Delhi District Court
State vs . Jitender Singh Shunty on 28 April, 2018
State vs. Jitender Singh Shunty
In the Court of Sh. Ajay Garg, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Shahdara, Karkardooma
Courts, Delhi.
State Vs. Jitender Singh Shunty
FIR No. : 83/12
U/S: 447/188 IPC
PS: Vivek Vihar
JUDGMENT
a) Unique ID No. of the case : 79735/16
b) Date of commission of offence : 30.03.2012
c) Date of institution of the case : 02.07.2012
d) Name of the complainant : Sh. Satish Ahuja
e) Name & address of the
accused : Jitender Singh Shunty
S/o. Sh. Preet Pal Singh
R/o. 85 Pratap Khand,
Jhilmil Colony, Delhi.
f) Offence complained off : 447/188 IPC
g) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty.
h) Arguments heard on : 19.04.2018
i) Date of Judgment : 28.04.2018
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION:
1. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 30.03.2012 at unknown time at 85 Pratap Khand, Delhi within the FIR No. 83/12 Page 1 of 5 State vs. Jitender Singh Shunty jurisdiction of PS Vivek Vihar accused Jitender Singh Shunty committed criminal tresspass on the government land i.e. street/ road in violation of guidelines of the Election Commission by making election office being BJP candidate for ward no. 238 for MCD election and also fixed boards on the electricity poles and other government/ non government building. With these allegations, accused has been sent to face trial for offence punishable U/sec. 447/188 IPC.
2. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet U/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the police and the accused was consequently summoned. Notice U/s.251 Cr.PC for the offence U/s. 447/188 IPC was served upon the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to substantiate the allegations, three witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution.
(i). PW1 HC Rajender Kumar, on the date of incident, he was the Duty Officer at PS Vivek Vihar, who received the rukka and registered the FIR of the instant case and proved the copy of FIR as Ex. PW1/A. He also proved the endorsement made by him on rukka as Ex. PW1/B.
(ii). PW2 Sh. Satish Ahuja, is the complainant, who pleaded ignorance about the present case and turned hostile and denied his complaint Ex. PW2/A as well as the statement recorded by the police Mark B. FIR No. 83/12 Page 2 of 5 State vs. Jitender Singh Shunty
(iii). PW3 Sh. Abhishek, is the photographer, who stated that on 11.04.2012 he alongwith police official namely Anoop and 2/3 other police officials were patrolling in police zipsy. In the evening at about 09.00/9.30 pm, they reached at the park just behind the police station Vivek Vihar where tents were fixed and chairs were lying in half of the tent. He took the photographs of the said tent as per the directions of police official and handed over the developed DVD in the PS. His statement was recorded by IO.
However, he was cross examined by Ld. APP for State as he was resiling from his previous statement. He admitted that on 31.03.2012 he alongwith SI Ravi Kumar reached at 85 Pratap Khand, Jhilmil Colony and at the above mentioned address, a tent was fixed and an office was maintained from where Jitender Singh Shunti was contesting elections. He took two photographs of the abovesaid spot which was seized by IO vide memo Ex. PW3/A. He also proved the photographs as Ex. P1 & P2.
Witnesses were cross examined at length by Ld. Defence Counsel.
4. P.E. was closed vide order of the Court dated 26.02.2015 and matter was fixed for statement of accused U/s. 313 Cr. PC. During his statement, accused denied all the incriminating evidence put to him and stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. No defence evidence was led.
5. I have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the FIR No. 83/12 Page 3 of 5 State vs. Jitender Singh Shunty record.
6. Findings:
The instant prosecution was launched on the complaint made by Sh. Satish Ahuja however, he turned hostile before the Court and did not support the case of prosecution. He denied the entire prosecution case in toto during his cross examination by the State. All the remaining witnesses are police officials who deposed on the procedural aspects.
Further as far as offence u/s. 447 IPC is concerned, there is no evidence regarding intention of the accused to commit any offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property. In these circumstances as there is no evidence to this effect offence punishable u/s. 447 IPC is not made out.
Similarly in respect of the offence punishable u/s. 188 IPC, there is no evidence regarding causing or tends to cause any obstruction, annoyance or injury or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person or causes or tends to cause danger to human life, health or safety, or causes or tends to cause a riot or affray which is necessary for establishing the ingredients of Section 188 IPC. Further, even the model Code of Conduct, which is allegedly violated by the accused has not been proved on record as per law.
In these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against the FIR No. 83/12 Page 4 of 5 State vs. Jitender Singh Shunty accused. Hence, accused Jitender Singh Shunty stands acquitted from all the charges levelled against him.
Ordered accordingly.
Announced in the open court Digitally signed by AJAY GARG on 28th April, 2018 AJAY Location: Court NO.59, Shahdara District, GARG Karkardooma Courts, Delhi Date: 2018.04.28 16:57:55 +0530 (Ajay Garg) Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
District Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.FIR No. 83/12 Page 5 of 5