Delhi District Court
State vs . Salim Khan & Anr on 17 July, 2015
IN THE COURT OF MS. NEHA: METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE03 : (SOUTH EAST) DELHI
STATE Vs. Salim Khan & Anr
FIR No: 809 of 2006
P. S. H.N. Din
Date of Institution of Case : 09.03.2007
Date on which case reserved : 17.07.2015
for Judgment
Date of Judgment : 17.07.2015
JUDGMENT :
a) Date of offence : 22.12.2006 b) Offence complained of : U/s 294/34 IPC & Section 7 of Cinematography Act c) Name of complainant : SI Surender Kumar Dahiya d) Name of accused, : Inderjeet Singh his parentage and residence S/o Shri Dhan Pal Singh R/o H. No. 166, Mahela Mohalla, Madanpur Khadar, New Delhi. e) Plea of accused : Not guilty f) Final order : Acquitted Counsels for the Parties: Sh. Arun Kumar Singh, Ld. APP for the State.
Thakur Karan Singh, Ld. Counsel for accused Inderjeet FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 1 of 10 BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION:
The case of prosecution in brief is that on 22.12.2006 at about 04.30 pm in basement of House No. T120, Sari Kale Khan Village, Delhi, accused Saleem and Inderjeet were found showing blue films on a colour TV with the help of VCD against the payment of Rs. 5/ to customers. Raid was conducted by SI Surender Kuamr Dahiya on receiving an secret information. He prepared rukka. Accordingly, FIR No. 809 of 2006 was registered u/s 294/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (herein after referred as 'IPC') and section 7 of Cinematography Act 1952, PS Hazrat Nizamuddin. Accused Salim was apprehended at the spot during raid and on his disclosure statement, accused Inderjeet was arrested.
2. After the completion of the investigation, charge sheet for offence U/s 294/34 IPC and Section 7 of Cinematography Act was filed against accused Salim and Inderjeet. Cognizance of the offence was taken. Copy of charge sheet was supplied to the accused. After hearing the parties, notice for the offence U/s 294/34 IPC and Section 7 of Cinematography Act, was served to both accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. During trial, accused Salim Khan stopped appearing and he was declared absconder vide order dated 07.10.2014. The trial was FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 2 of 10 conducted against accused Inderjeet.
4. The prosecution has examined four witnesses to prove its case.
5. PW1 Sh. Daya Ram is the land lord/owner of property bearing no. T120, Sarai Kale Khan where the raid was conducted by the police. He has deposed that he had given basement on rent to Inderjet for shop of TV repairing. His family lived at house no. T120, Sarai Kale Khan. At the time of offence, he was at Brij Ghat in Garmukh UP. He came to know that police had lodged an FIR against Inderjeet. Police informed him that raid has been conducted on rented basement.
6. PW2 HC Dinesh Tyagi is the official who joined proceedings with the IO.
7. PW3 Insp. Surender Kumar is the complainant/IO in this case who arrested the accused and prepared the chargesheet. He has deposed that on 22.12.2006, he was posted as IC/PP, Sarai Kale Khan, PS HND. On that day, at around 03.30 pm, one secret informer came at the chowki and informed that Saleem and Inderjeet were selling tickets and show blue films at Sarai kale Khan. Thereafter, he shared information with the concerned SHO and one constable namely Pramod came at PP in civil dress. He FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 3 of 10 lodged DD entry no. 19 at PP regarding the receiving of information. He formed raiding party comprising of HC Dinesh, Ct. Pramod, Ct. Paras Ram and Ct. Jitender alongwith secret informer. At around 04.05 pm, they departed from the PP and he made departure entry regarding the same vide DD No. 22 in the rojnamcha. He requested 45 public persons to join the raiding party but none agreed and left the spot without disclosing their name and addresses. At around 04.30 PM, they reached in front of Railway Fatak, Sarai Kale Khan, He handed over a note of Rs. 5 to Ct. Pramod vide memo Ex.PW2/A . The serial number of the said note was 46G310077 and he signed the said note and put date i.e. 22.12.2006 on the said note. Thereafter, he instructed Ct. Pramod to go with the secret informer. The secret informer along with Ct. Pramod went in a gali in front of railway fatak. After 1015 minutes, Ct. Pramod gave signal towards the raiding party by putting his hand on his head infront of house no. T20, Sarai Kale Khan. Thereafter, they reached and at point out of Ct. Pramod, they apprehended accused Salim who was standing on the basement gate of the said premises. Thereafter, they entered into the basement of the said premises. One Hindi movie was shown in one portion of the said basement on a TV and 1015 people were watching the said FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 4 of 10 movie at that time. One English Movie was shown on another portion of the said basement on a TV and 810 persons were watching the said movie at that time. One girl was playing a obscene scene in the English movie. The said girl was nude in the said movie.
8. IO has further deposed that they took possession of the articles i.e. both TVs, DVD and the CDs (Vijaypath Movie, Emckio Emi). He also took possession of the five CDs which were lying in the basement. He prepared the pulanda of the said CDs and sealed with the seal of SD. The said CDs were taken into police possession along with both TVs and DVDs vide memo Ex.PW2/B. Thereafter, he carried out cursory search of accused Salim and found Rs. 175/ (including Rs. 5 which was handed over to Ct. Pramod), 26 tickets and ball pen from his right side pocket of his pant. He prepared the pulanda of the same and sealed with the seal of SD. The same were taken into police possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/A. Ct. Pramod produced a ticket which was purchased by him from accused Salim and he seized the said ticket vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/B. In the meantime, Star News staff came there and they recorded the proceedings in the said basement. Thereafter, he interrogated accused Salim Khan. Accused Salim disclosed that FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 5 of 10 accused Inderjeet Singh was the owner of the said theater. Thereafter, he arrested accused Salim vide arrest memo Ex.PW2/B. He carried out personal search of accused Salim which is Ex.PW2/C. He prepared the site plan after registration of FIR which is Ex.PW3/A. He prepared tehrir which is Ex.PW3/B and got the registration of FIR done through Ct. Jitender. He recorded statement of witnesses. He searched accused namely Inderjeet but he was not traced. The case properties were deposed in Malkhana. Accused Salim sent to the lock up after medical examination.
9. IO has further deposed that on 03.01.2007, accused Inderjeet surrendered in the court. After obtaining the permission from the court, he interrogated accused Inderjeet which is Ex.PW2/H. He arrested and carried out personal search of accused vide memos which are Ex.PW2/E and Ex.PW2/F. He enquired about ownership of the said theater from the owner of the said premises namely Daya Ram.
10. PW4 Ct. Pramod Kumar is the official who had joined proceedings with IO during raid at property no. T120, Sarai Kale Khan and in his presence, accused Salim was arrested.
11. Ct. Paras Ram and Ct. Jitender were dropped from the list of prosecution witnesses at the request of Ld. APP for the State vide FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 6 of 10 order dated 18.05.2015. Examination of witness Namrata Narain was also dropped vide order dated 29.06.2015. PE was closed vide order dated 09.07.2015 at the request of Ld APP for the State.
12. Accused Inderjeet was examined u/s 313 CrPC and his statement was recorded by putting incriminating evidence to them. The accused has stated that he has no link with any Salim Khan. He has also stated that he has quarreled with one police official for parking of vehicle in front of his shop at Madanpur Khadar and therefore he has been falsely implicated. He did not examine any witness in his defence. Therefore, the matter was fixed for final arguments.
13. Final arguments were addressed on behalf of Ld. Defence Counsel and Ld. APP for the State.
14. Ld. APP for the State has argued that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It is also argued on behalf of State that the testimony of prosecution witnesses leaves no doubt that the accused had committed the offences with which he has been charged.
15. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for accused has argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts. It is submitted that no recovery has been made from FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 7 of 10 accused Inderjeet and he was also not apprehended at the spot. It is also argued that benefit of doubt may be given to accused and he may be acquitted of the charges alleged.
16. I have considered the submission of Ld. APP for the State and Ld. Defence Counsel and perused the entire material on record.
17. It is settled proposition of law that prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts.
18. The allegations of prosecution in brief is that one secret information was received that at the basement of property no. T120, Sarai Kale Khan blue film is shown to customers. Raid was conducted and accused Salim was arrested from house no. T120, Sarai Kale Khan. Accused Salim during interrogation has disclosed that he was working under accused Inderjeet. Accused Inderjeet surrendered before the court and he was formally arrested in the court.
19. PW3 Inspector Surender Kumar Dahiya is the head of the raiding team who received secret information and had conducted the raid. Examination of PW3 would show that he had arrested accused Salim from the spot and on his disclosure statement, he has searched for accused Inderjeet but could not trace him. On 03.01.2007, accused Inderjeet surrendered before the court and IO FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 8 of 10 had formally arrested accused Inderjeet and carried out his personal search. He has also stated that he has enquired about the ownership of the theater from the owner of the premises namely Daya Ram.
20. The owner of property no T120, Sarai Kale Khan has been examined as PW1. PW1 Shri Daya Ram has stated that he has given basement of property no. 120, Sarai Kale Khan on rent for shop of TV repairing to Inderjeet. He has come to know that the raid has been conducted on the rented basement by the police. He has also stated that accused Inderjeet who is present in the court is not the one to whom he has given the property on rent. The witness was declared hostile by the prosecution and during cross examination, the witness has denied that he had made any statement to the police.
21. In the present case, admittedly all recovery has been effected from the spot in the presence of accused Salim. Accused Inderjeet was arrested only on the basis of disclosure statement of accused Salim.
22. The prosecution has alleged that Inderjeet has taken the premises on rent from Daya Ram. However, Daya Ram, who is the owner of the property No. T120, Sarai Kale Khan, has not supported the prosecution and has denied that he has given the FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 9 of 10 property on rent to accused Inderjeet. Though, he has stated that he has given the property on rent to one Inderjeet but accused Inderjeet is not the one to whom the property was given on rent.
23. Apart from the disclosure statement of coaccused Salim, there is nothing on record to connect the accused with the allegations of the prosecution.
24. In view of the discussion herein above, this court holds that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case and benefit of doubt is given to accused and accused Inderjeet is acquitted of charges alleged.
25. Bail bond and surety bond of accused Inderjeet under section 437A Cr. P. C. has been furnished with his recent photograph and address proof. File be consigned to record room after necessary compliance with direction to revive the same as and when accused Salim is produced or appears before the court.
Pronounced in the open Court (Neha)
today on 21st July, 2015 MM03 (South East)
Saket, New Delhi
FIR NO. 809/06 State Vs Salim Khan & Anr.
PS HND Page no. 10 of 10