Delhi District Court
State vs Pappu Kumar Etc on 19 May, 2025
IN THE COURT OF Ms. DIVYA ARORA:
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-04: NORTH-WEST
ROHINI DISTRICT COURTS: NEW DELHI
FIR No. 326/2008
PS Aman Vihar
State Vs. Pappu Kumar etc.
Date of Institution: 11.01.2010
Date of Judgment: 19.05.2025
JUDGMENT
(a) Serial Number of the case : 529591/2016
(b) Date of commission of offence : 02.11.2008
(c) Name of the complainant : Sh. Gulab Singh,
(d) Name of Accused, his : (1) Pappu Kumar S/o Dhan Singh,
parentage & residence (Proceedings abated)
(2) Krishna W/o Kartar Singh,
R/o: H.No. 296, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
(3) Sudesh W/o Hari Bhagwan,
R/o: H.No. 107, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
(4) Brahm Prakash S/o Dariyav Singh,
R/o: H.No. 333, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
(5) Pawan Kumar S/o Kalan Singh,
R/o: H.No. 296, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
(6) Kamla W/o Jagbir Singh,
R/o: H.No. 114, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar)
U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC
State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 1 of 21
DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA
ARORA
ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:51:44
+0530
(7) Veena W/o Brahm Prakash,
R/o: H.No. 333, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
(8) Jagbir Singh S/o Hem Chand,
R/o: H.No. 114, VPO Rani Khera,
Delhi.
(e) Offence complained of : U/s: 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC
(f) Plea of Accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final order : Acquitted
BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION
1) The present case arises from allegations made by complainant Gulab Singh that on 02.11.2008 at about 8:45 AM, the accused persons namely Pappu Kumar, Brahm Prakash, Pawan Kumar, Veena, Sudesh, Krishna, Kamla and Jagbir Singh in furtherance of their common intention, committed criminal trespass by entering into the plot bearing number Khasra No. 41/5, Yogiraj Puram, Near Sheetla Properties, Delhi, in his possession, wrongfully restrained him and his son Surender, voluntarily caused simple injuries to both by beating them, caused mischief by damaging the foundation of the plot, and threatened to kill them. Based on these allegations, an FIR under Sections 447, 341, 323, 427, 506, and 34 IPC was registered and investigation was set in motion.
2) After completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed in Court, cognizance of the offences was taken against all accused persons, and all the abovesaid accused persons were summoned and after that, they entered appearance, copy of the chargesheet alongwith the documents FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 2 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:51:55 +0530 was supplied to them in compliance of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
3) Charge was then framed against the accused persons namely Pappu Kumar, Brahm Prakash, Pawan Kumar, Veena, Sudesh, Krishna, Kamla and Jagbir Singh on 26.09.2012 for the commission of offences under Section 447, 341, 323, 427, 506, and 34 IPC against all the accused persons, to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, and matter was fixed for prosecution evidence.
4) To prove its case, the prosecution examined its witnesses.
5) PW-1 Gulab Singh deposed that in the year 2008, he purchased two bigha 2 biswa land from O.P.Dutta for around four lacs rupees. There was a boundary wall on the said land he received the possession from Sh. O.P. Dutta. After around one month of his purchase when he put some building material in the said land, one Iqbal who was working in Delhi police came there and started fighting with him. He claimed that said land belongs to his family. Thereafter he also called Sudha, Krishna alongwith some other persons (total 10/12 persons). He did not know names of all the persons but they all are family members and seven of them are present in Court. At that time his son Surender was also present with him. All the accused persons including the said Iqbal started beating them and he sustained fracture in his left hand due to the beating. He called the police at 100 number who took him and his son to the SGM Hospital. Police recorded his statement Ex.PW1/A and FIR was registered by police. Police also took the photograph of spot. Arrest FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 3 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:51:59 +0530 memo of accused Krishna, Sudha and Pappu are Ex.PW1/B to Ex.PW1/D. Personal search memo of accused Pappu, Krishna and Sudesh are Ex.PW1/E to Ex.PW1/G. The disputed land was situated in 41/5 in Yogiraj Puram. Witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for State wherein he deposed that he purchased the plot from Vinod Dutta S/o Om Parkash Dutta in the month of May 2008. He deposed that the present incident took place on 02.11.2008 i.e. after around six month of purchasing the plot. He further deposed that incident took place at around 8.45 am and accused persons threatened him to vacate the premises or otherwise they will kill his son. They also use some words against his cast of SC ST for which he had moved a separate complaint. He further admitted that accused persons had thrown away his building material from the plot. He deposed that the name of other accused persons are Brahm Prakash, Pawan Kumar, Jagbir, Kamla and Veena. He further deposed that accused Kamla and Veena were involved in the incident. PW-1 identified all the accused persons in the court.
6) PW-2 Surender Kumar deposed that his father had purchased one land Khasra no. 41/05 at Guruyogi Rajpuram, Village Rani Khera from Vinod Dutt S/o Om Prakash and they took possession the above said plot. One accused Brahm Prakash alongwith his family members came to his office and threatened him and his father to leave the abovesaid plot otherwise they will face the dire consequences. His father made complaint regarding the abovesaid threats. On 02.11.2008 at about 8.45, he alongwith his father went to the abovesaid plot and the accused Brahm Prakash, Ikbal and Jagbir came at the plot they threatened to PW2 and his father. After that they came outside the plot, in the meantime Brahm FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 4 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:03 +0530 Prakash, Ikbal and Jagbir caught hold them and started beating them with fist and leg blows. In the meantime, the wife of Brahm Prakash namely Smt. Veena, mother of Ikbal came at the spot and threatened them to face the dire consequences. All the accused persons caught hold of them and started beating them. Accused Pappu (since died), Smt. Krishna and Pawan Kumar also came at the spot and gave beatings to them and they started throwing the building material from the plot and the boundary wall was also broken by them. Father of PW2 called at 100 number. Police official came at the spot and some accused persons fled away from the spot to see police official. After that PCR van took them to the SGM hospital and their medical examination was got conducted there. Police official recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC. PW-2 identified all the accused persons in the court.
7) PW-3 Ct. Rajbir deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted as constable at PP Prem Nagar PS Aman Vihar. On that day he alongwith HC Satbir went to Yogi Raj Puram Bhagya Vihar at about 9:00 AM where they found that some quarrel was going on between two parties regarding a plot. On seeing them, people started fleeing from the spot. He and HC Satbir stopped two ladies and one male person. They noticed that the boundary wall of a plot had been broken. Thereafter HC Satbir sent him to 70 Futa Road Prem Nagar for bringing the photographer and he accordingly brought a private photographer on the spot and he cliçked the photographs on the spot. Thereafter he took the injured Gulab Singh and his son Sh. Surender to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital on the instruction of HC Satbir. After the medically examination, injured Gulab Singh and Surender were taken to police station. Thereafter he again went to the FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 5 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:08 +0530 spot and from there on the instruction of the IO, he took accused Pappu to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital for his medically examination.
8) PW-4 ASI Runa Rathore deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted as W/HC at PS Aman Vihar. On that day at about 10:00 PM he alongwith SI Samar Pal and other police officials went to the spot i.e. Yogi Raj Puram Bhagya Vihar, where they found that HC Satbir had stopped two ladies Krishna and Sudesh and one male person. Thereafter HC Satbir got the FIR registered. Thereafter custody of the above said two lady was given to him. IO arrested the accused Krishna vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/B. Personal search of accused Krishna was also conducted by him vide memo Ex.PW1/F. IO arrested the accused Sudhesh Kumari vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/C. Personal search of accused Sudesh Kumari was also conducted by him vide memo Ex.PW1/G. Thereafter both the accused Krishna and Sudesh were sent for there medical examination. Witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for State and he asked the witness whether they are the same accused persons who were arrested in the presence of the witness. Witness correctly identified the accused Sudesh Kumari and accused Krishna.
9) PW-5 HC Anand deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted at PS Aman Vihar and was performing his duty in the PP alongwith I/C PP with other staff. One call was received with respect of the quarrel at Yogi Rajpur Colony, Bhagya Vihar. Thereafter, he alongwith SI Samarpal and other staff went to the abovesaid spot at about 10.30 am, they found many people were present there and the bricks of plot were removed there. HC Satbir recorded the statement of injured namely Gulab and prepared the FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 6 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:12 +0530 tehreer and same was handed over to HC Anand for the registration of FIR and he went to PS and got registered the FIR and came back at the spot alongwith original tehreer and copy of FIR and handed over the same to HC Satbir. IO HC Satbir arrested two ladies and one person and prepared the arrest memo Ex.PW1/B, Ex.PW1/C the arrest memo of third accused namely Pappu is Ex.PW1D. The medical examination of accused persons was also conducted.
10) PW-6 SI Satyabir Singh deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted at PS Aman Vihar as HC. On that day, he received one DD No. 10A which is Mark-A regarding quarrel and thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Rajbir went to the spot, i.e. Yogiraj Pura, near Sheetla Properties, Aman Vihar, Delhi. When they reached at the spot, 10-12 persons started running from there after seeing them. Complainant Gulab was present there who was the owner of the plot bearing khasra no. 41/05. Some of the persons who had fled from the spot. Thereafter, he caught them and one male person and two ladies came to him. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of complainant Gulab Singh which is Ex.PW1/A. He noticed at the spot that the boundary wall of the above mentioned plot had been broken and the bricks and the sand were scattered there. Thereafter, he also called the other police staff at the spot and accordingly, SI Samar Pal, HC Jogender, Ct. Anand Pal and W/Ct. Runa Rathi came at the spot. Thereafter, the complainant Gulab and his son Surender were sent for medical examination alognwith Ct. Rajbir. Thereafter, he prepared the rukka Ex.PW6/A and handed over the same to Ct. Anand Pal for registration of FIR, who accordingly, went to PS and got registered the FIR and came back at the spot alongwith copy of FIR and original rukka and handed FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 7 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:16 +0530 over the same to IO. In the meantime, complainant Gulab Singh and his son Surender alongwith Ct. Rajbir also reached at the spot from the hospital. He prepared the site plan at the instance of complainant which is Ex.PW6/B. Thereafter, he arrested three accused persons namely Smt. Krishna, Smt. Sudesh Kumari and Pappu Kumar at the instance of complainant vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/B to Ex.PW1/D respectively. Thereafter, he conducted the personal search of accused Pappu vide memo Ex.PW1/E. The personal search of accused ladies were carried out by W/HC Runa vide search memo Ex.PW1/F and Ex.PW1/G respectively. Thereafter, all the three accused persons were released on bail. Thereafter he recorded the statement of witnesses. Thereafter, on the instructions of SHO, he handed over the complete case file to SI Samar Pal. Thereafter, on 13.12.2008, he joined the investigation of the present case with IO SI Samar Pal and went to the village Rani Khera and reached at the house of accused persons where accused Jagbir, Pawan and two other accused persons were found present. Thereafter, IO SI Samar Pal arrested them vide arrest memo Ex.PW6/C to Ex.PW6/F respectively. Thereafter, IO conducted the personal search of three male accused persons vide search memo Ex.PW6/H to Ex.PW6/J. He identified the accused persons in the court.
11) PW-7 Inspector Samarpal Singh deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted as Chowki In-charge, PP Prem Nagar, PS Aman Vihar. On that day, one call was received vide DD no. 10-A which was marked to HC Satbir Singh who alongwith Ct. Rajbir reached at the spot i.e. Bhagya Vihar. Thereafter, HC Satbir Singh telephonically conveyed the message in the Chowki for sending more staff due to aggravated situation at the FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 8 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:21 +0530 spot. Thereafter, he alongwith staff i.e. HC Joginder, Ct. Anand Pal, one lady constable and other staff went to the spot i.e. Kachchi Colony, Bhagya Vihar, however, he cannot tell the exact location. At the spot, they met HC Satbir, Ct. Rajbir, complainant Gulab Singh and his son Surender. Some persons from the other side were also there at the spot. He pacified both the parties. At the spot, he observed that the boundary- wall of a plot allegedly owned by Gulab Singh was broken from some places and the building material which was in the above said plot was in scattered condition. Gulab Singh and Surender blamed the other parties for beating them and for their attempt to dispossess them from their plot. HC Satbir had called a private photographer through Ct. Rajbir and got clicked the photographs of the said plot. Thereafter, statement of complainant was recorded by HC Satbir and Tehrir was prepared by him and thereafter, FIR was got registered through Ct. Anand. Thereafter, HC Satbir arrested accused Pappu and two lady accused. In the meantime, HC Satbir sent Gulab Singh and Surender through Rajbir for medical examination in Sanjay Gandhi Hospital. Thereafter, all the three arrested accused persons were released on bail on the spot. After that the investigation of the present case was marked to him. During investigation, on 13.11,2008, he arrested the remaining accused persons namely Jagbir, Pawan and one other male accused person and two ladies from their house at village Rani Khera vide arrest memo Ex.PW6/C, Ex.PW6/D, Ex.PW6/E, Ex.PW6/F and Ex.PW6/G. Thereafter, the said accused persons were released on bail. Thereafter, he was transferred and therefore, he handed over the complete case file to MHC(R). He identified the accused persons in the court. Witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for State wherein he deposed that on 13.12.2008, he arrested FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 9 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:26 +0530 the accused Jagbir, Brahm Prakash, Kamla and Beena. He further deposed that spot of incident was Yogi Raj Puram, Near Sheetla Property Dealer, Khasra No. 41/05. He further deposed that personal search of the accused Jagbir, Brahm Prakash and Pawan Kumar was conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW6/H, Ex.PW6/I and Ex.PW6/J. After the completion of the investigation at the spot by HC Satbir, he went to the PS. He did not know as to how Gulab Singh and Surender were taken to hospital by Ct. Rajbir. On 13.11.2008, he went to village Rani Khera at about 6.00 pm on bike, however, he cannot tell the registration number of the same. He arrested the accused persons in the house of accused Jagbir Singh. The documents which were prepared in the house of accused Jagbir Singh at village Rani Khera, are partly in his handwriting and partly in the handwriting of HC Satbir. He denied that he did not visit the spot on 02.11.2008 or that he did not go to the house of accused Jabgir in Rani Khera Village on 13.12.2008 or that he did not arrest the accused persons in the Village Rani Khera. He admitted that no photograph of the spot was on the record in judicial file. He further denied that the accused persons have been falsely implicated in the present case.
12) PW-8 W/ASI Krishna deposed that on 02/11/2008, he was working as duty officer and at about 09:42 he received information through wireless operator regarding quarrel which was recorded by him in the Roznamcha vide DD entry No. 10A. True copy of the said DD entry no. 10A is Ex.PW8/A (OSR). Thereafter the said information was conveyed to HC Satbir for necessary action. On the same day at about 12:45 pm he received the rukka from Ct Anand which was sent by HC Satbir. He made endorsement on the rukka which Ex.PW8/B. On the basis of the FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 10 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:41 +0530 said rukka, he registered the present FIR. Copy of the FIR is Ex.PW8/C (OSR). Witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for State wherein he deposed that he did not remember as to whether on 02/11/2008 at about 05:30 pm, on the instructions of the IO he took the accused Sudesh and Krishna from Yogiraj puram Bhagya Vihar to SGM Hospital Mangolpuri, Delhi for their medical examination and from the hospital he took them back to PS Aman Vihar.
13) PW-9 Dr. Munish Wadhawan, Specialist and Head, Forensic Medicine, SGM Hospital, Mangol Puri, Delhi identified the signature of Dr. Manoj Dhingra on the MLC bearing no. 14011 of Surender S/o Gulab Singh. He deposed that the said patient was brought to casualty by HC Satbir Singh at 2.45 pm with alleged history of physical assault. Dr. Manoj Dhingra had opined that final opinion can be given after receiving USG Report. The opinion on MLC from point X to X1 is Ex.PW9/A is in the handwriting of Dr. Manoj Dhingra and bears his signature at point A.
14) PW-10 Dr. Vipul Mishra, Radiologist, Dr. Vimal Sharma Path Lab Roop Nagar, Delhi deposed that in the year 2008, he was working as Radiologist at SGM Hospital, Delhi and at that time, on the basis of X- ray Plate no. 4639 dated 02.11.2008, he gave his report which is Ex.PW10/A. The said X-ray plate is Ex.PW10/X. On the MLC Ex.PW9/A, his signature is at point Y and the portion written by him was in red circle.
15) PW-11 Retd. HC Rajbir deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted at Prem Nagar Chowki, PS Aman Vihar as Constable. SI Samar Pal was FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 11 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:46 +0530 alongwith him in Prem Nagar Chowki, he received PCR call on which he got the information regarding some quarrel. He alongwith SI Samar Pal left for the spot and reached there, the accused persons were having some quarrel with the complainant party. They were exchanging the abusive words and also beating each other. After seeing the police, few of them ran away from the spot, only two women and two gents namely caught by the police. SI Samar Pal informed regarding the incident in PS Aman Vihar and called the lady police staff on the spot. The injured persons Gulab Singh and Pappu were taken to SGM Hospital by him. There the doctor prepared the MLC of injured persons. After that he came back to the spot alongwith Gulab Singh and Pappu. On the spot, SI Samar Pal arrested the accused person Sudesh Kumari vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/C. Pappu Kumar was arrested vide arrest memo ExPW1/D. He handed over the copy of MLC to SI Samar Pal. SI Samar Pal recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC. He identified the accused persons namely Gulab Singh and Sudesh Kumari.
16) PW-12 Dr. P.C. Prabhakar, CMO, NFSG, SGM Hospital, Mangol Puri, Delhi deposed that in the year 2008, Dr. Ish Kumar Midha was the CMO at SGM Hospital. He identified the signature of Dr. Ish Kumar on MLC No. 13957 dated 02.11.2008 Ex.PW12/A at point A and B. He have no other knowledge regarding the MLC or the other doctors.
17) PW-13 Sh. Dashrath Yadav, Record Clerk, SGM Hospital, Mangol Puri, Delhi deposed he has no knowledge regarding the present case and he cannot identify the signatures of Dr. Rajesh and Dr. Raman as the present case was pertain to the year 2008.
FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 12 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:50 +0530
18) Witness Inspector Joginder Singh deposed that on 02.11.2008, he was posted at PP Prem Nagar, PS Aman Vihar. On that day, at about 9.30 was, he received a call from the IO regarding quarrel at Bhagya Vihar, Prem Nagar, Delhi. He alongwith SI Samarpal and W/HC Krishna went to the spot i.e. Yogi Raj Purais, Bhagya Vihar. At the spot, they met HC Satbir and Ct. Rajbir, and they had apprehended one person namely Pappu and two ladies namely Sudesh and Krishna. At the spot, complainant and his son was also present. He found that the bricks were shattering and there was lots of dust also. Complainant had also lodged a complaint against the accused persons prior to that incident. Police force came at the spot. HC Satbir took the injured to the hospital and IO registered the case. In his presence, HC Satbir arrested the accused persons namely Pappu, Sudesh and Krishna on that day. He identified the accused Krishna in the court.
19) Witness SI Adhish Kujur deposed that on 28.03.2009, the present case file was handed over to him by Record Clerk. On 25.05.2009, the complainant Gulab Singh came to Chowk Prem Nagar and he stated in writing that Iqbal Singh was not present at the spot at the time of incident. Thereafter, he put Iqbal Singh in Column no. 12. In July 2009, he received the MLC of complainant and his son and thereafter, he prepared the charge-sheet and same was filed in the court.
20) Witness Sh. Sube Singh, Designation Record Clerk from SGM Hospital, Delhi has given him one letter bearing no. F-3/7/2014/MRD/SGMH/ 3632 dated 01.10.2018 for producing before the Court letter is Mark Z1 FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 13 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:55 +0530 bearing the signature of Dr. Ajay Gupta at point A.
21) Thereafter, the prosecution evidence was closed and the statement of accused was recorded under Section 281 read with Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 wherein the entire incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons who maintained their innocence. Accused persons stated that "They have been falsely implicated. The allegations against them are false and frivolous. The complainant had implicated them in a false and frivolous case, as a civil dispute pertaining to the said plot (Khasra No. 41/5) was going on and complainant falsely implicated the accused persons in this criminal case so that the complainant can pressurize accused persons for the settlement regarding the said plot. They have not committed any offence. All the accused persons are family members." Further accused persons have chosen to lead defence evidence.
22) DW-1 Brahm Prakash (accused) deposed that he is the owner of property bearing khasra no. 41/5, area of which, is around 1 bigha 16 biswa. He filed the original kathoni of Khasra no. 41/5 which is Ex. DW-1/A. He also filed the computerized copy of Khatoni which is Ex.DW-1/B. He further deposed that complainant had filed one false and frivolous case against the accused persons as the complainant was having a property dispute pertaining to the aforesaid property. The complainant had registered the present FIR which is sole motive to exert pressure upon the accused. He further deposed that on the day of incident, he alongwith Pappu and his brother Jagbir Singh were present on their plot and at that time, other neighbours and villagers were also present. No such incident FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 14 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:52:59 +0530 as alleged ever took place and the complainant made a false and frivolous complaint against the accused and had falsely implicated his other family members. He further deposed that no women of his family was present at the place of incident and they were falsely implicated by the complainant. Upon the false and frivolous complaint of complainant, PCR van came at his plot and took him, Pappu and Jagbir from their plot without any fault.
23) DW-2 Sh. Anil Kumar deposed that on 02.11.2008, he went to his fields at Bhagya Vihar. Accused Brahm Prakash is having his agricultural land prior to his land. Sh. Brahm Prakash alongwith Sh. Pappu were present at their property and were doing work in their fields. I had a conversation with Brahm Prakash and Pappu for about 15-20 minutes, thereafter, he went to his field. Meanwhile, one PCR van came there and inquired about one call of quarrel. There was no such fight or quarrel in his presence between the accused persons namely Brahm Prakash and Pappu. Thereafter, he left the place of incident and went to his fields. The ladies of the family of the accused namely Brahm Prakash and late Sh. Pappu were not present at the place of incident. The complainant filed a false case against the accused persons and had deliberately implicated the ladies from the family of the accused Brahm Prakas and Pappu.
24) DW-3 Sh. Jag Pravesh deposed that when he reached at the spot, accused Brahm Prakash and Pappu were present at the place of incident and they both were sitting there and doing their work. No incident was happened in his present.
FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 15 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:03 +0530
25) DW-4 Sh. Rajender deposed that he went to morning walk and accused Brahm Prakash and Pappu were present at their property and doing the work of cleaning the property. After some time, one PCR reached the spot. After that, they reached near the PCR. No incident was happened. PCR officials said to the accused Prakash Brahm Prakash and Pappu to come at PS. Thereafter, they left the spot. Thereafter, matter was fixed for final arguments.
26) Final arguments as advanced by the Ld APP for the State and by Ld. counsel for the accused have been carefully considered along with the evidence on record.
27) It is a settled proposition of law that in a criminal trial, it is for the State to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence and it is for the prosecution to ensure that its case is able to stand on its own legs. The prosecution cannot derive any benefit whatsoever from the weakness of the defence of the accused if any. Accused is entitled to the benefit of every reasonable doubt in the prosecution version.
28) It is also to be noted that the proceedings against one of the accused, namely Pappu, stood abated during the pendency of the trial vide order dated 21.08.2013.
29) One of the significant shortcomings in the prosecution case is the complete absence of any independent public witness. This deficiency FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 16 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:08 +0530 becomes even more glaring in light of the fact that PW5 namely HC Anand, specifically deposed in his chief examination that public persons were present at the site at the relevant time. Despite the availability of such public witnesses, the prosecution failed to examine even a single neutral person to corroborate the version of PW1 and PW2. In contrast, the defence examined three witnesses - DW2, DW3 and DW4 - who claimed to be public persons and deposed that no quarrel or incident occurred on the day in question. During cross-examination by the learned APP, they admitted to being friends of the accused, which certainly affects their neutrality. However, even discounting their testimonies for this reason, the burden still lay on the prosecution to present at least one unbiased, independent witness to substantiate its version. The failure to do so weakens the evidentiary value of the prosecution's case.
30) Another notable lapse in the investigation pertains to the person named Iqbal. Both PW1 and PW2 consistently named Iqbal as having taken part in the assault and as someone who was the first to attack them. Despite such clear and repeated allegations, Iqbal was neither arrested nor chargesheeted, nor was any explanation offered by the investigating officer for this omission. The non-inclusion of a person directly accused of assault by the primary witnesses of the prosecution undermines the reliability and credibility of the investigation and leaves a material gap in the case of the prosecution.
31) It is also significant to note that the prosecution has not brought any photographic evidence on record to support the allegation of damage to the foundation of the plot. PW1 stated that photographs of the damage FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 17 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:12 +0530 were taken, and PW3 also stated that a private photographer was called. Even PW7 confirmed this fact. However, no photographs were ever placed on record, nor was the photographer examined, nor cited as a witness. This raises a presumption that the alleged photographs either did not exist or did not support the prosecution's case. In the absence of any such corroborative evidence, the charge under Section 427 IPC does not stand on a firm footing.
32) It also emerged during cross-examination that PW1 denied the suggestion that the site plan was prepared in his presence. Furthermore, both PW1 and PW2 admitted that there was a civil suit pending between the parties concerning the same property, which lends credence to the defence argument that the criminal case may have been filed to pressurize the accused in the civil dispute.
33) One of the accused persons, namely Brahm Prakash, examined himself as DW1. He deposed that no incident took place on the date in question and that the present FIR was lodged by the complainant to exert pressure and grab the property under dispute. He further stated that female members of the family had been falsely implicated in the case. During cross-examination, however, he admitted that he himself was not the owner of Khasra No. 41/5 and that the ownership vested in his father. This admission is relevant as it casts doubt on his authority over the land but also reinforces the background of an ongoing property dispute which may have motivated the filing of the present complaint.
FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 18 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:17 +0530
34) Further, scrutiny of the testimonies of PW1 and PW2 reveals internal contradictions in their accounts regarding the sequence of events and the specific roles attributed to each accused person. These inconsistencies, particularly in a case involving multiple accused persons and specific allegations of assault and mischief, cannot be lightly brushed aside. In the absence of corroborative evidence, such contradictions materially affect the credibility of the prosecution story.
35) It is a settled principle of criminal law that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and must exclude every possible hypothesis consistent with the innocence of the accused. In a case like the present one, where the allegations are grave and multiple accused persons are involved, the standard of proof becomes more stringent. The evidence on record fails to meet that threshold.
36) The absence of any public or independent witness, despite their availability, is a material omission. The non-investigation of a named co- offender, namely Iqbal, amounts to suppression of material facts. The missing photographic evidence, though asserted by three prosecution witnesses, has also gone unexplained. The civil dispute admitted by the complainant and his son further suggests that the possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out. When the totality of the facts and circumstances is considered, serious doubts arise as to the truthfulness and reliability of the prosecution story. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lallu Manjhi v. State of Jharkhand (2003) 2 SCC 401, non- examination of material witnesses and incomplete investigation seriously FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 19 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:21 +0530 impair the credibility of the prosecution case. Likewise, in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116, it was reiterated that the chain of circumstances must be so complete that there is no possibility of innocence, and the prosecution must eliminate every reasonable doubt.
37) Applying these principles to the facts of the present case, it becomes evident that the prosecution has failed to establish the charges against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. The absence of public witnesses, unexplained non-inclusion of a named assailant, the failure to bring on record crucial photographic evidence, and the presence of a pre- existing civil dispute, collectively cast a deep shadow over the credibility of the prosecution version. In such circumstances, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused.
Decision:
38) Accordingly, the accused persons namely (1) Krishna W/o Kartar Singh, (2) Sudesh W/o Hari Bhagwan, (3) Brahm Prakash S/o Dariyav Singh, (4) Pawan Kumar S/o Kalan Singh, (5) Kamla W/o Jagbir Singh, (6) Veena W/o Brahm Prakash, and (7) Jagbir Singh S/o Hem Chand are acquitted for the offence under Sections 447, 341, 323, 427, 506 read with Section 34 IPC in the present case.
39) Accused persons are directed to furnish bail bond and personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each under section 437(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and is directed to be present before the Ld. Appellate FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 20 of 21 DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:27 +0530 Court as and when notice is served upon them.
40) File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in the open court on 19.05.2025.
DIVYA Digitally signed by DIVYA ARORA ARORA Date: 2025.05.19 18:53:40 +0530 (DIVYA AORA) Judicial Magistrate First Class-04/ North West Rohini District Court/New Delhi Certified that this judgment contains 21 pages and each page bears my signature.
DIVYA Digitally signed by
DIVYA ARORA
ARORA Date: 2025.05.19
18:53:45 +0530
(DIVYA AORA)
Judicial Magistrate First Class-04/ North West Rohini District Court/New Delhi FIR No. 326/2008 (PS Aman Vihar) U/s 447/341/323/427/506/34 IPC State Vs . Pappu Kumar etc. Page No. 21 of 21