Delhi District Court
State vs . Rakesh Etc. on 3 March, 2015
FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 IN THE COURT OF SH. POORAN CHAND : CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: CENTRAL DISTRICT: TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI FIR No.:203/99 PS: DBG Road U/s : 381/34 IPC State Vs. Rakesh etc. Unique ID No.: 02401R1357212008 J U D G M E N T:
_____________________________________________________________
(a) S.No. of the case : 27/2
(b) Name of complainant : Sh. Sudarshan Lal S/o Sh. Amir Chand, R/o 12, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, Delhi.
(c) Date of commission of offence : In between April 1999 to
23.08.1999
(d) Name of the accused : 1). Rakesh
S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar
R/o A-158, Subhadra Colony,
Delhi.
2). Pappu Singh
S/o Sh. Babu Singh
R/o B-70 C, Tilak Vihar, Delhi.
(e) Offence complained of : U/s 381/34 IPC
(f) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final arguments heard on : 24.02.2015
(h) Final Order : Convicted
(i) Date of such order : 03.03.2015
BRIEF FACTS & REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 1 of 11
FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015
1. The facts of the case in brief as emanating from the record are that in between April 1999 to 23.08.1999 at H. No. 867, Joshi Road, Delhi while being employed in Aero Club Company both accused persons namely Rakesh and Pappu Singh in furtherance of their common intention committed theft of leather pieces from the possession of Sh. Sudarshan Lal belonging to Aero Club Company of which accused were employed. Thereafter, on complaint Ex. PW1/A the police was called and at instance of complainant, arrested both accused persons and recovered the stolen case property from their possession. After completion of necessary investigation, challan was prepared and filed in the Court.
2. Thereafter, compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C was made and after hearing arguments on charge vide order dated 03.07.2001, charge for offences U/s 381/34 IPC was framed upon both the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Thereafter, prosecution lead its evidence to prove its case and produced as many as five witnesses. A brief scrutiny of the evidence recorded in the matter is as under.
4. PW-1 Sh. Sudarshan Lal was the employee of the complainant company who deposed that on 23.08.1999 he was working as Store Incharge, some leather was missing from the store and he had doubt that State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 2 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 accused Rakesh and Pappu, who were employee in the same company and both have stolen the same. He lodged a complaint in this regard to the police and police reached at the spot and both the accused were handed over to the police. Police recorded his statement Ex. PW1/A. Both the accused were arrested and their personal search was conducted vide Ex. PW1/B and Ex. PW1/C respectively. Both the accused made disclosure vide statements Ex. PW1/D and Ex. PW1/E respectively. Accused persons pointed out the place of theft/occurrence and the memo in this regard was prepared vide Ex. PW1/F and Ex. PW1/G respectively. The case property was recovered vide recovery memo Ex. PW1/H and Ex. PW1/I respectively. From the possession of accused Pappu, eleven bundles of leather were recovered from his house and from the possession of accused Rakesh, 34 bundles of leather were also recovered from his house. Both the recovered articles were seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/J and Ex. PW1/K respectively. Photographs of the case property were also taken on the spot. The case property is collectively Ex. P1. The seven bags containing 45 leather bundles are Ex. P2/1 to Ex. P2/45. Thereafter the PW1 was cross examined at length.
5. PW-2 ASI Satyawan Singh was the Duty Officer at the relevant time who proved the recording of FIR in the matter. He exhibited the copy of FIR as Ex.PW2/A and his endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW2/B.
6. PW-3 Sh. Satya Narain Mehra has deposed that he was employed as State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 3 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 Stock Writer in Aero Club 867, Joshi Road Karol Bagh, Delhi and was working with Store Incharge namely Sh. Sudharshan Lal. In the month of August 1999, Sh. Sudharshan Lal Arora had a doubt about missing of leather from the store. He conducted inquiry and found that some leather was missing and there was doubt about the involvement of accused Rakesh and Pappu. Sh. Sudharshan Lal Arora had also conducted inquiry from security guard as well as from other workers and it was told by security guard that accused Rakesh and Pappu used to remove leather from the store. Accordingly, Sh. Sudharshan Lal Arora had called the police. Thereafter, the further examination in chief of PW3 was deferred for want of statement u/s 161 Cr.PC.
7. PW-4 Ct. Naresh Pal deposed that on 23.08.1999, on receipt of PCR Call, he alongwith ASI Ram Kumar Tyagi had gone to 867, Joshi Road Woodland Stores where Sh. Satya Narain and some other employees of the company were present. They produced two persons namely Rakesh and Pappu Singh. ASI Ram Kumar Tyagi made inquiry from the accused persons as well as from Sh. Satya Narain. As per statement of Sh. Satya Narain both the said accused persons had committed theft of the articles of the company. IO recorded statement of Sh. Satya Narain and prepared tehrir on the same. He sent him with the tehrir to Police Station DBG Road for getting the case registered. He accordingly went there and the present FIR was registered on the basis of the tehrir. After registration of FIR he alongwith copy of FIR and State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 4 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 original tehrir went to the spot where he gave the said documents to ASI Ram Kumar for investigation. Thereafter, accused Rakesh led them to Subhadara Colony at his house and produced 34 bundles of leather which were seized in this case. Both the accused persons were arrested by the IO vide memo Ex. PW1/B and PW1/C. They pointed out the place of occurrence vide memo Ex. PW1/G and F. The disclosure statement of accused Rakesh is Ex. PW1/E and seizure memo is Ex. PW1/I. Thereafter, they went to the house of accused Pappu Singh situated at Tilak Vihar and 11 bundles of leather were seized from his house. The disclosure statement of accused Pappu Singh is Ex. PW1/D and the seizure memo is Ex. PW1/H. Thereafter, they had returned to the Police Station and the case property was deposited in the Malkhana. MHC(M) has produced one sealed pullanda bearing the case particulars of this case duly sealed with the seal of Court. Seal got broken. Pullanda opened. 45 pieces of leather are taken out. Witness has correctly identified the said pieces as samples of the leather sheets recovered. Witness has correctly identified the case property from the eight photographs placed on record including the photograph of the samples. The photographs are Ex. PX collectively and the sample pieces are Ex. P1 collectively whereas the case property from the photographs is Ex. P2/1 to P2/45.
8. PW-5 ASI Ram Kumar is the IO who deposed that on 23.08.1999 DD No.17-A recorded on the PCR call was marked to him. He alongwith Ct. Naresh Pal went to the spot i.e. 867, Arrow Club Company, Woodland Shoes, State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 5 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 Joshi Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi. Where one Sh. Sudarshan Lal, Store Incharge alongwith other employee met him. He enquired regarding the incident. They produced two persons whose names later on came to know as Pappu and Rakesh with the allegation that they had committed theft of leather being the employees of their store. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of Sh. Sudharshan Lal Ex. PW1/A and he prepared rukka on it which is Ex. PW5/A, and sent Ct. Naresh Pal to Police Station for registration of FIR. After about half an hour Ct. Naresh Pal returned back to the spot and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka. Accordingly, he interrogated the accused persons which is Ex. PW1/E & F wherein they had confessed about committing theft of the leather. He also prepared pointing out memo at the instance of both the accused persons which are Ex.PW1/G and D. Pursuant to the pointing out and disclosure statement, he recovered 11 bundles of leather at the instance of accused Pappu vide memo Ex. PW1/H and 34 bundles at the instance of accused Rakesh vide memo Ex.PW1/I. Thereafter, he seized all the leather bundles vide memo Ex. PW1/J. He seized the sample of the case property which was duly photographed through photographer namely Sh. Satya Prakash who handed over the same after duly developing vide memo Ex.PW5/B. Thereafter, he arrested both the accused persons in the present case vide personal search memo Ex. PW1/B & C. During the personal search of accused Rs. 50/- from Pappu and Rs. 80/- from Rakesh were recovered which were deposited in the malkhana of Police Station. It is also deposed by the witness that all the above investigation was conducted in the presence of State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 6 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 complainant Sh. Sudarshan Lal. Thereafter, he recorded statement of PWs u/s 161 Cr.P.C i.e. police officials, photographer etc. He also prepared site plan Ex. PW5/C at the instance of complainant. Thereafter, he produced both the accused persons in the concerned Court from where both the accused persons were sent to the judicial custody. Thereafter, he prepared the chargesheet and filed the same before the Court for judicial verdict.
9. This is all as far as prosecution evidence in the matter is concerned.
10. Thereafter, statement of accused persons namely Rakesh and Pappu, were recorded.
11. I have heard arguments advanced at bar by learned Additional PP for the State as well as on behalf of accused persons and have carefully gone through the evidences recorded in the matter and the documents placed on record by the prosecution in this case.
Arguments advanced & Case law cited:
12. While opening the arguments, Ld. APP for the State has submitted that all the prosecution witnesses have duly supported the prosecution story and thus, prosecution has been able to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 7 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015
13. Per contra, accused persons have submitted that they have been falsely implicated in this case by the police officials by planting case property upon them and they are innocent.
14. Accused Rakesh and Pappu Singh charged for the offence u/s 381 r/w Section 34 IPC for having committed theft of leather from the possession of his master Sudarshan Lal belonging to Aero Club Company being the employee of the company.
15. In order to prove the charge prosecution is under a duty to prove that both the accused persons have committed theft of leather which is in possession of their master or employee i.e. Aero Club Company. Prosecution examined as much as five witnesses out of which PW1 Sudarshan Lal, PW3 Satya Narain Mehra, PW4 Ct. Naresh Pal and PW5 ASI Ram Kumar examined as eye witnesses to prove the factum of recovery at the instance of both the accused persons. I have perused and gone through the testimonies of these witnesses minutely. It is pertinent to mention that evidence of PW3 Satya Narain Mehra could not be completed as his examination in chief remain deferred. Hence, statement of PW3 is of no use for the prosecution as it cannot be read into in evidence. Now, the only evidence of PW1, PW4 and PW5 are to be analyzed.
State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 8 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015
16. PW1 Sudarshan Lal examined himself as a complainant on behalf of company and has categorically deposed in the witness box that he is employee of Aero Club, 867, Joshi Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi and was working as Store incharge, some leather was missing from the store and he had doubt that accused Rakesh and Pappu Singh who were employee in the same company have stolen the same. In this regard, he lodged complaint Ex. PW1/A, on the basis of which the present FIR was registered and during investigation the case property was recovered vide memo Ex. PW1/H and Ex. PW1/I respectively. From the possession of accused Pappu Singh, 11 bundles of leather from his house and from the possession of accused Rakesh, 34 bundles of leather were recovered from his house. Total 45 pieces of leather were seized in this case and later on got released by the company. During cross examination of this witness has volunteer that goods worth Rs. 10-12 lacs were missing from the godown situated at Joshi Road. This witness has also stated that Pappu Singh was working as a clerk and his duty was also to maintain the stock register at godown. It is also stated that accused has prepared a duplicate key. During cross examination, this witness has admitted that recovery was not effected in his presence. Police officials had recovered the skins in the presence of another employee of the complainant. Another recovery witness are PW4 Ct. Naresh Pal and PW5 ASI Ram Kumar, both these witnesses have supported the version of the complainant and have deposed that 11 bundles of skins leather were recovered from the house of accused Pappu Singh and 34 bundles were State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 9 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 recovered from the possession of accused Rakesh. All these witnesses have identified the case property in the Court and also identify both the accused.
17. The defence of the accused persons is that both the accused persons were employees of the complainant company and company wanted to terminate their services and were not paying their salary/wages, therefore they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is pertinent to mention that no defence evidence is lead in this case by the accused persons to prove their defence, i.e. complainant company wanted to terminate their services. The defence of the accused persons is not plausible because such huge property cannot be planted to falsely implicate the accused persons. Complainant in his cross examination has stated that case property worth Rs. 10-12 lacs were stolen. More so the testimony of both the police witnesses corroborated to each other and remain unimpeached. I find no reason to disbelieve the testimony of police witness.
18. In view of the above discussions, this court is of the considered view that quantum of case property recovered at the instance of accused persons is too heavy which cannot be planted. Hence, there is no reason to disbelieve the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses on the point of recovery of huge case property. In view of my above reasons, accused persons namely Rakesh and Pappu Singh being the employees of complainant company have committed the theft of leather. Hence, both are convicted for offences u/s 381 State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 10 of 11 FIR NO. 203/99: PS: DBG Road ; U/s 381/34 IPC DOD: 03.03.2015 IPC r/w Section 34 IPC in the matter. To be heard separately on the point of sentence.
Announced in the open court (Pooran Chand)
on 03.03.2015 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate:
Central District:Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi
State V/s Rakesh etc. (Convicted) Page 11 of 11