Delhi District Court
Sessions Case/99/2006 on 2 February, 2007
1
!#"%$& #$'$'( ) )$) *
,+ ,-. ! /0"
1'243#265,7 8:9;9:<>=@?
ACBED 5 7)8F?&GH?I<KJ;=;=ML
N 1O8QP RTSVU@WYX[Z X]\ R_^`X:2
a <ESb8@cH9;L:<dc:9&ef<gL'G;Gh<dcIL B N 3
1@^>Rb^gX i Sj2 G;2 D RVkKl&Rhmon p R_^qU*rC1F<Ks p t*uvR[W
3wUxR[y*z&{ D <Ks p|265 s&2;G@GFcx{ N Zdr.}~R
R[ZVSVU@y*r~3sMmqsFyM}C{f[R[W txyxR
RhTR[Z{ Xfm
U*r>2
Jv2 W r
^~P t*W/RbZ1M<s 1;t@*UvRTSVU
3wUxR[y*z&{ D <Ks p|265 s&2T9 G#[R[W txyxR
RhTR[Z{ Xfm
U*r>2
c*2 a WYXISVU)}&Rh;r{@1F<Ks D RbW l~Rhm
}&Rh@r>{ D <Ks L N 1/1~R_vfr
RbyxzMr{ N s;mrqfX 3sMmqsFyM}'{ XhmU@r2
$&Cf]'(foMf*f' ¢¡@£¤o¥
¢
*¦ ¡F§Of¨V©
M¨E]¡@ªo fM§O«¬fC¨E - M®&"4M®&"¤®@@x¯@"
M¨E]¡@ª° ±±(¡; - M®&"4M®&"¤®@@x¯@"
²C³´µ¦¶¸· ¹¢º
Two accused facing trial herein are accused for the offence u/s
394/397/34IP on the allegations that on the night of 31.12.2004 at about 9.30 pm at Bulward Road, More Gate near Red Light they committed Contd..............2 2 robbery on the point of knives and snatched a sum of Rs.3,500/- and a motor cycle of the complainant Sandeep and Rs.150/- and one mobile phone from pillion rider Naresh who was coming back alongwith complainant Sandeep on the night of the occurrence. When Naresh made resistance he was also caused injury. Naresh was taken to Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital. The case was registered on the complaint of Sandeep Kumar that on the aforesaid date and time he was coming from Sadar Bazar on his motor cycle with Naresh Kumar and when they reached near Bulward Road, Mori Gate red light their motor cycle was got stopped by one boy and immediately thereafter his associates joined him and took out knives and made the alleged robbery with them and also caused injury to Naresh Kumar. On this complaint FIR was registered.
Accused Rajpal facing trial herein was arrested on the basis of secret information on the intervening night of 20/21.1.2005. The robbed motor cycle was recovered in this case from the possession of co accused Umesh Kamal who is a juvenile in the area of PS Subzi Mandi. The proceedings against accused Umesh have already been quashed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The accused Amit was arrested initially in a case u/s 107/151 CrPC at PS Kashmere Gate on 21.1.2005 and subsequently his arrest was put in this case on 31.1.2005. Both the accused refused their TIP. There was no other recovery except motor cycle.
Charge sheet was submitted and charges as aforesaid were Contd..............3 3 framed against the accused Rajpal and Amit.
Prosecution so far has examined 20 witnesses including the complainant Sandeep Kumar as PW-3 and injured Naresh as PW-5. Both of these witnesses are the main witnesses of the prosecution. There is no other witness of the incident. None of the two material witnesses namely Sandeep and Naresh have identified the two accused facing trial herein as the person seen by them at the time of occurrence. The motor cycle was allegedly recovered from accused Umesh against whom proceedings have since been quashed. There is no other material to connect the two accused with the commission of the offence. SI Bhoop Singh IO of the case is present. However, in view of the statement of PPW-3 and 5 there seems to be no use of continuing the trial against the two accused herein. Accordingly the two witnesses present today are discharged and PE is closed. In absence of any identification of either of the two accused by the complainant or by the injured there was no need of recording the statement of them u/s 313 CrPC. Their statement is accordingly dispensed with.
Since the material witnesses of the prosecution case have not identified the accused as the person involved in the commission of offence both accused are acquitted of the charge u/s 394/397/34 IPC. Case property be confiscated to the State after expiry of the period of appeal, if any. Bail bond and surety bond of accused Amit be cancelled. Accused Rajpal @ Hathi is in custody. He be released forthwith if not wanted in Contd..............4 4 any other case. Case file be consigned to Record-Room.
At this stage after announcement of the judgment when the Presiding Officer was hearing the accused on his request on the point of his handcuffs and fetters, he all of a sudden got flared and violent and started shouting and abusing towards the Presiding Officer. He appears to be disparate kind of accused and it is not desirable, looking to the conduct of the accused to open his handcuffs and fetters. He will be continued to remain in handcuffs and fetters till orders are passed by other Court of Law.
»,¼;¼x½H¾x¼x¿fÀ±Á,¼,ÃqÄ*À]½HÅ&Àh¼ ¿±½H¾xÆKÃEÇ È ¼,ÃÄ*Â`ÉËÊ@ÌHÍ`ÎCÁ@Ï_Т½MÑ°ÒOÀ_Óxƾ~ÏbÆKÐ'Ç:Ì;Ê;Ê&Ô@Õ Ö× Ø Ù Ú ÛÝÜßÞ à × Ø á Ø,â â ã Þ Ú(ç è Ùxé â ê Þ â ÞãàÚ ë äæå å'å å ä ì;í ì;í í*ì;ìxî ä ä ä Contd..............