Delhi District Court
State vs . Rahil @ Ramdev on 13 April, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANIL KUMAR: METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE CENTRAL-05, DELHI
STATE VS. RAHIL @ RAMDEV
FIR NO: 293/05
P. S. Kamla Market
Date of institution of case : 31.10.2005
Date on which case reserved for judgment : 03.02.2012
Date of judgment : 13.04.2012
JUDGEMENT U/s 355 Cr.P.C.:
a) Date of offence : 08.10.2005
b) Offence complained of : U/s 25/54/59 Arms Act.
c) Name of complainant : ASI Rajvir singh
d) Name of accused, his parentage, : Rahil @ Ramdev
local & permanent residence s/o Desh Raj Singh r/o DZ-147,
Sector 9, Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad,
UP.
e) Plea of accused : Plead not guilty
f) Final order : Acquitted.
BRIEF REASONS FOR THE DECISION:-
1.Prosecution case in brief is that on 08.10.2005, PW-4 ASI Rajvir Singh, PW-3 Ct. Chanderkant were on patrolling duty along with two other official, namely, HC Vinod Kumar and Ct. Suraj Bhan and at 03:30 PM, when they were checking bus near Y point, DBG Road and then accused along with one pillion rider reached there by riding motorcycle bearing no. UP 14Y 1049 make Splender black colour from the side of Paharganj Chowk. PW-4 ASI Rajvir Singh gave a signal to accused to stop the motorcycle but they tried to escape on seeing the police party. They chased them and ASI Rajvir Singh and Ct. Chanderkant apprehended the accused Rahil while HC Vinod Kumar and Ct. Suraj Bhan apprehended pillion rider. On the search of accused Rahil, a button FIR No. 293/05 PS: Kamla Market State Vs. Rahil @ Ramdev 1 of 6 operated knife, two gold chains and two ladies gold rings were recovered from the right side pocket of his pant.
2. Charge U/s 25 Arms Act was framed upon the accused on 25.07.2007 and notice U/s 103 DP Act served upon the accused on 12.03.2010 to which he has pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution has examined four witnesses.
4. PW-1 is HC Ombir Singh, who being duty officer has registered the FIR No.293/05 PS Nabi Karim and proved on record the same as Ex. PW-1/A.
5. PW-2 is ASI Devi Sharan. This witness has deposed that on 08.10.2005, after registration of FIR investigation of this case was assigned to him and he along with Ct. Chandrakant went to place of occurrence, i.e., at Y point at DBG Road where he met with ASI Rajbir, HC Vinod Kumar, Ct. Suraj Bhan and ASI Rajbir and produced him accused Rahil @ Ramdev, seizure memo, skethc of knice adn two pullandas sealed with the seal of RB. This witness has further deposed that he prepared site plan Ex. PW-2/A, arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW-2/B and conducted personal search of accused vide memo Ex. PW-2/C. He recorded the statements of witnesses and got accused medical examined vide memo Ex. PW-2/D. This witness has further deposed that he deposited the case property at malkhana and collected photocopy Ex. PW-PX. After completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet in court.
6. PW-3 is Ct. Chandrakant. This witness has deposed that on 18.03.2006, at about 03:30 PM, he was on patrolling duty along with HC Vinod Kumar and Ct. Suraj Bhan at Y Point DBG Road, one motorcycle bearing no. UP 14Y 1049 make Splender Black colour came from Paharganj chowk and two person was on the motorcycle. ASI Rajbir gave signal to stop motorcycle but they tried to escape on seeing them. They chased them and apprehended both the them. This witness has further deposed that he along with ASI Rajbir Singh apprehended one person, namely, Rahil, i.e., accused in the present case. His casual search was conducted during which button operated knife, one chain and two gold ring were recovered from right side pocket of his pant. Knife was measured and it was found having 24 cm. long with blade of 11 cm. in length and width 2.5 cm. IO prepared sketh of the knife which is Ex. PW-3/A. Knife and other articles were seized in cloth pullanda and sealed with the seal of RB and seized vide memo FIR No. 293/05 PS: Kamla Market State Vs. Rahil @ Ramdev 2 of 6 Ex. PW-3/B. Seal after used handed over to this witness. Thereafter, IO prepared rukka and gave it to him to get FIR registered. After getting the FIR registered, he returned back at the spot along with ASI Devi Saran who conducted further investigation. IO handed over the accused, sealed pullanda and prepared documents to ASI Devi Saran, who prepared site plan at his instance. IO arrested the accused and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex. PW-2/B & 2/C.
7. PW-4 is IO SI Rajbir. This witness has deposed that on 08.10.2005, he was on vehicle checking duty with HC Vinod Kumar, Ct. Suraj Bhan and Ct. Chanderkant at Y Point, DBG Road. At about 03:30 PM, one motorcycle bearing no. UP 14Y 1049 make Splender Black colour came from Paharganj chowk and two person was on the motorcycle. He gave signal to stop motorcycle but they tried to escape on seeing them. They chased them and apprehended both the them. This witness has further deposed that he along with Ct. Chanderkant apprehended one person, namely, Rahil, i.e., accused in the present case. His casual search was conducted during which button operated knife, one chain and two gold ring were recovered from right side pocket of his pant. Knife was measured and it was found having 24 cm. long with blade of 11 cm. in length and width 2.5 cm. This witness has further deposed that he prepared sketch of the knife which is Ex. PW-3/A. Knife and other articles were seized in cloth pullanda and sealed with the seal of RB and seized vide memo Ex. PW-3/B. Seal after used handed over to this Ct. Chanderkant. Thereafter, he prepared rukka Ex. PW-4/A and gave it to Ct. Chanderkant to get FIR registered. After getting the FIR registered, he returned back at the spot along with ASI Devi Saran who conducted further investigation. This witness has further deposed that he handed over the accused, sealed pullanda and prepared documents to ASI Devi Saran.
8. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused and his statement U/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded to which he denied his involvement in the offence and he preferred to lead defence evidence.
9. DW-1 Smt. Ramwati, mother of accused. This witness has deposed that in the month of October, 2005, she given one golden chain and two gold rings for keeping in the room. She purchased the said golden chain from Pandit Jewellers, Sarafa Bazar, Bulandshahar, UP vide receipt mark A and the said golden ring from Sony Jewellers, Ghaziabad, UP and second golden ring was gifted ho her by Sh. Yad Bindu, Registrar posted at Agra. This witness has correctly identified FIR No. 293/05 PS: Kamla Market State Vs. Rahil @ Ramdev 3 of 6 the above said golden chain and rings in court.
10. The court has heard the submissions made by Ld. APP for the State as well as the Ld. defence counsel.
Ld. APP for the State submits that the accused is liable to be convicted for the offences charged as the prosecution has been able to bring home guilt of the accused.
On the other hand Ld. Defence counsel has argued that statement of PW-3 and PW-4 are highly contradictory on the point of date of incident. He has further argued that in the rukka knife has been shown to be recovered from the back left pocket of the accused but in the charge sheet and statement of witnesses, it has been shown to be recovered from the right side pocket of the accused. He has further submitted that ornaments shown to be recovered from the possession of the accused has been duly explained to belongs to accused. On this plea, he has submitted that the case of prosecution is highly doubtful and accused is liable to be acquitted.
11. As per rukka and seizure memo, it is the case of the prosecution that on 08.10.2005, four police officials, SI Rajbir Singh, HC Vinod Kumar, Ct. Chanderkant and Ct. Suraj Bhan were on patrolling duty when accused came near these police officials by driving motorcycle along with his friend then ASI Rajbir Singh given signal to accused to start the motorcycle but accused and his friend tried to escape away therefrom but police officials chased them and accused was caught by SI Rajbir Singh and Ct. Chanderkant and friend of accused was caught by HC Vinod Kumar and Ct. Suraj Bhan. On search of accused, a knife was recovered from the back left pocket of accused and two golden chains and two ladies rings also recovered from the accused.
12. IO has filed charge sheet on these allegations but pocket of recovery of knife has been changed from back pocket of the accused to right pocket of the accused. There is no any explanation in the charge sheet or the statement of the witnesses on this point. In the rukka as well as seizure memo prepared by PW-4 ASI Rajbir Singh and witnessed by PW-3 Ct. Chanderkant, it has been mentioned that the knife was recovered from back left pocket of the pant. In their testimonies, these two witnesses have deposed on the line of charge sheet and stated that knife was recovered from the right pocket of accused. This discrepancy in my opinion is very fatal for the prosecution and raised serious doubt over the case of the prosecution.
FIR No. 293/05 PS: Kamla Market State Vs. Rahil @ Ramdev 4 of 6
13. Further I find that recovery has been shown from the possession of the accused and at that time, apart from PW-4 ASI Rajbir Singh and PW-3 Ct. Chanderkant, two other police officials HC Vinod Kumar and Ct. Suraj Bhan were also present but they are out of frame as they have not been made witness to alleged recovery from the accused. Apart from this, there is nothing on record to show that what happened to friend of accused who was caught by ASI Rajbir Singh and his team. Absence of any explanation on this point also raised doubt over the case of prosecution.
14. Statement of ASI Rajbir Singh in his cross examination regarding his failure to tell the name of the person who was driving the motorcycle also create doubt over his testimony. One place, he has stated that accused Rahil was driving the motorcycle and other place, he failed to tell the name of the person who was driving the motorcycle.
15. In so far as discrepancy in respect to date of the incident in the testimonies of PW-3 and PW-4 is concerned, I find that this discrepancy is minor and the same is not fatal for the prosecution.
16. In view of above scrutiny of evidences, I have no hesitation to say that recovery of knife from the accused is very doubtful and benefit of doubt is given to accused and accused is entitled for acquittal of offences U/s 25 Arms Act.
17. Now, come to the offence U/s 103 DP Act. It has been alleged by the prosecution that two golden rings and two ladies rings have been found in possession of accused but accused failed to account of such possession because it was stolen property.
18. On this point, DW-1 has deposed that one golden chains and two rings were given by her to accused who is her son. It cannot be expected from any person to have proof of purchase of those in possession or its ownership. At least in Indian society, usually each family are having ornaments. In my opinion, if any article is found in possession of any person, which is generally kept by ordinary persons cannot be a ground for prosecution U/s 103 DP Act. This Section requires reason to believe but not suspicion. Only on the ground of suspicion, a person cannot be convicted U/s 103 DP Act. Hence, accused is liable to be acquitted for offence U/s 103 DP Act.
19. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and also considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the court is of the opinion that accused stands acquitted from charge of offence U/s 25/54/59 Arms Act and FIR No. 293/05 PS: Kamla Market State Vs. Rahil @ Ramdev 5 of 6 103 DP Act. His PB & SB stands discharged. Original documents, if any, be returned to the rightful owner after cancellation of endorsement, if any.
One golden chain with pendant and two chains as claimed by accused and his mother be returned to accused. Other golden chain not claimed by accused is forfeited and be deposited with District Nazir.
After compliance, file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open (Anil Kumar)
Court on 13th April, 2012 MM(Central)-05,
Delhi.
FIR No. 293/05 PS: Kamla Market
State Vs. Rahil @ Ramdev 6 of 6