Delhi District Court
State vs . Rambeer Etc. on 6 February, 2023
IN THE COURT OF MS. SONIKA
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-04, EAST
DISTRICT KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
FIR No.1676/2014
PS: Shakarpur
State Vs. Rambeer Etc.
CNR No. DLET02-002549-2017
(a) Sr. No. of the case 3164/2017
(b) Date of offence 20.08.2014
(c) Complainant Sh. Sandeep Kumar Tyagi
(d) Accused, parentage and address 1. Sh. Rambeer, S/o Sh. Jaswant, R/o H. No.
E-109, Papu Colony, Gzb. (UP) and Vill.
Mohmadpur PS Hafijpur Distt. Hapur, UP.
2. Sh. Sauravbh Mittal, S/o Sh. Ajeet Kumar
Mittal, R/o H. No. 3, Pandit Chowk Near
Durga Mata Mandir, Mandawali, Delhi.
3. Sh. Sunil Kumar, S/o Sh. Suresh Kumar, R/o
H. No. S-561, School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi.
4. Sh. Vikas Kumar, S/o Sh. Rajbeer Singh,
R/o H. No. S-341, School Block, Shakarpur,
Delhi.
(e) Charges Framed Section 452/506/34 IPC
(f) Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final Order Proceedings qua accused Vikas Kumar abated
v.o.d. 23.06.2022
Remaining accused persons Acquitted
(h) Date of institution 22.04.2017
(i) Date when judgment was 06.02.2023
reserved
(j) Date of judgment 06.02.2023 (on same day)
FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.1/9
BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION OF
THE CASE
1. Present charge-sheet has been forwarded by the SHO, PS Shakarpur against the accused persons to face trial for the offences under Section 452/506/34 IPC.
2. In nutshell, the case of the prosecution is that on 20.08.2014 at about 06:00 P.M., at Shop No. S-556, School Block, Shakarpur, within the jurisdiction of PS Shakarpur, the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention committed house trespass in the house of the complainant after having made preparation to cause hurt/ wrongful restraint/ put in fear to the complainant and extended threat to the complainant to kill him. Consequently, present FIR was registered and after completion of investigation, the final report (charge sheet) for the offences under Section 452/506/34 IPC was forwarded against accused persons.
3. Cognizance was taken by Ld. Predecessor v.o.d.
22.04.2017 and after taking cognizance, copy of the charge-sheet alongwith documents were supplied to the accused persons in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. and the case was listed for arguments on charge.
4. After hearing the parties, charge was served upon accused persons for the commission of offence under Section 452/506/34 IPC v.o.d. 29.01.2019 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. It is pertinent to FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.2/9 mention that during the course of trial, the accused Vikas had expired on 05.08.2022. Resultantly, the proceedings qua accused Vikas was abated v.o.d. 23.06.2022, after the verification of his demise.
5. Thereafter, matter was listed for Prosecution's evidence. It is pertinent to mention that accused persons admitted the genuineness of FIR (Ex. C-1) and the certificate u/s 65B Evidence Act (Ex. C1/2), without its contents. As a result of which, the examination of the concerned witnesses were dispensed with. It is pertinent to mention here that several attempts were made to serve the summons upon the complainant Sh. Sandeep Kumar Tyagi, but the process was received back un-served. Thereafter, summons was ordered to be served through DCP concerned but again, the same were received back unserved and hence the witness was dropped from the list of witnesses.
6. Prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 03 witnesses.
7. PW-1 Insp. Kuldeep Singh deposed that on 20.08.2014, he was posted as SI at PS Shakarpur and on that day, he was present in PS on day emergency duty w.e.f. 08.00 am to 08.00 p.m. alongwith Ct. Dheer Singh, during which he received DD No.79B dated 20.08.2014 Ex.PW1/A, pursuant to the said DD, he alongwith Ct. Dheer Singh went to the spot at S-556, School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi, where complainant Sandeep Kumar FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.3/9 Tyagi alongwith Ct. Ashok and accused Rambeer was present. He further deposed that he made inquiries from him and complainant gave a written complaint to him regarding incident of present case Ex.PW1/B and having gone through the same, he made his endorsement on the statement of complainant, Ex.PW1/C. He further deposed that he sent rukka to PS through Ct. Dheer Singh for registration of case FIR. He further deposed that he inspected the spot and prepared the site plan Ex.PW1/D in the presence of complainant. He further deposed that in between, Ct. Dheer Singh came to him alongwith original rukka and copy of FIR Ex.PW1/E and handed over the same to him. He further deposed that on the same day, he arrested the accused Rambeer in the present case vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/F at the instance of complainant and the personal search of the accused was conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/F1. He further deposed that he interrogated the accused and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW1/G and thereafter, they left for the search of remaining accused persons but remained all in vain. He further deposed that after that he alongwith complainant, his staff and accused came back to PS and recorded supplementary statement of complainant also. He further deposed that the accused Rambeer was medically examined through Ct. Ashok and he recorded statements of Ct. Dheer Singh and Ct. Ashok and relieved them. He further deposed that on 21.08.2014, he produced accused Rambeer in the concerned Court where accused was FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.4/9 granted bail and on the same day, he visited School Block, Shakarpur where he arrested accused Saurabh Mittal in the present case vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/H at the instance of complainant and the personal search of the accused was conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/H1. He further deposed that he interrogated the accused and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW1/I. He further deposed that on the same day, he produced accused Saurabh Mittal in the concerned Court where accused was granted bail also. He further deposed that on 30.08.2014, accused Vikas and Sunil Kumar sought anticipatory bail in the present case and both of them were released on anticipatory bail by the concerned Ld. Sessions Court, however, he formally arrested both of them in the present case vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/J and Ex.PW1/K, but they were released on bail same time. He further deposed that he interrogated both accused persons. He further deposed that thereafter, he was transferred from PS Shakarpur to Crime Branch. He further deposed that he handed over the case file to MHC(R). He further identified the accused Rambeer, Saurabh Mittal and Sunil. PW-1 was cross-examined at length by Ld. Counsel for accused persons.
8. PW-2 ASI Dheer Singh deposed that on 20.08.2014, he was posted as constable at PS Shakarpur and on that day, he was present in PS on day emergency duty alongwith SI Kuldeep Singh w.e.f. 08.00 a.m to 08.00 p.m. He further deposed that SI Kuldeep Singh received DD No.79B and thereafter, he alongwith him went to the spot FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.5/9 at S-556, School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi where Ct. Ashok alongwith complainant already caught accused Rambeer. He further deposed that complainant Sandeep Kumar Tyagi gave a written complaint to the IO and IO made his endorsement of the same. He further deposed that IO handed over him the rukka which he took to PS for registration of case FIR. He further deposed that after registration of FIR, he alongwith original rukka and copy of FIR came back at the spot and handed over the same to the IO. He further deposed that thereafter, IO arrested the accused in the present case. He further deposed that IO made inquiries from other neighbours. He further deposed that IO recorded his statement in this regard. He further identified the accused Rambeer. PW-2 was duly cross- examined on behalf of accused persons.
9. PW-3 Retd. SI Anand Kumar deposed that in the year 2017, he was posted as ASI at PS Shakarpur and since the previous IO SI Kuldeep Singh was transferred from PS Shakarpur, the investigation of present case was marked to him by SHO concerned. He further deposed that he collected the case file from MHC(R) and gone through the same and the investigation of the case was almost completed by the previous IO. He further deposed that he called all the accused persons in PS and made enquiries from them. He further correctly identified the accused persons, who were present in the court. PW-3 was duly cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused persons.
FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.6/9
10. Thereafter, PE was closed v.o.d 23.01.2023.
Statement of accused persons U/Sec. 313 r/w Section 281 Cr.P.C was recorded on the same day wherein accused persons pleaded false implication and denied all the incriminating evidence put to them. Since, the accused persons did not opted to lead defence evidence, the matter was listed for final arguments.
11. It was argued by the Ld. APP for the State that the prosecution witnesses have successfully proved the factum of commission of offence by the accused, beyond reasonable doubt. He further stated that all the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and hence, the accused persons are liable to be convicted and punished as per law.
12. On the other hand, it was argued by Ld. Counsel for accused, the accused persons was falsely implicated in the case as there are several discrepancies and material contradictions in the deposition of the prosecution witnesses which create grave suspicion about the prosecution's case. He prayed that the accused persons deserve to be acquitted in this case.
13. I have heard the arguments addressed by Ld. APP for the State and Ld. Counsel for the accused persons and have carefully perused the material available on record.
14. It is a well settled legal principle that the prosecution has to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts and has FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.7/9 to stand upon its own legs. The prosecution cannot draw any strength from the case of the accused howsoever weak it may be. It is also a well settled principle of law that the burden of proof in a criminal trial always rests upon the prosecution and the same never shifts on the accused.
15. In the present case, the accused persons have been charged for the offences punishable u/s 452/506/34 IPC. Since the testimony of the complainant could not be recorded as he was not traceable through DCP and was consequently dropped from the list of witnesses, it could not be proved that the accused persons had committed the house trespass after making preparation to cause/put in a fear to cause hurt/wrongful restraint and thereby threatened the complainant.
16. In order to prove its case, although the prosecution has examined 3 witnesses but their deposition is not sufficient to prove the story of prosecution. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused persons had committed the alleged offence as the independent witness to the alleged incident could not be brought to the witness box. The remaining witnesses are police officials/formal witnesses and their examination could have been supplementary step to join the link of investigation and the sequence of events. But, in the absence of examination of material witnesses i.e. the complainant, the other witnesses are of no help to the prosecution.
FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.8/9
17. In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances, I hold that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 452/506/34 IPC against accused persons. Consequently, accused persons namely Rambeer, Saurvbh Mittal and Sunil Kumar are acquitted from the offences under Section 452/506/34 IPC.
Pronounced in the open court ( SONIKA) on 6th Day of February 2023 MM-04/East/KKD/Delhi
It is certified that this judgment contains 09 pages and each page is checked and signed by me.
(SONIKA) MM-04/East/KKD/Delhi 06.02.2023 FIR No. No.1676/2014 State Vs. Rambeer Etc. Page no.9/9