Delhi District Court
State vs . Sappan Dass & Ors. Fir No. 1079/2015 ... on 1 March, 2023
State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur
IN THE COURT OF MS. SHIVANI CHAUHAN
THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (SOUTH-
EAST), SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF :
CNR number. DL-SE02-026265-2018
Cr. Cases Registration number 5412/2018
State Vs. Sappan Dass
FIR No. 1079/2015
PS : Kotla Mubarak Pur
U/s: 435/34 IPC & 4 PDPP Act.
Date of Institution : 23.08.2018
Date of reserving the judgment : Not reserved.
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 01.03.2023
JUDGMENT
1. Serial No. of the case : 5412/2018
2. Name of the Complainant : Constable Manjit
Kumar
3. Date of commission of offence : 27.09.2015
4. Name of accused person :
1. Sappan Dass, S/o Sh. Krishan
Dass, R/o S-201/59, Kidwai
Nagar East, Bengali Jhuggi, New
Page No. 1 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED)
State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur
Delhi.
2. Ratan Dass, S/o Sh. Ram
Krishan Dass, R/o S-201/53,
Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi-
110023.
3. Vikram Dass, S/o Sh. Naresh
Dass, R/o 201/58, East Kidwai
Nagar, New Delhi.
5. Offence charged : 435/34 IPC & 4
PDPP Act.
6. Plea of accused : Not guilty.
7. Final Order : Acquitted.
JUDGMENT
Brief facts of the case are as follows:
1. The prosecution has alleged that accused Sappan Dass, Ratan Dass and Vikram Dass had set two private bikes and one government bike on fire. Upon seeing Constable Manjeet and the home guard in their direction, they ran away. It is also alleged that the accused pelted stones on the bikes. On these allegations, the FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Section 435/34 IPC & Section 4 of PDPP Act. Matter was Page No. 2 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur investigated and charge-sheet was filed in the Court. Ld. Predecessor was pleased to take cognizance of the offence under Section 435/34 IPC and Section 4 PDPP Act and summoned all three as accused in the present case.
2. After compliance of the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C and hearing, formal charge for the offence under Section 435/34 IPC and Section 4 of PDPP Act was framed against the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. The prosecution examined seven witnesses in support of its case.
4. Vide their statement u/s 294 Cr.P.C, accused persons admitted the genuineness of, registration of the FIR copy of which is Ex.PA1, DD no. 33B and 40 B both dated 27.09.2015 Ex.PA2 and Ex.PA3, DD no. 38A Ex.PA4, Mechanical Inspection report of the vehicle bearing no. DL6SAL2527 and UP15P6007 TVS Victor and DL1SY-3845 Ex.P-5, Ex.P-6 and Ex.P-7 respectively, superdarinama of the affidavit of the vehicle bearing no. DL6SAL2527 (Hero HF Delux) Ex.PA8 and Ex.PA9 (running into 2 pages), superdarinama of the vehicle bearing no. UP15P6007 TVS Victor Ex.PA10, Five photographs of motorcycle bearing no. UP15P6007 TVS Victor Ex.PA10, Five photographs of motorcycle bearing no. UP15P6007 TVS Victor already Ex.P-1, three photographs of motorcycle bearing no. Page No. 3 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur DL1SY-3845 already Ex.P-2, Four photographs of motorcycle bearing no. DL6SAL2527 (Hero HF Delux) Ex.P-3. Thereafter PE was closed.
5. The statements of all accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused persons denied commission of the offence and stated that they had been falsely implicated in the present case. Accused persons did not lead any evidence in their defence. The matter was listed for final arguments.
6. It was submitted by Ld. APP for State that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubts. The accused persons have failed to prove any defence. Hence, the accused persons are liable to be convicted.
7. On the other hand, it is submitted by Sh. Dilip Kumar, Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against accused beyond reasonable doubts. The accused has been falsely implicated by the police officials. No offence has been committed by the accused. Hence, it is prayed the accused may be acquitted.
8. Submissions heard on behalf of both the parties. Carefully perused the record.
9. It is a settled proposition of criminal law that the Page No. 4 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur prosecution is supposed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence. The primary burden of proof for proving the offences in a criminal trial rests on the shoulders of the prosecution. Further, an accused is entitled to benefit of every reasonable doubt appearing qua the material facts.
Relevant Law:-
The settled propositions of Criminal Law are :
(A) Prosecution is required to prove its case on judicial file beyond reasonable doubts by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence.
(B) In order to prove its case on judicial file, prosecution is supposed to stand on its own legs and it cannot derive any benefit whatsoever from the weaknesses, if any, in the defence of the accused.
(C) The burden of proof of the version of the prosecution in a criminal trial throughout the trial is on the prosecution and it never shifts to the accused.
Page No. 5 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur (D) The accused is entitled to the benefit of every reasonable doubt in the prosecution story and such doubt entitles the accused to acquittal.
Law relating to requirement of independent witness Sections 100 Clause 4 & 5 CrPC: Requirement of independent witnesses only when search is made on the person of the accused or at some place from where the incriminating articles is recovered and not when corroboration of happening of event in which accused is alleged to be involved is concerned.
Minor contradictions do not effect the credibility of the prosecution case.
It was held in the judgment titled as Ravi Kapoor V. State of Rajasthan, 2012 VIII AD (S.C) 73 that "Minor variations are bound to occur in the statements of the witnesses when their statements are recorded after a considerable lapse from the date of occurrence".
Page No. 6 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur Overall context of the case is to be seen.
It also the settled law laid down in Sardul Singh Vs. State of Haryana AIR 2002 SC 3462 that Courts have a duty to undertake a complete and comprehensive appreciation of all the vital features of the case and entire evidence with reference to broad and reasonable probabilities of the case in their attempt to find out proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Law relating to Evidentary value of testimony of Police Officers:
10. The testimony of police personnel should be treated in the same manner as testimony of any other witness and there is no principle of law that without corroboration by independent witnesses their testimony cannot be relied upon. The presumption that a person acts honestly applies as much in favour of police personnel as of other persons and it is not a proper judicial approach to distrust and suspect them without Page No. 7 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur good grounds; Karamjit Singh v. State (Delhi Administration), AIR 2003 SC 1311.
11. Section 4 in The Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 provides as under:-
Mischief causing damage to public property by fire or explosive substance.--Whoever commits an offence under sub-section. (1) or sub-section (2) of section 3 by fire or explosive substance shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to ten years and with fine: Provided that the court may, for special reasons to be recorded in its judgment, award a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than one year.
12. Section 435 in The Indian Penal Code provides as under:-
Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to amount of one hundred or (in case of agricultural produce) ten rupees.-- Whoever commits mischief by fire or any explosive substance intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, damage to any property to the amount of one hundred rupees or upwards 1[or (where the property is agricultural produce) ten rupees or upwards], shall be pun- ished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Page No. 8 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur Prosecution witnesses deposed as follows:
13. PW1 Sh. Umesh deposed that he is registered owner of the vehicle i.e. motorcycle bearing no. UP15P-6007. However, he did not remember the exact date, month and year when he had parked his vehicle at the outside his residence at Kidwai Nagar, Kotla Mubarakpur. One another vehicle i.e. government vehicle was also parked near his motorcycle. On the day of incident, he came outside from his jhuggi and saw that his vehicle was burning.
14. PW2 Smt. Sarla Devi deposed that she is a housewife and illiterate and on 27.09.2015, at around 11:00 p.m, she heard noise of bursting of the tank. She came out of her house and saw that some vehicles were burning. Her motorcycle also got burnt in that fire. Somebody had made call from her phone at number
100.
15. PW 3 Constable Manjeet Kumar deposed that on 27.09.2015, he was on patrolling duty in Kidwai Nagar, INA. During patrolling duty, at about 09:00 pm, he reached on road going towards gurudwara at East Kidwai Nagar near Nala and Jhuggis. He parked his government bike bearing no. DL 1 SY 3845 near gurudwara. After around one hour, during patrolling duty, he heard a noise of blast and he found that his bike was set on fire and had fallen. He saw the accused persons who fled Page No. 9 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur from the spot after seeing him and home guard. Then he made a call at Police Station. Again when he saw the accused persons at the spot, they were pelting stones on the bikes. In the meantime, police officials reached at the spot. He then went inside the jhuggis to search the accused persons. Thereafter, IO recorded his statement Ex.PW3/A. IO prepared the site plan at his instance at the spot Ex.PW3/B.
16. PW4 ASI Janardhan Singh deposed that on 27.09.2015, he was posted as ASI at Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur and on that day, he was on night emergency duty and during his duty hours, Head Constable Arvind received a PCR Call and a case was marked to him by the then SHO. He alongwith Constable Rajesh went to the spot at Jhuggi, Bengali Camp, East Kidwai Nagar, near Gurudwara. He found that crowd had gathered at the spot. He recorded statement of Constable Manjeet at the spot which is already Ex.PW3/A and later on prepared the rukka on the basis of complaint which is Ex.PW4/A. Thereafter, he handed over the rukka to Constable Rajesh for registration of FIR at the Police Station. He called mechanical Inspector and Crime Team at the spot. He seized the government motorcycle bearing no. DL-1-SY-3845 vide seizure memo already Ex.PW3/C. Two other private vehicles were also seized by him at the spot vide seizure memo already Ex.PW3/D and Ex.PW3/E. He had also seized one cement stone vide seizure Page No. 10 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur memo already Ex.PW3/F. He prepared the site plan at the instance of Constable Manjeet Ex.PW3/B and made efforts to search the accused persons. At around 5 am, he found accused Sappan Dass. Accused Ratan Dass was also found in the morning hours and he arrested both of them vide arrest memo Ex.PW3/H and Ex.PW3/J respectively. At their instance, he prepared the pointing out memo Ex.PW4/B. They then reached the Police Station and deposited the case property of the present case in the Malkhana. Accused persons were then got medically examined and, thereafter, sent to Judicial Custody. In the evening of the same day, accused Vikram Dass was also arrested from the jhuggi area vide arrest memo Ex.PW3/L. Then personal search of the accused persons was conducted vide memos already Ex.PW3/K, Ex.PW3/M and Ex.PW3/I. He also recorded the disclosure statements of accused Vikram and Sappan Dass vide memos Ex.PW4/C and Ex.PW4/D. He also recovered one match stick from accused Vikram vide seizure memo already Ex.PW3/G. He prepared the pointing out memo of the place at the instance of accused Sappan Dass and Ratan Dass where Constable Manjeet scolded them vide Ex.PW4/E. Thereafter, he was transferred and he handed over the case file to MHC(R).
17. PW5 HC Ram Narayan deposed that in the month of May, 2018, the present file was marked to him for completing the investigation by the MHC(R). He perused all the charge-
Page No. 11 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur sheet as it was already completed by the first IO Head Constable Digvijay. He did not made any further inquiry in the present case. Hence, he filed the present charge-sheet in the court against the accused persons.
18. PW6 Head Constable Digvijay Singh deposed that on 23.08.2017, he was posted as Head Constable at Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur and on that day, he received the present case file for further investigation from MHCR. During investigation, he went to the MT office to collect documents relating to ownership of the offending vehicle, however, he did not collect the same due to absence of Assistant Sub-Inspector Sumer Singh. In the meantime, he was transferred from Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur and he submitted the present case file to MHC(R) on 25.04.2018.
19. PW7 Constable Rajesh deposed that on 27.09.2015, he was posted as Constable at Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur and on that day, he joined the investigation with IO / Assistant Sub- Inspector Janardhan Singh and after receiving DD No. 38A regarding burning of motorcycle, they went to the spot i.e. East Kidwai Nagar, Near Gurudwara where they met Constable Manjeet. They also saw some bikes were lying in burnt condition. IO then recorded the statement of Constable Manjeet and prepared rukka for registration of the FIR and handed over Page No. 12 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur the same to him. He then went to Police Station and got the FIR registered through the then Duty Officer. After registration of the FIR, he returned back to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to the IO. Investigation of the case was marked to Assistant Sub-Inspector Janardhan Singh. Thereafter, IO prepared the site plan and also seized the motorcycle bearing No. DL-1SY-3845 vide memo Ex.PW3/C. IO also seized motorcycles bearing nos. DL-6S-AL-2527 and UP 15P-6007 vide memos Ex.PW3/D and Ex.PW3/E. IO also seized one cement stone and match box separately and sealed them with the seal of JSB. He also prepared seizure memos already Ex.PW3/F and Ex.PW3/G. Case property i.e. three motorcycles were brought to Police Station and were deposited in the Malkhana. They also made efforts to search the accused persons in the Jhuggi area and they were found near Lal Quarters Jhuggi. IO arrested accused Sappan Dass vide memo already Ex.PW3/H, accused Rattan Dass vide memo already Ex.PW3/J and accused Vikram Dass vide memo already Ex.PW3/L. IO also conducted personal search of accused persons vide memos already Ex.PW3/I, Ex.PW3/K and Ex.PW3/M respectively. IO also recorded the disclosure statements of accused Sappan Dass and Vikram Dass vide memos Ex.PW4/C and Ex.PW4/D respectively. IO also prepared the pointing out memo at the instance of accused Sappan Dass and Vikram Dass already Ex.PW4/B and Ex.PW4/E. Thereafter, accused persons were Page No. 13 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur brought to Police Station. IO then recorded his statement to this effect. He correctly identified accused Sappan Dass and Rattan Dass before the Court.
Discussion on merits:
20. All the witnesses were duly cross-examined. None of the seven prosecution witnesses has deposed that they had seen anyone putting any flammable object on the alleged vehicle or putting any of the alleged vehicle on fire. PW1 Umesh and PW2 Sarla Devi categorically deposed that they did not as to who put their bikes on fire. Even PW3 Constable Manjeet deposed that he heard a blast noice and saw the bike was already on fire. He also did not see anyone flaming his bike. The only allegation against accused remains that they allegedly ran away after seeing Constable Manjeet and the home guard. Interestingly, all the accused persons were apprehended from their respective jhuggis within 24 hours of the alleged offence. If the accused had set the bikes on fire or had run away as alleged, then why would they be available at their jhuggi. This has not been explained by the prosecution. The alleged home guard who had accompanied Constable Manjeet has not been examined as a witness or even named anywhere by the prosecution. The other allegation is that matchstick and a cement stone was recovered from the possession of the accused Vikram Dass. Matchstick is a very Page No. 14 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur common object which is available in each and every household and also commonly available with the people who smoke cigarette or bidi. It is also commonly available at the temples where diyas and agarbattis are lit. The cement stones are also freely lying on the roads and are also lying at constructions sites. Mere recovery of commonly available objects like matchstick or stone is not sufficient to link any of the accused with the alleged offence. None of the witness had seen any of the accused putting any of the alleged vehicle on fire. Prosecution has also not proved any motive as to why the accused would set the vehicles on fire as alleged or pelt stones. Prosecution has failed to connect any of the accused with the alleged offence except the fact that they were residents of the jhuggis which is also a densely populated area. Despite the fact that the place of occurrence is densely populated, not even a single eye-witness has deposed having seen any of the accused putting the alleged vehicles on fire. There are several lacunae in the case of prosecution which go to the very root of the case and raise several doubts on the story put forth by the prosecution.
21. As the facts alleged have not been proved, the discussion on points of law is not necessitated. Prosecution has failed to prove that any of the accused had set any of the alleged vehicle on fire as alleged. The burden of proving the Page No. 15 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED) State Vs. Sappan Dass & Ors. FIR No. 1079/2015 P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur case is on the Prosecution and it has to prove its case beyond the pales of reasonable doubt and has to stand on its own legs. It cannot rely on the absence or imperfection of the defence. Whereas the accused is only required to raise reasonable doubt on the prosecution's case. As discussed in preceding paragraphs, there are several glaring loopholes in the Prosecution's version and benefit of doubt has indeed accrued in favour of accused and the same must necessarily be extended to them. In these circumstances, Accused Sappan Dass, Ratan Dass and Vikram Dass are hereby acquitted for offence U/s 435/34 IPC and S. 4 PDPP Act.
Ordered accordingly.
Pronounced in the open Court on this 01st day of March, 2023.
(Shivani Chauhan) Chief Metropolitan Magistrate South East, Saket Courts: New Delhi Page No. 16 of 16 (Shivani Chauhan/CMM/SED)