Delhi District Court
3.Title State vs . Shaeen @ Reshma Etc. on 7 September, 2019
THE COURT OF MS. RICHA MANCHANDA
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE01, NORTH EAST DISTRICT,
KARKARDOOMA COURT, DELHI
1.FIR No. 148/08, PS Gokalpuri
2.Unique Case No. 02402R015292011
3.Title State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc.
3(A).Name of complainant Inspector V.S. Malik.
3(B).Name of accused 1) Shaeen, W/o Ikram, R/o Gali no. 2,
Sherpur Chowk, Khajuri Khas, Delhi.
2) Nargis, W/o Javed, R/o Dabur Talab,
Loni Ghaziabad, U.P.
3) Rukhsar, D/o Akbar, R/o Gali no. 8, Near
Hansraj Diary, Gamri Road, Delhi.
4.Date of institution of challan 20.01.2011
5.Date of Reserving judgment 07.09.2019
6.Date of pronouncement 07.09.2019
7.Date of commission of offence 12.06.2008
8.Offence complained of U/s 4/5/8 ITP Act
9.Offence charged with U/s 4/5/8 ITP Act
10.Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty.
11.Final order Acquitted U/s 4/5/8 ITP Act
12. Date of receiving of judicial file 23.08.2012
in this court
JUDGMENT
1. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 12.06.2008 at 5:45 PM at near Ambedkar College, DTC bus stand, Wazirabad Road, Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Gokalpuri accused Shaeen @ Reshma alongwith two co accused persons Nargis and Rukhsar were found sitting on a patri for the FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7 purpose of alluring customers for prostitution and also accepted Rs. 500/ as advance and thereby committed offences punishable U/s 4/5/8 ITP Act and within the cognizance of this court.
2. After completion of investigation, the IO filed the charge sheet against the accused on 12.06.2008. After supplying of documents and hearing the accused, Ld. Predecessor was pleased to frame a charge against the accused persons for the offences under Section 4/5/8 of ITP Act on 12.07.2013. The accused persons pleaded not guilty in respect of the allegations contained in the charge and claimed trial.
3. To prove its case prosecution has examined only one witness in support of its case against the accused persons.
PW1 is Shri V.S. Malik, ACP. He has deposed that on 12.06.2008, he was posted at PS Gokalpuri as Inspector/SHO. On that day, he was present at PS and at about 5:30 PM, one secret informer came to his office and informed that 45 females indulged in the business of prostitution and seduced persons to have sexual intercourse for consideration of money who were present near Loni, Gole Chakkar flyover, near Ambedkar College, opposite petrol pump and if immediate raid conducted, then they might be apprehended. He narrated the whole incident to senior officer ACP Gokalpuri who permitted him to take immediate action and conduct the raid. Thereafter, he made entry regarding the said information in the DD register vide DD No. 20A. Thereafter, he prepared the raiding party consisting of HC Rohtash, HC Anil, Ct. Virender, WHC Leela and also accompanied the secret informer. Thereafter, he alongwith the said raiding party reached near the Gokalpuri flyover through the government Gypsy FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7 driver by Ct. Sarabjeet at about 5:45 PM. He requested 45 passersby to join the raiding party, however, they refused to join the investigation and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. In the said raiding party HC Rohtash and WHC Leela were in civil dress, however, the other raiding staff members were in police uniform. He briefed the facts and mode of operating to raiding party and HC Rohtash was instructed to act as a decoy customer and also handed over one Rs. 500/ currency note signed by him bearing no. 7DU627872 vide handing over memo Ex. PW1/A bearing his signature at point A. He also instructed the said decoy customer HC Rohtash that he would deal wih the said ladies if they invite him for the sexual intercourse and the moment deal got completed, he would make the indication with respect to the same by placing his hand on his head. Secret informer pointed out towards the said ladies and raiding party took its respective position. When HC Rohtash made the decided indication, then immediately they rushed to the said spot and apprehended the said three females who were present at the spot. HC Rohtash who was present at the spot told that one lady namely, Shaheen @ Reshma who projected herself as the leader of the said ladies and invited him to have sexual intercourse. He further told that accused Shaheen @ Reshma also shown two ladies namely, Rukhsar and Nargis and told him that to have sexual intercourse with Rukhsar he would be charged Rs. 2,000/ and with Nargis the charge would be Rs. 1,500/. HC Rohtash further told that he opted accused Rukhsar for sexual intercourse and handed over the said Rs. 500/ currency note to Shaheen as advance for the said purpose. WHC Leela made cursory search of accused Shaheen @ Reshma. Accused FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7 Shaeen @ Reshma was carrying the small hand bag/ladies purse chocolate colour and inscribed with the word JOOP was also searched by WHC Leela and the said Rs. 500/ currency note which was handed over to her by HC Rohtash was recovered from the said purse. It was the same currency note which he handed over to HC Rohtash and HC Rohtash handed over the same to accused Shaheen. The Rupees 500/ currency note and said purse were taken into police custody. The said Rs. 500/ currency note was again put inside the said purse and taken into police custody and seized after preparing pullanda sealed with the seal of VSM vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/B. He prepared the rukka Ex. Pw1/C and handed over to HC Anil with the direction to get the case registered at PS and to get appointed Inspector Gajraj Singh (Investigation) as IO for further investigation. Thereafter, HC Anil alongwith Inspector Gajraj Singh reached at the spot after getting the case registered at PS alongwith copy of FIR and original rukka. He narrated the whole facts to Inspector Gajraj and handed over the case property, seizure memo and handing over memo to him. He also handed over the custody of all the accused persons namely, Shaheen, Rukhsar and Nargis. Inspector Gajraj Singh prepared the site plan Ex. PW1/D at his instance. He recorded his supplementary statement. He got relieved thereafter and headed towards the PS. He correctly identified the accused persons present in the court. During his crossexamination, he stated that he do not have any personal knowledge whether before giving secret information by secret informer, any public person had lodged any complaint against them in the PS. He did not make any notice to the public persons who refused the join the investigation. He did not remember FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7 whether any arms from armoury were taken for this raid. The currency note of Rs. 500/ was from his personal account and he made a signature on this currency note. Head Constable Rohtash was in civil dress. He prepared the handing over memo of the currency note as well as seizure memo. He tried to interrogate people around the accused persons regarding their activities and gestures but the said people did not answer his interrogation. He denied the suggestion that no case property as stated by him was recovered from the possession of accused persons or they were present at the spot as stated by him. He denied the suggestion that accused persons had been falsely implicated by them.
4. It is seen that during the examination of PW1 the case property could not be brought directly on 03.08.2019. Statement of CW1 HC Sanoj was also examined who stated that no other property was deposited in the malkhana with respect to the present case except the property found during personal search.
Further, it is seen that despite the production of VRK file, the case property i.e. currency note in the present case could not traced. However, the only person to give clarifications about the same was IO Inspector Gajraj Singh who has since expired and therefore, till date, the case property i.e. currency note is not on the file. Also the next IO Inspector Ishwar Singh was called in the court who gave written explanation that he simply filed the challan and has no concern with the case property.
Rest of the witnesses are of the raiding party who were alongwith PW1 at the time of incident. In the aforesaid circumstances, the case property is not traceable and the IO has expired, the chain of circumstances FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7 in which the incident took place is incomplete and the said lacunae cannot be fulfilled after the examination of the other witnesses who are part of the raiding party. Accordingly, PE was directed to be closed.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satish Mehra v. Delhi Administration and others 1996 JCC 507 had held that "in a case where, there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction, the valuable time of the court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the conclusion on a future date".
6. The statements of the accused persons namely, Shaheen @ Reshma, Rukhsar and Nargis u/s 281 Cr.P.C. r/w 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded on 07.09.2019 wherein they pleaded their innocence. However, they chose not to examine any witness in their defence.
7. I have heard arguments from both the sides, and have perused the record very carefully.
8. Despite efforts made by prosecution, the case property i.e. currency note could not be traced and brought on record. In these circumstances, the chain of events is incomplete and has created a doubt in the case of prosecution. Accordingly, accused persons namely Shaheen @ Reshma, Rukhsar and Reshma are acquitted for the offences punishable U/s 4/5/8 ITP Act.
Announced in the (RICHA MANCHANDA)
Open Court on 07.09.2019 Metropolitan Magistrate
KKD Courts, Delhi
07.09.2019
FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7
It is certified that this judgment contains 7 (seven) pages and each page bears my signature.
(RICHA MANCHANDA) Metropolitan Magistrate NE/KKD Courts, Delhi 07.09.2019 Digitally signed by RICHA RICHA MANCHANDA MANCHANDA Date:
2019.09.07 15:46:22 +0530 FIR No. 148/08 State Vs. Shaeen @ Reshma etc. 7 Of 7