Delhi District Court
State vs Sachin on 12 September, 2024
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-05 (SOUTH-WEST),
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
PRESIDED BY : SH. NITESH GOEL
STATE V SACHIN*
FIR No. 743/23
Police Station: VIKAS PURI
Under Section: 188 IPC
Date of institution : 27.06.2024
Date of reserving : 12.09.2024
Date of pronouncement : 12.09.2024
JUDGMENT
a) CIS Number 23523/24
b) Date of commission of offence 26.12.2023
c) Name of the complainant HC Makhan Lal
d) Name, parentage and address of Sachin s/o Ramsharan Pruthi r/o
the accused House no. KG 1/301 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 12.09.2024
BRIEF REASONS FOR THE JUDGMENT
1. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 26.12.2023, at about 6:30 pm at KG I /301 Block Market Vikas Puri, within jurisdiction of PS Vikas Puri, one Sachin s/o Satpal was found working in Nandni Pruthi Maker Studio without police verification and thereby accused violated the notification no. 16076-175/ACP/Tilak Nagar dated 05.12.2023 and thereby committed offence u/s 188 IPC. At the complaint of complainant, STATE V SACHIN FIR No. 743/23 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s : 188 IPC 1 the present case was registered and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused 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 16.08.2024, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. PW1 Ct. Mahender has deposed that on 26.12.2023 he was posted at PS Vikas Puri as Ct. That day he along with HC Makhan were on patrolling duty and during patrolling they reached at Pruthi Maker Studio KG I/301 Block market Vikas Puri at around 6:30 pm. There they met one person namely Sachin who was found to be working there without police verification. They asked about his employee police verification to which he stated that his police verification was not got done by the employer however, he had given his Adhar Card to the employer. 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 1/A. Witness correctly identified the accused in the court. IO prepared site plan in his presence. Site plan is exhibited as Ex. PW 1/B During cross examination he admitted that he had not affixed the order of the ACP on vicinity of the area in which the accused resides so that the accused is sensitized about the order. He do not remember whether there was public persons or not. The place was public place however no CCTV footage was obtained from the spot. He do STATE V SACHIN FIR No. 743/23 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s : 188 IPC 2 not remember whether there was CCTV Camera or not. He cannot tell the number of departure and arrival entry. He denied that he never join the investigation in the present matter and therefore, he do not remember his entry of his departure and arrival entry. He denied that all the proceedings of the present case was conducting while sitting in the PS.
4. PW2 HC Makhan Lal deposed on the lines of PW 1. He prepared rukka vide Ex. PW 2/A. Witness correctly identified the accused.
5. Accused has admitted the FIR along with Certificate u/s 65 of Indian Evidence Act, complaint u/s 195 Cr. PC vide Ex. A1 to Ex. A2 u/s 294 Cr. PC.
6. 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.
7. 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 given corroborative statements and the accused is liable to be convicted in this case.
8. It is contended by Ld. Counsel for the accused that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case.
OBSERVATION
9. The prosecution has not proved the order of the ACP no. 16076-175/ACP/Tilak Nagar dated 05.12.2023 wherein it is alleged that the employer is required to conduct the police verification. In view of the same, as the reason behind filing of the complaint against STATE V SACHIN FIR No. 743/23 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s : 188 IPC 3 the accused has not been proved. Therefore, there is no benefit of discussing the other evidences available on record.
10. In view of the above discussion, the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond the reasonable doubts. Accordingly, the accused is acquitted of the offence punishable under 188 IPC.
Announced in open court on 12.09.2024.
(Nitesh Goel)
Judicial Magistrate First Class -05
(South-West) 12.09.2024
Nitesh Digitally signed
by Nitesh Goel
Date: 2024.09.12
Goel 15:18:10 +0530
STATE V SACHIN FIR No. 743/23 PS : VIKAS PURI U/s : 188 IPC 4