervening night of 30/31.12.2002 and committed the theft of golden articles as well as cash amount. Convict Roop Basant also inflicted danda blow on the head of PW-3 Kiran Pandey and PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey. PW-4 Kamal Chand Pandey received grievous injuries. The antecedents of both the convicts are not clean and they are involved in many other cases.
iii) After considering all the facts, convicts Roop Basant and C.K. @ Raju are sentenced to undergo RI for the period of ten years alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default SI for six month for the offence punishable u/s 460/34 IPC and to also undergo RI for the period of seven years alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default SI for six months for the offence punishable u/s 380/34 IPC. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. Case property if any confiscated to the State. The convicts be given benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. The committal State vs. Roop Basant and ors.
-: 13 :-warrants be issued. Copy of judgment and order on sentence be supplied to each of the convicts free of cost forthwith. File be consigned to Record Room and be revived as and when accused Pratap @ Pappu and Satpal @ Gopal produced before the court to face trial.
Announced in open court ( Dr.Sudhir Kr. Jain ) On 24th February, 2010 ASJ-01 (Outer)/Rohini/Delhi State vs. Roop Basant and ors. -: 14 :- FIR No. 820/02 PS S.P. Badli 24.2.2010 Present : Shri Atul Kumar Gupta, CPP for the State. Accused Roop Basant and C.K. @ Raju in JC.
Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Advocate/Amicus Curie for both accused. Vide separate judgment, both the accused are convicted for the offence punishable u/s 460/34 IPC and section 380/34 IPC. There is no need to pass separate conviction u/s 308 & 323 IPC as the said offences are covered within the ambit of section 460 IPC.
Vide separate order on sentence convicts Roop Basant and C.K. @ Raju are sentenced to undergo RI for the period of ten years alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default SI for six month for the offence punishable u/s 460/34 IPC and to also undergo RI for the period of seven years alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default SI for six months for the offence punishable u/s 380/34 IPC. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. Case property if any confiscated to the State. The convicts be given benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. The committal warrants be issued. Copy of judgment and order on sentence be supplied to each of the convicts free of cost forthwith. File be consigned to Record Room and be revived as and when accused Pratap @ Pappu and Satpal @ Gopal produced before the court to face trial.
(Dr.Sudhir Kumar Jain) ASJ-01(Outer)/Rohini/Delhi State vs. Roop Basant and ors.