Delhi District Court
State vs Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 1 Of 7 on 3 October, 2012
Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012 IN THE COURT OF VIDYA PRAKASH: CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: DELHI FIR No.:11/2011 PS: DBG Road U/s 379/411/34 IPC Unique ID No.: 02401R0207732011 J U D G M E N T:
______________________________________________________________
(a) S.No. of the case : 79/2
(b) Name of complainant : Harjeet Singh, s/o Sh. Hukam Singh R/o H. No8615, DCM School Lane, Gaushala Marg, New Rohtak Road, New Delhi.
(c) Date of commission of offence : 17.01.2011
(d) Name of the accused : (1).Pankaj
S/o Sh. Ram Swaroop
R/o H. No. Jhuggi No.40, Rajiv
Gandhi Camp, Punjabi Bagh,
Delhi.
(Since expired)
(2). Mithun
S/o Sh. Tulsi
R/o WZ78, Basai Dara Pur,
Delhi.
(e) Offence complained of : U/s 379/411/34 IPC
(f) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final arguments heard on : 03.10.2012
(h) Final Order : Accused Mithun convicted
u/s 411 IPC.
(i) Date of such order : 03.10.2012
State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 1 of 7
Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012
A. BRIEF FACTS & REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
The facts of the case in brief are that on 18.01.2011complainant Sh. Harjeet Singh got his complaint recorded in police station DBG Road with regard to theft of his motorcycle bearing Registration No. DL4S AZ0008 make Bajaj Pulsar, stating therein that on 17.01.2011 at about 09:00 PM, he had parked his aforementioned motorcycle outside his house situated at 8615, DCM School lane, Gaushala Road Marg, New Rohtak Road, Delhi. Thereafter, in the morning of next day i.e. 18.01.2011 he found the same missing. He made sincere efforts to trace out the same but could not be succeeded. On the basis of this statement, case FIR was registered. Thereafter, on 04.03.2011, a telephonic message was received by PS DBG Road that the aforesaid motorcycle stood recovered from the possession of accused Pankaj s/o Sh. Rawswaroop and accused Mithun s/o Sh. Tulsi in case FIR No.49/11 u/s 25 Arms Act P S Punjabi Bagh. After completion of investigation, chargesheet in the matter was filed in court through SHO concerned.
Detail of Court Proceedings:
2. After filing of charge sheet in the case, both accused persons were supplied the documents in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. After hearing arguments on charge, vide order dated 02.06.2011 charge u/s 411/34 IPC was framed against both the accused persons namely Pankaj and Mithun to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. However, on State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 2 of 7 Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012 09.05.2012 accused Pankaj expired and proceedings qua him stood abated.
Evidence Held:
3. In order to bring home the guilt of accused, prosecution examined five witnesses, whereafter the PE in the matter was closed as accused voluntarily pleaded guilty. Thus, statement of accused Mithun U/s 281 Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein he admitted all the incriminating evidence put to him and prayed for a lenient view against him.
4. Before embarking upon appreciating the arguments advanced at Bar, it would be appropriate to have a brief scrutiny of the evidence recorded in the matter.
5. PW01/complainant Sh. Harjeet Singh deposed that in the night of 17.01.2011 he parked his motorcycle bearing registration no. DL4SAZ0008 model 2007 make Bajaj Pulsar outside his house, however in the morning of very next day i.e. 18.01.2011 he found the same missing and therefore he dialled 100 number and lodged a written complaint as Ex.PW1/A. Thereafter, n 14.03.2011 he got the said motorcycle released on superdari on furnishing superdarginama Ex.PW1/B. He further proved the photographs of his stolen motorcycle in the Court as Mark A to Mark F. During his cross examination he admitted that recovery of the motorcycle in question was not effected in his presence. State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 3 of 7
Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012
6. PW2 Ct. Gurbaksh Singh, deposed that on 10.03.2011 he was posted at PS DBG Road as Constable. On that day he alongwith IO reached at Tis Hazari Court before Link MM, Court no. 355 for investigation of the present case as they received information that accused got arrested in other case and they have to be presented before the said court. On that day they presented application before the Ld. MM for interrogation and formal arrest of both the accused i.e Pankaj and Mithun. Ld. MM gave 1520 minutes for the same. Both the accused persons were interrogated and formally arrested and IO recorded the disclosure statement of both the accused and at the same time SI Arun Kumar reached in the court. He forwarded application for PC remand for 15 days of both the accused. PC remand was rejected by the Ld. MM and accused was ordered to send in JC. Accused Pankaj and Mithun were formally arrested vide arrest memo exhibited Ex.PW2/A and Ex.PW2/B. His statement was recorded by the IO. He also signed on the disclosure statement of Pankaj Ex.PW2/C and Mithun Ex.PW2/D. During his cross examination, he denied that all the investigation was conducted at the PS. He further denied that both the accused were falsely implicated in the present case.
7. PW3 W/Ct. Sanyogita was the DD writer in PS DBG Road who had recorded DD entry No.16/PP regarding arrest of accused Pankaj and proved the same as Ex.PW3/A. This witness was not cross examined by the defense.
State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 4 of 7 Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012
8. PW4 SI Rajinder Singh was posted as Duty Officer at the relevant time in police station DBG Road, Delhi and he has proved the case FIR in the matter as Ex. PW4/A. This witness was not cross examined by the defense.
9. PW5 deposed that on 04.03.11, he was posted at PS Punjabi Bagh and was on vehicle checking duty from 6 P.M to 8 P.M at Anti Snatching Picket Club Road. At about 6.30 P.M, two persons passed from the said road on a motorcycle no. DL4SAK 9264. None was wearing helmet. HC Sarjeet and Ct. Om Parkash were with him on the said duty. HC Sarjeet gave signal for stopping the said motorcycle. Name of the motorcycle riders were disclosed as Pankaj and Mithun. They were not able to give any satisfactory answer when they were asked to show the documents of the vehicle. They took the cursory search of both of them. One buttondar knife was recovered from accused Pankaj whereas one cloth pullanda of green colour was recovered from accused Mithun. The pullanda was found containing jewellery articles of golden colour. Accused Mithun told that he had stolen the said jewellery from the area of Basai dara pur about 1011 days back. Knife and said cloth pullanda were seized by HC Sarjeet after sealing both of them separately with the seal of SK, U/s 102 Cr.PC. On the tehrir prepared by HC Sarjeet FIR no. 49/11 PS Punjabi Bagh was registered. During investigation accused persons had made disclosure statements and had got recovered three State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 5 of 7 Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012 other motorcycles bearing registration number plates PB10C 3095, DL4SAD 0409, DL4SAZ 0008, from road side adjacent to the park situated in Mahatma Gandhi Camp. The said motorcycles alongwith the motorcycle on which both of the accused persons were apprehended were seized in the said case and were deposited in the Malkhana. He correctly identified the accused Mithun in the Court. He proved the copy of the disclosure statements of both the accused persons namely Pankaj Kumar and Mithun as mark A and B as well as copy of seizure memo of motorcycle no. DL4SAZ 0008 as mark C as well as copy of arrest memo of accused Pankaj and Mithun in case FIR no. 49/11 as Mark D and E. This witness has identified the motorcycle from the photograph already on record as Mark A to F.
10. This is all as far as prosecution evidence is concerned. The accused did not examine any witness in defense despite opportunity.
Court View & Final Decision:
11. Since the accused Mithun has voluntarily pleaded guilty in the matter no arguments were advanced by the either sides. However, accused Mithun was warned about penal consequences of his pleading guilt of the offence for which he has been charged in the present case. Accused Mithun had also been given sufficient time to think over again as well as to consult Ld. LAC but despite that, accused insisted to plead guilty. After making such State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 6 of 7 Case No.79/2 : PS DBG Road : U/s 379/411/34 IPC DOD: 03.10.2012 inquiry, Court has been satisfied that accused Mithun has voluntarily pleaded guilty for the offence charged against him. Consequently, in view of the plea of guilt made by accused Mithun, he is convicted for offence punishable u/s 411 IPC.
Announced in the open court (Vidya Prakash)
on 03.10.2012 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate:
Delhi
State V/s Pankaj & Mithun ("Convicted") Page 7 of 7