Delhi District Court
State vs Inder @ Munna Etc. on 8 March, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJAY JINDAL
CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
NORTHWEST DISTRICT : ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
Unique Case ID No. : 02401R0314362008
STATE VS INDER @ MUNNA ETC.
FIR NO. 735/2007
P.S. : ASHOK VIHAR
U/S : 380/411/34 IPC
J U D G M E N T
a)Serial No. of the case : 67/2/08
b)Date of commission of offence : 10.12.2007
c) Name of the complainant : Sh. Ganesh Chand Mitra
d)Name, parentage and address of : (1) Anil S/o Sant Lal
accused R/o : Jhuggi No.340
CN Jailerwala Bagh,
Ashok Vihar, Delhi.
Permanent Address:
VillageVankata,
POJahanaganj,
Distt.Azamgarh, UP.
(Proclaimed Offender)
(2) Babloo @ Saroj,
S/o : Late Ram Avtar,
R/o : Jhuggi Lal Bagh,
Azadpur, Delhi
Permanent Address:
VillageMundahar,
Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 1/8
PODhekab, PSBindra
Bazar, Teh.Lal Ganj,
Distt.Azamgarh, UP.
(Convicted vide order
dated 25.07.2012)
(3) Inder @ Munna,
S/o Dev Raj,
R/o : Jhuggi Lal Bagh,
Azadpur, Delhi
Permanent Address :
Village Jayab Sanehi,
PO & PSRasda,
Distt.Baliya, UP.
(4) Aasre @ Guru @
Ram Asare, S/o Motilal,
R/o : Jhuggi No.107,
BBlock, N28D, CSA
Colony, WPIA, Delhi.
Permanent Address:
VillageMehiya,
P.O.Bara Gaon,
P.S. : Nizamabad,
Distt.Azamgarh, UP.
(Proclaimed Offender)
e)Offences complained of : U/s 380/411/34 IPC
f)Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
g)Final Order : Acquitted
h)Date of order : 08.03.2013
i)Date of conclusion of : 08.03.2013
final arguments
Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 2/8
BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION :
1 Brief facts, as per case of the prosecution, are that in the intervening night of 01.12.2007 and 02.12.2007 between 10:00 pm to 8:00 am at b67/2, WPIA, Delhi within the jurisdiction of P.S. Ashok Vihar, accused Bablu and Inder @ Munna along with their co accused Anil and Aasre committed theft of one Plasma TV and they were found in possession of the said TV knowing or having reason to believe that the same was a stolen property. All the accused persons were arrested and after investigation, they were duly chargesheeted to the Court.
2 Copies of the relevant documents were supplied to all the accused persons. Charge for the offences U/s 380/411/34 IPC was framed against accused Bablu and Inder @ Munna on 19.03.2009 to which both of them pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 3 Vide order dated 24.06.2010, accused Aasre @ Guru @ Ram Aasre was declared proclaimed offender and charge for the offence U/s 411/34 IPC was framed against accused Anil to which accused Anil pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 3/8 4 At the time of trial, prosecution examined following PW's: PW1 Ct. Dasrath, PW2 HC Raj Kumar, PW3 WHC Prafulla, PW4 Ct. Swaraj Singh, PW5 ASI Sushil Kumar; PW6 ASI Mahender Singh, and PW7 Sh. Ganesh Chander Mitra. 5 After conclusion of the prosecution evidence, all the
incriminating evidence was put to accused Inder @ Munna and his statement under Section 281 r/w Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. He denied the allegations and claimed false implication. He opted not to lead any evidence in his defence.
6 I have heard Ld. APP for the State and counsel for the accused and carefully perused the record.
7 So far as the witnesses examined by the prosecution are Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 4/8 concerned, PW1 Ct. Dasrath participated in the investigation with IO HC Mahender Singh. PW2 HC Raj Kumar was the Naib Court in the concerned Court where the accused persons were arrested and their disclosure statements were recorded. PW3 WHC Prafulla is the Duty Officer who recorded FIR Ex.PW3/A and made endorsement Ex.PW3/B on the ruqqa. PW4 Ct. Swaraj Singh and PW5 ASI Sushil Kumar participated in the investigation with the IO of case FIR No. 553/07 P.S. Adarsh Nagar wherein the accused persons made disclosure about this case. PW6 ASI Mahender Singh is the IO of this case who has deposed as per the case of the prosecution. PW7 Sh. Ganesh Chander Mitra is the complainant in this case. He has deposed that he made complaint regarding missing of his plasma TV and later on he identified the alleged TV in Court. 8 The present case was registered on the complaint of PW7 Sh. Ganesh Chander Mitra regarding theft of one plasma TV from his clinic during the intervening night of 1 & 2 December, 2007. The case of the prosecution is that the said Plasma TV was recovered from/ at the instance of four accused persons namely Bablu, Ram Ashray, Anil and Inder @ Munna (the accused presently facing trial). Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 5/8 The prosecution has examined seven witnesses. PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW7 are formal witnesses who are not directly related to either arrest of the accused or alleged recovery of the stolen article. PW6 ASI Mahender Singh is the IO of the present case and he has also carried out the proceedings either before arrest of the present accused or after the alleged recovery of the stolen articles which was allegedly effected by the officials of Special Staff, NorthWest, Delhi. 9 The statements of PW4 Ct. Swaraj Singh and PW5 ASI Sushil Kumar are the only testimonies which are relevant qua alleged role of the present accused. As per the facts disclosed by PW4 and PW5, they were part of the raiding party constituted on the basis of secret information in respect of case FIR No.553/07 U/s 399/402 IPC and U/s 25/54/59 Arms Act P.S. Adarsh Nagar and that on 10.12.2007, all the four accused persons were apprehended. It is further stated by these witnesses that disclosure statements of all the four accused persons were recorded and all of them pointed towards Jhuggi in front of B67/2, WPIA, Chander Shekhar Azad Colony, Delhi and disclosed that they had stolen a television from the said shop. PW5 has deposed some additional facts and stated that all the accused persons got Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 6/8 recovered one TV make Plasma i.e., the stolen TV from the corner of the house i.e., First Floor of Jhuggi No. N22, A37, Kaushal Puri, Lal Bagh, Delhi. It is also stated by the said witness that the said house was locked and the key of the said house was recovered from accused Anil(PO).
10 It is clear from the record that the only socalled incriminating evidence against the present accused namely Inder @ Munna is the pointing out memo qua place of theft and joint recovery of the stolen TV from a place which was locked and the key was with the other accused. In such situation, it cannot be said that accused Inder @ Munna was found in possession of the alleged stolen Plasma TV. Furthermore, it is also to be noted that joint possession of a stolen property cannot be termed as recovery from possession of an individual. So far as the pointing out memo and disclosure statement of accused Inder @ Munna are concerned, these documents carry no weight in the eyes of law as the accused was in Police Custody at that time. Furthermore, these documents do not bear signature of any independent public witness so that the same can be taken into consideration. As discussed above, there is no substantial material Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 7/8 against accused Inder @ Munna for the offences alleged against him. 11 In view of the above discussions, accused Inder @ Munna is acquitted. He is in J/C. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Original documents, if any be returned to the rightful owner against proper receipt and after cancellation of endorsement, if any thereon. The case property, if any be released to the rightful owner against proper receipt.
12 In the present matter, accused Anil and Ram Ashray are proclaimed offenders. Hence the file be consigned to the Record Room sine die and be revived as and when the said accused persons are apprehended or appear.
Announced in open Court th Today on this 8 Day of March, 2013.
(SANJAY JINDAL) CMM : NORTHWEST DISTRICT ROHINI : DELHI Case No. 67/2/08 State Vs. Inder @ Munna 8/8