Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

State vs . on 19 September, 2014

                                        1

                   IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJNISH BHATNAGAR,
                   ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE -02, NORTH DISTRICT
                           ROHINI COURTS : DELHI


IN RE :                        Sessions Case No. : 60/13
                               FIR No. : 383/12
                                P.S.     : Bawana
                                U/s       : 392/394/397/411/34 IPC
                                Date of registration : 20-03-2013
                               Reserved for Judgment on: 19-09-2014
                               Judgment Announced on : 19-09-2014

                 State

                  Vs.

      Deepak S/o Sh. Jai Pal
      R/o H. No. 68, Village Sannoth,
      Delhi.

JUDGMENT

1. Briefly stated the present case was registered on the basis of the statement of complainant Raj Singh S/o Bhawani Singh. According to the complainant on 15/11/12, he left his factory situated at 170, O-Block, Sec.2, DSIDC, Bawana at about 9:15pm for his house on his motorcycle No.DL 11 SB-4896 Hero Honda Passion and when he reached at Gol Chakar J-Block two boys came from wrong side on a motorcycle and gave signal to stop him.

2. According to the complainant on suspicion instead of stopping the motorcycle he drove it fast. The aforesaid two boys chased him and intercepted him after putting their motorcycle in front of him as a result of which he was forced to stop his motorcycle. The pillion rider got down from the motorcycle and Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 1 of 28 2 held his motorcycle from its handle. The driver of the aforesaid motorcycle also got down and they both gave him beatings and as a result of which he fell down on the road.

3. According to the complainant, the boy who held the handle of his motorcycle fled away with his motorcycle and the other boy fled away on his motorcycle. According to the complainant, he raised noise, hearing which one chowmein vender along with his associate chased the aforesaid two boys on a motorcycle and he chased them on foot. According to the complainant when he reached at C-Block about 300-400 meters after running he saw his motorcycle lying there and the chowmein vender was bleeding from his head which may be due to the attack by the persons who have robbed his motorcycle.

4. According to the complainant, the boy who had fled away with his motorcycle was also present there in injured condition, and he was being beaten by the public and two police persons who were present there were intervening in the same. According to the complainant, the name of the boy who had fled away with his motorcycle after robbing the same was revealed as Deepak. PCR Van also arrived at the spot and shifted the chowmein vender to the hospital as he was bleeding profusely. According to the complainant, police arrived at the spot and his motorcycle bearing registration No. DL 11 SB 4896 and Deepak had been handed over to the police.

5. F.I.R. bearing No. 383/12, was registered at P.S. Bawana and investigation went underway. During the course of investigation accused was arrested. After completion of investigation final report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared and was filed in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate who after completing Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 2 of 28 3 all the formalities committed the case to the court of sessions for trial.

6. On 15-05-2013, a charge U/s 392/394/397/34 IPC and U/s 411 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

7. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses.

8. PW 1 Raj Singh (Complainant), PW 2 Sunil Kumar and PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah are the material public witnesses and I will discuss their testimonies in the later part of the judgment.

9. PW 3 Dr. Rakesh Verma examined the patient Mohd.

Satha Ullha on 15-11-2012, vide MLC No. 4353/12 and after the examination he referred the patient to orthopedic surgeon. He proved on record the MLC of patient Satta Ullaha as Ex. PW 3/A which bears his signature at point X and he proved his observations on the MLC Ex. PW 3/A from point A to A. He further deposed that he opined the nature of injury as "grievous" in nature.

10. He further deposed that on the said date he also examined Raj Singh brought by Ct. Amit. He examined the patient and prepared the MLC No. 4355/12. He proved the same as Ex. PW 3/B which bears his signature at point X. He further deposed that he opined the nature of injury as simple in nature on the MLC Ex. PW 3/B.

11. PW 4 Ct. Anil Kumar deposed that on 15-11-12, he was posted at P.S. Bawana and was on patrolling duty in the area. At about 11:30 p.m while patrolling in the area he reached at C Block Sector 2 near Maruti Ata meal. On reaching there he met H.C. Mukesh and constable Surender. He alongwith H.C. Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 3 of 28 4 Mukesh and Constable Surender took complainant Rai Singh and accused Deepak to MV Hospital and got the accused and complainant medically examined.

12. He further deposed that after that H.C. Mukesh obtained the MLC of complainant Rai Singh and accused Deepak. Satha Ulla was also brought to the hospital by PCR and he was medically examined and after that his MLC was also obtained by H.C. Mukesh. Thereafter they reached to the police station alongwith all the said three injured persons. The MLCs of the said injured persons were handed over to SI Praveen by H.C. Mukesh.

13. He further deposed that thereafter he alongwith Constable Surender and H.C. Mukesh went for the search of accused Jagbir @ Monu (not charge sheeted) but despite their efforts the accused was not traceable. They also went to the house of accused Jagbir @ Monu (not charge sheeted) where his mother was found present. Thereafter they came back to the police station.

14. PW-5 HC Jawahar Lal is the duty officer. He proved on record the FIR as Ex. PW 5/A. He also made his endorsement on the rukka which he proved as Ex. PW 5/B.

15. PW 7 Ct. Jaideep Kaushik deposed that on 15-11-12, he was posted at PP DSIDC P.S. Bawana as DD writer and on that day he received an information from duty officer of PS Bawana that at Sector 2 Bawana, Industrial Area, Factory No. J-6, two persons on a motorcycle pushed a person and snatched away with his motorcycle No. DL 1 SB 4896 Passion Black Colour. PW 7 further deposed that he recorded DD No. 26 in this regard and he proved the same as Ex. PW 7/A. Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 4 of 28 5

16. PW-8 Ct. Mukesh Kumar deposed that on 15.11.12 he was posted at PS Bawana and on that day, he along with SI Parveen Kumar were on patrolling duty at DSIDC Bawana. At about 10.00 p.m. on wireless set information was received about snatching of one motorcycle and they reached at C Block, Sector-2, Near Maruti Brand Atta Mill. A crowd was gathered there beating accused Deepak.

17. He further deposed that one another person Mohd. Sattuallah was also found at the spot in injured condition. Motorcycles no. DL 11S B 4896 and DL 8S AM 5747 were lying at the spot. PCR Libra 40 also reached at the spot and injured/witness Sattaullah was shifted to MB Hospital along with other public witness Sunil who was also present at the spot.

18. PW 8 further deposed that in the meantime, HC Mukesh and Ct. Surender reached at the spot. HC Mukesh recorded the statement of complainant Rai Singh who was also present at the spot and prepared the rukka and handed over to him for registration of the case. He went to police station for registration of FIR and got the present case registered. He further deposed that after registration of the case, further investigation was assigned to SI Parveen Kumar. PW 8 further deposed that he returned to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and rukka to SI Parveen Kumar.

19. PW 8 further deposed that in the meantime, HC Mukesh, Ct. Surender, Ct. Anil returned to the spot along with complainant Rai Singh, Deepak and Mohd. Sattauallah and handed over the MLC of aforesaid three public persons. PW 8 further deposed that accused Deepak was handed over to him. HC Mukesh, Ct. Surender and Ct. Anil went in search of other Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 5 of 28 6 accused Jagbir. Site plan was prepared at the instance of complainant Rai Singh. Interrogation was made with accused Deepak. He was arrested vide memo already Ex.PW1/C bears signature of PW 8 at point X and his personal search was carried out vide memo already Ex.PW1/D which bears the signature of PW 8 at point X in which one Nokia mobile phone was found. Accused made the disclosure statement already Ex.PW1/E bears the signature of PW 8 at point X.

20. PW 8 further deposed that motorcycle no. DL 11 SB 4896 was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW1/F bears his signature at point X. Motorcycle no. DL 8S AM 5747 was taken into possession vide seizure memo already Ex.PW1/G bears his signature at point X. Accused Deepak pointed out the place of incident i.e. near factory no. J-6, Sector- 2, DSIDC, Bawana where he along with his associate Jagbir had done the robbery and pointing out memo Ex.PW8/A was prepared which bears his signature at point A. PW 8 further deposed that thereafter they returned to the police station. Case property was deposited with the MHC (M). Accused Deepak made the supplementary disclosure statement Ex.PW8/B which bears signature of PW 8 at point A.

21. PW 9 HC Mukesh deposed that on 15.11.2012, he was posted at PP DSIDC Bawana and on that day, on receipt of DD no. 22 PP already Ex. PW-7/A and 23 PP already Ex. PW- 7/B, he alongwith Ct. Surender reached factory no. J-6, Sector-2, near DSIDC Bawana, where no complainant met and he alongwith Ct. Surender reached C Block, Sec-2, near Maruti Atta Mill where SI Parveen Kumar alongwith Ct. Mukesh met him there.

22. PW 9 further deposed that accused Deepak s/o Jai Pal, was found apprehended and it was revealed that his associate Jagbir @ Monu managed to escape from the spot. Accused Deepak was injured as he was given beatings by the public. One public person Mohd. Sataullah was also got injured who apprehended the accused Deepak and was injured by accused Deepak and Jagbir in that process. PW 9 further deposed that said Mohd. Sataullah was already shifted to MV Hospital by PCR personnels. Two motorcycles no. DL-11-SB- 4896 and DL-8S-AM-5747 were found at the spot. Complainant Rai Singh was also found at the spot who got his statement recorded already Ex. PW-1/A bears the signatures of PW 9 at point A about the robbery committed by accused Deepak alongwith Jagbir.

23. PW 9 further deposed that he made rukka Ex. PW-9/A which bears his signature at point A and handed over the same to Ct. Mukesh who went to the police station and got the present case registered. In the meantime, Ct. Anil while patrolling also reached at the spot and he alongwith Ct. Anil, Ct. Surender, Complainant Rai Singh and accused Deepak went to MV Hospital and got the medical examination done of complainant Rai Singh and accused Deepak and collected their MLCs and also the MLC of Sataullah and returned to the spot alongwith the aforesaid personnels with one companion of Sataullah.

24. PW 9 further deposed that further investigation was assigned to SI Praveen Kumar and he handed over the three MLCs and accused Deepak to him whose custody was handed over to Ct. Mukesh and he alongwith Ct. Surender and Ct. Anil went in search of co-accused Jagbir @ Monu but without Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 7 of 28 8 success.

25. PW 10 Dr. Suresh Kumar, deposed that on 15-11-12, he was posted at Maharishi Balmiki Hospital, Pooth Khurd, Delhi and on the said day at about 10:08 p.m. patient Sataulla was examined by Dr. Vippin Kumar, SR Ortho. The observations given by him on the MLC already exhibit PW 3/A are from point B to B and the same bears his signature at point Z. PW 10 identified the signature and handwriting of Dr. Vippin Kumar on the MLC already Ex. PW 3/A as he had worked under his supervision. He further deposed that Dr. Vippin Kumar has left the services of the hospital and his whereabouts are not known.

26. PW 11 Rajesh Kumar Bansal M.R.O M.V. Hospital Puth Khurd Delhi brought the original summoned record i.e. X Ray reports of patient Mohd. Sataulla dated 17-11-2012, and X-Ray Plate No. 2078 dated 15-11-12. He proved the X-ray report as Ex. PW 11/A and X-ray Plate as Ex. PW 11/B.

27. PW 12 is Dr. Sunil Kakkar. He deposed that X-Ray Report of patient Mohd. Sataulla Ex. PW 11/A was made by Dr. Sharad Ex. S.R. Department of Radiology M.V. Hospital on 17- 11-12. He further deposed that Dr. Sharad has left the services of the hospital and his whereabouts are not known. PW 12 identified the handwriting and signature of Dr. Shrad as he had worked under him. He further deposed that X-ray report Ex. PW 11/A is in the handwriting of Dr. Sharad and bears his signature at point A. He further deposed that as per the X-ray plate Ex. PW 11/B and report there is a fracture on the lower shaft of the ulna and olecranon process noted.

28. PW 13 SI Praveen is the IO of the case. He unfolded the Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 8 of 28 9 sequence of investigation done by him. He proved on record DD No. 21- PP, DSIDC Bawana as Ex. PW 13-A; arrest memo of accused Jagbir @ Monu as Ex. PW 13/B; his personal search memo as Ex. PW 13/C; his disclosure statement as Ex. PW 13/D; pointing out memo of the place of apprehension of accused Deepak as Ex. PW 13/E; pointing out memo of the place of incident as Ex. PW 13/F; application for providing the TIP proceedings of accused Jagbir Singh as Ex. PW 13/G; copy of the TIP proceedings as Ex. PW 13/H and TIP proceedings of accused Jagbir Singh @ Monu as Ex. PW 13/I.

29. PW 14, Ct. Sikandar deposed that on 15.11.2012, he was posted at PHQ at CPCR at Channel No. 129. He received an information at about 09.50 p.m, from phone no. 8447335701 about the snatching of bike and beating at C Block, Sector-2, in front of Maruti Atta Mill, Bawana. He filled up the form and passed on the information on net for further necessary action. He proved the copy of the same as Ex. PW-14/A.

30. PW 15 HC Pradeep Kumar Gaur, deposed that on 15.11.2012, he was posted at PHQ at CPCR at Channel No.

129. On that day, W/Ct. Saraswati was also posted as such and was working at Channel no. 130, who received the first call at about 09.46 p.m from phone no. 9810994434, name of the informant was Rai Singh whereby he informed about the snatching of his motorcycle No. DL-1SB-4896, Pulsar, red and black colour, by two motorcycle riders at Sector-2, factory no. J-6, Bawana Industrial Area. She filled up the form and passed on the information on net for further necessary action. He proved the copy of the same as Ex. PW-15/A.

31. He further deposed that on the same day, at about 09.52 Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 9 of 28 10 p.m, he received another call in respect of the aforesaid incident from mobile no. 8447335701 whereby it was informed that "bike chheen rahe hain aur maar peet ho rahi hai" at D Block, Sector-2, in front of Maruti Atta Mill, Bawana Indl. Area. He filled up the form and passed on the information on net for further necessary action. He proved on record the attested copy of the PCR form as Ex. PW-15/B and the copy of the same as Ex. PW-15/C.

32. After the closing of the prosecution evidence statement of accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C was recorded and all the incriminating evidence was put to him. Accused denied the same and stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No evidence in defence was led by the accused.

33. I have heard Ld. Addl.PP for the state and Ld. Amicus Curiae Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Adv. for the accused and have also gone through the records of the case.

34. It is submitted by the Ld. Addl. PP for the state that on the basis of the evidence recorded and the material available on record accused be convicted. It is further submitted by the Ld. Addl. PP for the state that the allegations against the accused are grave and serious in nature. It is further submitted that accused was apprehended at the spot and the motorcycle of the complainant was recovered then and there.

35. On the other hand, it is submitted by the Ld Amicus Curiae for the accused that the accused has been falsely implicated and he was simply a passerby from the place of incident. He was caught and implicated in the present case.

36. In the instant case the material witnesses are PW 1 Raj Singh, PW 2 Sunil Kumar and PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah.

37. PW 1 Raj Singh is the person who according to the prosecution was robbed of his motorcycle by the accused and his associate. According to PW 1 on 15-11-12, he left his factory situated at 170, O Block, Sector 2 DSIDC Bawana at about 9:15 p.m for his house. He was driving his motorcycle No. DL 11 SB - 4896 Hero Honda Passion. When he reached at round of J Block, 2 boys came from a wrong side on a motorcycle and signaled him to stop. He further deposed that he got suspicious and drove his motorcycle at a fast speed. The said two boys chased him and intercepted him after putting their motorcycle in front of him as a result of which he was forced to stop his motorcycle.

38. He further deposed that the pillion rider got down form the motorcycle and held his motorcycle by its handle. He further deposed that the driver of the said motorcycle also got down and they both started giving beatings to him as a result of which he fell on the road. PW 1 has further deposed that the boy who had held the handle of his motorcycle thereafter fled away with his motorcycle and the other boy fled away on his motorcycle. He raised an alarm hearing which one Chawmein vendor alongwith his associate chased the boys on a motorcycle and he chased them on foot. He further deposed that when he reached at C- Block, he saw his motorcycle was lying there and the chawmein vendor was bleeding from his head. The boy who was fled away with his motorcycle was also present there in injured condition as he was beaten by the public.

39. He further deposed that two police personnels were also present there. He identified the accused Deepak as the person who had fled away with his motorcycle. He further deposed that Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 11 of 28 12 the motorcycle on which the accused persons came was also lying there. He further deposed that his statement was recorded which is Ex. PW 1/A. He further deposed that he alongwith accused Deepak and Chawmein vendor was taken to the hospital where they were medically examined. He proved the arrest memo of accused Deepak as Ex. PW 1/C; his personal search memo as Ex. PW 1/D; his disclosure statement as Ex. PW 1/E. He further deposed that the site plan was prepared at his instance, which he proved as Ex. PW 1/B. He further deposed that the motorcycles were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PW 1/F and Ex. PW 1/G. He identified his motorcycle as Ex. P- 1 and the motorcycle on which the accused persons had come as Ex. PX.

40. This witness was cross examined on behalf of the accused and in his cross examination he denied that there was no light on the route which he took from his factory to his house. He further deposed that accused Deepak was not wearing a helmet. He further stated that accused Deepak was apprehended after about a chase of 300 meters. Basically there is noting in the cross examination of this witness to make him unbelievable. He has categorically narrated about the manner in which the incident took place and identified accused Deepak who was apprehended at the spot and motorcycle of the witness was also recovered from there. The motorcycle on which accused Deepak had come with his co-accused was also recovered from the spot where he was apprehended.

41. The another material witness is PW 2 Sunil Kumar. He is the person who had chased the accused persons on his motorcycle alongwith PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah who was the Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 12 of 28 13 chowmein vendor. He deposed that he is having a mobile shop at K Block Road, Sector-2 DSIDC Bawana and Mohd. Sattaullah PW 6 used to install chawmein rehari near his shop.

42. He further deposed that on 15-11-12, at about 9:30 / 10 p.m, one person was coming towards them and was raising alarm stating that his motorcycle has been snatched. He further deposed that at the same time he saw 2 boys who were coming on 2 separate motorcycle which they were driving at a high speed. He further deposed that he started his motorcycle No. DL 8 S AT 0546 and Sattaullah sat on the pillion seat of his motorcycle and they started chasing those 2 boys at C-Block, Sector 2 near Maruti Atta Mills and overpowered them at C Block Sector 2 near Maruti Atta Mills. He further deposed that when he was parking his motorcycle by the side of the road PW Sattaullah caught hold of one of the two boys and he identified the said boy as accused Deepak present in the Court. He further deposed that the other associate of accused Deepak tried to set Deepak free from them and he gave beatings to Sattaullah and accused Deepak gave beatings to Sattaullah with legs and fist blows. He further deposed that public persons gathered there and gave beatings to accused Deepak but his associate managed to escape.

43. He further deposed that accused Deepak was found driving motorcycle number DL 11 SB 4896 which was identified by the complainant PW 1 as his motorcycle which was robbed by the accused. He further deposed that when they were grappling with accused Deepak and his associate PW Raj Singh was also present there as he was following them on foot. He further deposed that associate of accused Deepak ran away from the Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 13 of 28 14 spot leaving the motorcycle No. DL 8S AM 5747. He further deposed that he informed the police and accused Deepak was handed over to the PCR official in the presence of Raj Singh. He also proved the documents with regard to the arrest memo of accused; his personal search and disclosure statement of the accused on record. He identified the motorcycle of the complainant as P-1 and motorcycle No. DL 8S AM 5747 on which associate of accused Deepak was driving as PX.

44. This witness was cross examined on behalf of the accused and in his cross examination he denied the suggestion that accused Deepak has been falsely implicated or that both the accused fled away from the spot. He denied the suggestion that there was no light at the spot. He deposed that 10-12 persons gathered there who gave beatings to Deepak. Again there is nothing in the cross examination of this witness which could discredit his testimony. He has also categorically narrated the manner in which he alongwith PW 6 Sattaullah, chased the accused and how he was apprehended at the spot. He has also deposed about the presence of PW Raj Singh who came there on foot. He has also identified both the motorcycles and corroborated PW 1 Raj Singh on all material particulars of the case.

45. PW 6 is Mohd. Sattaullah. He deposed that on 15-11-12, he was present alongwith Sunil at Crossing K Block, Sector 2 DSIDC Bawana where they had their shops in their reharis. He further deposed that at about 9:30 p.m one person made noise regarding snatching of his motorcycle and two boys on separate motorcycles fleeing away. He alongwith Sunil chased them on the motorcycle of Sunil at C Block, Sector 2 Maruti Atta Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 14 of 28 15 Mills and apprehended accused Deepak. (Witness correctly identified accused Deepak in the Court).

46. He further deposed that co-accused of accused Deepak in order to release started giving beatings to him with danda as a result of which he suffered injuries on his body and accused Deepak also gave him beatings. Public persons gathered there. He further deposed that co-accused of accused Deepak managed to flee away from the spot. In the meantime the person whose motorcycle was snatched also reached at the spot. Police also reached at the spot. Both the motorcycles, one that was robbed and another on which accused came were lying at the spot.

47. He further deposed that the PCR persons shifted him to MB Hospital Pooth Khurd. Sunil accompanied him to the hospital. He further deposed that accused Deepak was arrested vide arrest memo already Ex. PW 1/C and his personal search was carried out vide memo already Ex. PW 1/B and accused Deepak made disclosure statement which is already Ex. PW 1/E. This witness could not tell the number of both the motorcycles. But he deposed that the number of the motorcycle of Sunil on which they chased was 0564.

48. This witness was cross examined on behalf of the accused and in his cross examination he stated that at the time of the incident there were 8-10 shops. All the shops were closed on that day. He denied the suggestion that accused Deepak was falsely implicated in this case. He also denied that both the culprits fled away from the spot. He also denied the suggestion that he received injury due to the slipping of the motorcycle.

49. There is nothing in the cross examination of this Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 15 of 28 16 witness which could discredit his testimony and he corroborated PW 1 Raj Singh and PW 2 Sunil Kumar on all material particular of this case. He has also categorically narrated the manner in which he alongwith PW 2 Sunil Kumar, chased the accused and how the accused was apprehended at the spot. He has also deposed about the presence of PW Raj Singh who came there at the spot. No doubt this witness could not tell the number of the motorcycles as he did not remember the same but in my opinion this is not sufficient to discredit the otherwise reliable and cogent testimony of this witness who has supported the case of the prosecution on all material particulars.

50. PW 8 is Ct. Mukesh who on receiving the information had reached the spot where he found PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah in injured condition and motorcycle No. DL 11 SB 4896 and DL 8S AM 5747 were lying at the spot. PCR Libra 40 had also reached the spot and inured PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah was removed to the hospital. He has further deposed that H.C. Mukesh recorded the statement of the complainant who was present at the spot.

51. PW 9 is H.C. Mukesh Kumar. He also reached the spot where accused Deepak was found apprehended and he was injured due to public beatings and according to him PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah was also present there in injured condition. He has also deposed that two motorcycles bearing No. DL 11 SB 4896 and DL 8S AM 5747 were lying at the spot and complainant Rai Singh was also present there whose statement was recorded. According to him complainant Rai Singh and Deepak went to the hospital for their medical examination. Thereafter they all returned to the spot.

52. PW 13 SI Praveen also deposed more or less on the same lines as deposed by PW 8 Ct. Mukesh Kumar and PW 9 H.C. Mukesh Kumar.

Sattaullah have corroborated each other regarding the manner in which the incident took place; accused Deepak was apprehended at the spot alongwith the motorcycle of complainant bearing No. DL-11 SB 4896 and the motorcycle No. DL 8S AM 5747 on which accused Deepak alongwith his associate had committed the crime was also lying at the spot. This fact has also been corroborated by PW 8 Ct. Mukesh Kumar, PW 9 H.C. Mukesh and PW 13 SI Praveen who had reached their on receiving the information about the incident.

54. PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah had even received injuries at the hands of accused and his associates which has been corroborated by PW 1 Rai Singh and PW 2 Sunil Kumar. Nothing is their in the cross examination of PW 1, PW 2 and PW 6 to make them un-believable. As already discussed hereinabove, the post incident version of the public witnesses finds corroboration from the testimony of PW 8, PW 9 and PW 13 who are the police officials and reached their on the receipt of the information. The accused was apprehended at the spot alongwith the motorcycle of the complainant.

55. Therefore, the prosecution, has been able to prove that it was the accused who alongwith his co-associate came on motorcycle No. DL 8S AM 5747 and robbed the complainant of his motorcycle bearing No. DL-11 SB 4896 and subsequently accused Deepak was apprehended alongwith the motorcycle of the complainant. Accused Deepak has also given beatings to Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 17 of 28 18 PW 6 Mohd. Sataullah as a result of which he received injuries which is evident from the MLC of PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah which is Ex. PW 3/A. PW 2 Sunil Kumar and PW 6 Mohd. Sattaullah have also categorically stated this fact in their testimonies.

56. In view of the discussions mentioned hereinabove, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts against the accused. Therefore, the accused is held guilty and convicted U/s 392/394/34 IPC.

57. The accused has also been charged U/s 411 IPC as according to the prosecution the motorcycle No. DL 8S AM 5747 on which he had come alongwith his associate was a stolen motorcycle but no evidence has been led on record to show that the motorcycle No. DL 8S AM 5747 was a stolen motorcycle. So the accused is acquitted of the charge U/s 411 IPC.

58. The accused has also been charged U/s 397/34 IPC but the prosecution has not been able to prove that at the time of committing the robbery the accused was having any deadly weapon or any such deadly weapon was used by him at that time. So the accused is also acquitted of the charge U/s 397/34 IPC. Put up for arguments on the point of sentence on 26-09-2014.

(Announced in the open Court on 19-09-2014.) (RAJNISH BHATNAGAR) ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-02 NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS : DELHI Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 18 of 28 19 IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE -02, NORTH DISTRICT ROHINI COURTS : DELHI IN RE : Sessions Case No. : 60/13 FIR No. : 383/12 P.S. : Bawana U/s : 392/394/397/411/34 IPC State Vs. Deepak S/o Sh. Jai Pal R/o H. No. 68, Village Sannoth, Delhi.

ORDER ON SENTENCE

1. I have heard Sh. Girish Giri, Ld. Addl. PP for the State and Ms. Sadhna Bhatia, Ld. Amicus Curiae for the convict on the point of sentence.

2. It is submitted by the Ld. Amicus Curiae for the convict that the convict is a poor person has a family to support and is the only bread earner of his family. It is prayed that a lenient view be taken and minimum sentence be awarded to the convict.

3. On the other hand, it is submitted by the Ld. Addl. PP Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 19 of 28 20 for the State that the convict does not deserve any leniency and maximum punishment be awarded to the convict.

4. Vide my separate Judgment dated 19-09-2014, the convict was held guilty and convicted U/s 392/394/34 IPC. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I sentence convict Deepak to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month u/s 392/34 IPC.

5. I further sentence convict Deepak to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Section 394/34 IPC.

6. All the sentence to run concurrently. Benefit of section 428 Cr.P.C be given to convict. Copy of judgment and order on sentence be given to convict free of cost. File be consigned to Record Room.

(Announced in the open Court on 29-09-2014).

(RAJNISH BHATNAGAR) ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE -02 NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS : DELHI Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 20 of 28 21 Sessions Case No: 60/13 Page 21 of 28