Delhi District Court
State vs . Jitender Kumar @ Rinku on 6 December, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SH. AMIT BANSAL, CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
FIR No. 217/2003
P.S. Connaught Place (EOW )
U/s 63/68-A of The Copyright Act,1957 and Section 292
IPC
State Vs. Jitender Kumar @ Rinku
Unique Case ID No. 02403R0523142003
JUDGMENT U/S 355 Cr. P.C.
a) Sl. No. of the case 02403R0523142003
b) The date of commission of 30.04.2003
the offence
c) Name of the complainant Sh Jasvinder Sharma
d) Name, parentage & address Jitender Kumar @ Rinku s/o Sh. Gian
of accused Chand Mehta r/o X-10, IIIrd Floor, West
Patel Nagar, Delhi.
e) Offence Complained of or U/s 63/68-A of The Copyright Act,1957
proved and Section 292 IPC.
f) The plea of the accused and Statement of accused Jitender Kumar @
their examination Rinku under section 313 Cr.P.C has been
dispensed with as there are no
incriminating circumstances appearing in
the prosecution evidence on record
against him.
FIR No 217/03 P.S. Con. Place(EOW) State Vs.Jitender Kumar @ Rinku. 1 of 6
g) The Final order Accused Jitender Kumar @ Rinku is
acquitted in the present case u/s 63/68-
A of The Copyright Act,1957 and
Section 292 IPC.
h) The date of such order 06.12.2013
Date of institution of case : 05.09.2003
Date of reserving judgment/order : 06.12.2013
Date of Pronouncement : 06.12.2013
BRIEF FACTS/ STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR
THE DECISION :-
1. Accused Jitender Kumar @ Rinku is facing trial on the allegations of the prosecution that on 30.04.2003 at Shop No.13, Palika Bazar Parking, Cannaught Place, New Delhi he infringed the copyright of the complainant company of the films mentioned in the complaint dated 30.04.2003 which were exclusively vested with the complainant and was found selling 458 pirated VCD's of various Hindi/English movies as mentioned in the seizure memo dated 30.04.2003, which were not bearing the mandatory particulars as required under Section 52-A of The Copyright Act, 1957 and thereby committed offences punishable under Section 63/68-A of The Copyright Act, 1957. Accused is also facing trial on the allegations that on the above said date and place, he was also found in possession of 305 pornographic VCDs for the purpose of sale as mentioned in the seizure memo FIR No 217/03 P.S. Con. Place(EOW) State Vs.Jitender Kumar @ Rinku. 2 of 6 dated 30.04.2003 and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 292 IPC.
2. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed in the court u/s 63/68-A of The Copyright Act, 1957 and under section 292 IPC against the accused. It is pertinent to mention here that initially accused did not appear to face trial and vide order dated 26.08.2006 was declared Proclaimed offender. On 24.05.2007, on the application of SI Amit Mishra production warrants were issued against accused and he was taken in custody in the present case. Copy of charge sheet and documents were supplied to the accused free of costs.
3. After hearing the arguments, the Charge u/s 63/68-A of the Copyright Act, 1957 and u/s 292 IPC was framed against the accused by Ld. Predecessor of this Court on 24.07.2007 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution has examined total two witnesses in support of its case i.e. PW-1 Ct. Surender Negi and PW-2 H.C. Janak Raj Singh, Duty Officer. The further prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 06.12.2013 after giving sufficient opportunities to the prosecution to lead evidence and as no witness for prosecution appeared on last three dates of FIR No 217/03 P.S. Con. Place(EOW) State Vs.Jitender Kumar @ Rinku. 3 of 6 hearing.
5. Statement of accused Jitender Kumar @ Rinku under section 313 Cr.P.C has been dispensed with as there are no incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence on record against him.
6. I have heard the final arguments and carefully perused the record.
7. The case of prosecution against the accused is that on 30.04.2003 at Shop No.13, Palika Bazar Parking, Cannaught Place, New Delhi he infringed the copyright of the complainant company of the films mentioned in the complaint dated 30.04.2003 which were exclusively vested with the complainant and was found selling 458 pirated VCD's of various Hindi/English movies as mentioned in the seizure memo dated 30.04.2003, which were not bearing the mandatory particulars as required under Section 52-A of The Copyright Act, 1957 and also found in possession of 305 pornographic VCDs for the purpose of sale as mentioned in the seizure memo dated 30.04.2003.
8. As mentioned above, the prosecution in support of its case has examined only two witness. PW-1 Ct. Surender Negi is only a formal witness who was examined u/s 299 Cr.P.C who deposed that on 30.04.2003, FIR No 217/03 P.S. Con. Place(EOW) State Vs.Jitender Kumar @ Rinku. 4 of 6 IO prepared a rukka at 05.30 p.m. and sent him to PS Connaught Place for registration of the case. He further deposed that he reached at P.S Con Place at about 06.30 pm, handed over the rukka to duty officer, after registration of FIR took the rukka and copy of FIR and handed over the same to IO at the spot.
PW-2 H.C. Janak Raj Singh is again a formal witness who was working as a duty officer and registered the case FIR, carbon copy of which has been proved as Exh PW2/B. The rukka has been proved as Ex PW2/A and endorsement on it has been proved as Exh. PW-2/C.
9. It is evident from the above said testimony of witnesses that the prosecution has failed to examine any material witness and has even failed to prove on record the search cum seizure memo dated 30.04.2003. The prosecution has also failed to prove that the accused was found in possession of 458 pirated VCDs of various English and Hindi movies and was also found in possession of 305 VCDs of pornography movies as mentioned in the seizure memo dated 30.04.2003. As mentioned above, the statement of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C has also been dispensed with as there are no incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence on record against him. No prosecution witness has deposed even an iota against the accused or to the effect that any pirated or infringed articles or pornographic VCD's were seized from his possession. It is a settled law that FIR No 217/03 P.S. Con. Place(EOW) State Vs.Jitender Kumar @ Rinku. 5 of 6 the prosecution has to stand on its own legs and has to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, which the prosecution has miserably failed in this case due to non examination of the material witnesses and non proving on record the material documents including the search cum seizure memo dated 30.04.2003. The benefit of doubt in these circumstances goes in favour of accused who is entitled to acquittal in the present case.
10. Accordingly, from the above said discussion, it is evident that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the charge under section 63/68-A of The Copyright Act, 1957 and 292 IPC against the accused Jitender Kumar @ Rinku and hence he is acquitted in the present case under section 63/68-A of The Copyright Act, 1957 and 292 IPC. Bail bonds of the accused Jitender Kumar @ Rinku is cancelled and his surety is discharged.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court on : 06.12.2013 ( AMIT BANSAL ) CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
06.12.2013 FIR No 217/03 P.S. Con. Place(EOW) State Vs.Jitender Kumar @ Rinku. 6 of 6