Delhi District Court
State vs . : Vishal on 25 May, 2012
IN THE COURT OF MS. APARNA SWAMI
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE02/NORTH
TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI
State Vs. : Vishal
FIR No. : 202/11
U/s : 379 IPC
PS : Kashmere Gate
JUDGEMENT
1 Unique ID No. of Case : 02401R0004052012
2 Date of commission offence : 18.10.2011
3 Date of institution of the case : 03.01.2012
4 Name of the complainant : Gaurav Chopra S/o Sh. Raj
Kumar Chopra, R/o H. No.
216, New Layal Pur Colony,
Chander Nagar, Delhi51
5 Name of accused, parentage & : Vishal S/o Sh. Dass, R/o Address H1/217, Madangir, Delhi 6 Offence complained of : Sec. 379 IPC 7 Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty 8 Date of reserving for order : 09.05.2012 9 Final order : Acquitted 10 Date of Judgment : 25.05.2012 FIR No. 202/11 1/6 STATE VS. VISHAL Briefly the case of prosecution is as under:
1. The FIR under Section 154 Cr.PC in the present case was registered on the statement of Gaurav Chopra, who alleged theft of his brown colour bag containing laptop, charger, hard disk internet connection Tata Photon pen drive, cheque books, diary and visiting cards. On his complaint the investigation in this regard was carried out and accused namely Vishal was arrested. After the completion of investigation, present chargesheet u/s 173 Cr.PC was filed in the Court.
2. On 16.02.2012, charge for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 379/34 IPC was framed against the accused and his accomplices (who were untraceable during the investigation).
3. The Prosecution Evidence commenced. In order to establish its case against the accused, prosecution has examined 3 (three) witnesses. Briefly the evidence is reproduced as under: 3.1 PW1 is Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) Duli Chand Sharma. On 18.12.2011 he was posted as ASI at PS Kashmere Gate and was working as duty officer from 5.00 pm to 1.00 am. At about 5.50 pm Ct. Ashok brought one Rukka, on the basis of which he got registered present FIR No. 202/11, under Section 379 IPC. On his testimony, computer generated copy of FIR is Ex.PW1/A. FIR No. 202/11 2/6 STATE VS. VISHAL This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused. 3.2 PW2 is Gaurav Chopra he is the complainant in the present case. He deposed that on 18.10.2011 when he was going in his Santro car bearing registration number DL2FBS2222, at around 3.00 pm he reached Mori Gate Red Light. As the traffic was moving at slow speed, 23 persons on motorcycle informed him that there is leakage of oil from his car. On this, he parked his car and got down to check the same. On checking, he found no leakage in the car. When he came back to the car, he found his brown colour back containing laptop, portable hard disk, internet connection pen drive, cheque book and some other documents missing from the car. He made 100 number call and police came at the spot. The statement of this witness was recorded by the police which is Ex.PW2/A. Site plan was also prepared at his instance (Ex.PW2/B). Later he handed over all the documents i.e. purchase bills etc. to the police. He further deposed that one accused was shown to him when he visited the PS Kashmere Gate for enquiry about his case but in the court he failed to identify accused Vishal as the one who committed theft of his bag on 18.10.2011.
As witness was resiling from his earlier statement, with permission of the Court he was cross examined by Ld. APP for the State. FIR No. 202/11 3/6
STATE VS. VISHAL In his cross examination, he negated the suggestion that accused is the same person who on 18.10.2011 diverted his attention and committed theft of this bag. He further refused to have given any statement to the police on 19.12.2011.
He was cross examined by the Ld. counsel for accused. 3.3 PW3 is Head Constable (HC) Rajesh Kumar who is Investigating Officer of the present case. He deposed that on 18.10.2011 for the investigation in the present matter, he reached Mori Gate, Red Light Boulevard Road where ASI Sunil Kumar, Ct. Ashok and the complainant Gaurav Chopra were present. The site plan was prepared by him (Ex.PW2/B) and the portrait of the accused persons were got prepared but no clue was found. Thereafter on 16.12.2011, an intimation vide DD entry No. 31B was received to the fact that in case FIR No. 282/11 of PS Kotwali one accused namely Vishal has been arrested and he has disclosed about his involvement in the present case. On this information, HC Rajesh Kumar reached PS Kotwali and accused Vishal was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW3/A. His disclosure statement was recorded which is Ex.PW3/B. The accused was produced before the Court for TIP but he refused to take part in the same. During the investigation, all efforts were made to trace coaccused namely Bablu, but he was untraceable. FIR No. 202/11 4/6
STATE VS. VISHAL Thereafter, the complainant Gaurav Chopra visited the PS to know about the status of his case and accused Vishal was shown to him and was identified by the complainant. The supplementary statement of complainant was recorded in this regard separately.
During the investigation, efforts were made to trace the co accused and the case property but they were not found. As material witnesses of the Prosecution were examined, therefore the Prosecution Evidence was closed and statement of accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC, wherein accused stated that he has been falsely arrested and implicated in the present matter. His signatures are also taken forcefully on blank papers by the police. He did not prefer to lead evidence in defence. Thereafter the matter was put up for final arguments.
5. The final arguments are heard at length and file has been perused thoroughly.
6. The complainant in the present case is PW2 Gaurav Chopra. As per the version of the prosecution, the statement of the complainant Gaurav Chopra was recorded by the police and he identified the accused Vishal in the police station. However when the witness was examined in the court, he denied having made any such statement to the police and also failed to identify the accused Vishal as one of who committed theft of his FIR No. 202/11 5/6 STATE VS. VISHAL bag on 18.10.2011. The deposition of the complainant is totally in contradiction to the version of prosecution. Further no recovery has been made by the police in the present case.
Thus the evidence on record has no where established that accused Vishal has dishonestly removed the bag of the complainant, out of his possession without his consent and thus have committed the offence of theft. Hence, it is concluded that Prosecution has failed to prove the case of theft (punishable under Section 379 IPC) against the accused Vishal. Thus, accused Vishal stands acquitted from the charge.
As accused Vishal is on bail in this case. His bail bonds stand canceled. Sureties be discharged. Original document, if any, be returned on proper receipt and identification. Accused is admitted to bail under Sec. 437 A Cr.PC on his furnishing separate PB/SB in the sum of Rs. 10,000/ each for a period of six months. PB/SB furnished and accepted.
Dictated and Announced in the open (APARNA SWAMI)
court on 25.05.2012 MM02/NORTH/DELHI
FIR No. 202/11 6/6
STATE VS. VISHAL