Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Fir No. 168/18 (State vs . Rishabh Jain) Ps Sagarpur on 22 July, 2022

     FIR No. 168/18               (State vs. Rishabh Jain)              PS Sagarpur



     IN THE COURT OF MS. MANU SHREE, MM-03, PATIALA HOUSE
             COURTS, NEW DELHI DISTRICT, NEW DELHI

CrC No. 14555/2018
State Vs. Rishabh Jain
FIR No. 168/2018
PS Sagarpur
                                   JUDGMENT

1. Date of the Commission of offence            :        30.05.2018
2. Date of Institution of the case              :        27.06.2018
3. Date of reserving the judgment               :        20.07.2022
4. Date of pronouncement of judgment            :        22.07.2022
5. Name of the Complainant                      :        Sh. Aman Sharma
6. Name of Accused, their Parentage             :        Rishabh Jain S/o Sh. Rajender
   and address                                           R/o WZ 1391/27B, Nangal
                                                         Raya, New Delhi.
7. Offences complained of or proved             :        U/s 457/380/411 IPC.
8. Plea of accused                              :        Not Guilty
9. Final order                                  :        Conviction

          BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE CASE

1. Briefly stated, the instant FIR was registered on the complaint of one Aman Sharma regarding theft from his dwelling house and lurking house trespass at night. As per the complainant, on 30.05.2018, complainant was at his house situated at RZ A-27, Gali No.4, Vashisht Park, Pankha Road, Sagarpur, New Delhi. When he was sleeping on the ground floor of his house, at around 02:30 AM, he heard some voice at first floor of his house and he saw that the lock of the room of first floor was broken and when he reached the first floor of the house, he found that the one boy (accused herein) was holding his Laptop bag with his laptop, charger and his mobile phone. Upon seeing the complainant, the boy tried to run away but complainant raised hue and cry and his brother and father came to the room and apprehended the boy. Thereafter, the brother of the complainant Sumit called the emergency number and thereafter, police arrived at the spot and accused was handed over to the police. On the basis of complaint Page No. 1 /8 FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur given by the complainant Aman Sharma, the present FIR was registered and the investigation of the case was marked to ASI Shri Ram who after completion of the investigation prepared the charge-sheet and filed the same in the court on 27.06.2018.

2. On the basis of the charge-sheet and materials on record, commission of cognizable offences were prima facie made out, therefore, cognizance of the offences were taken and accused was summoned and upon his appearance before the court, he was supplied with copies of chargesheet and other documents sought to be relied upon by the prosecution and compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C. made. On 09.08.2018, charges u/s 380/457/411 IPC were framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial and thereafter, the case was listed for PE.

3. On 04.12.2018 in his statement recorded u/s 294 Cr.PC., accused admitted the genuineness of FIR No. 168/2018 and DD No. 6A dated 30.05.2018 and on 02.07.2022, in his supplementary statement recorded u/s 294 Cr.PC., accused admitted the genuineness of the Certificate u/s 65 B Indian Evidence Act supporting the FIR No. 168/2018 and accordingly, examination of the formal witnesses to prove the same were dispensed with.

4. To prove its case against the accused, prosecution examined four witnesses.

Complainant Aman Sharma was examined as PW1 who reiterated the contents of the FIR and testified that he gave his complaint to the police Ex.PW1/A and also stated that IO of the case prepared the site plan Ex.PW1/B at his instance on 30.05.2018. PW1 further deposed that he had apprehended the accused on the day of incident with the help of his father & younger brother Sumit and thereafter, handed over the accused to the police.

FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur Father of the accused, Sh. Vyas Sharma was examined as PW-2, who testified to the effect that on 30.05.2018, he was sleeping at first floor of his house. On hearing the voice of his elder son namely Aman Sharma, he along with his younger son namely Sumit Sharma went to the top floor where they found that his son Aman Sharma had caught hold of one person and they helped grab the boy. He further deposed that one mobile phone and laptop along with charger belonging to his son Aman Sharma was found in possession of the accused at the time and he noticed that the lock of the door was broken and his younger son namely Sumit Sharma called the emergency number 100, after which police arrived at the spot and the accused was handed over to the police and case property i.e Laptop, mobile phone, broken lock and charger were seized by the police and accused arrested after his personal search was conducted and his statement was also recorded by the police.

Ct. Sanjeet who had joined the investigation with ASI Shri Ram was examined as PW3 who testified to the effect that on 30.05.2018, he was posted as constable at PS Sagarpur. On receiving DD no.6A, he along with ASI Shriram reached at the place of occurrence. He further deposed that when they reached the spot they both met the complainant Aman Sharma who handed over the accused Rishabh Jain to ASI Shri Ram and also produced the case properties i.e. one laptop bag along with laptop make HP, charger, and one mobile phone make MI Note V Golden Colour. Thereafter, complainant gave his complaint (Ex. PW-1/A), the case properties were seized by the IO vide seizure memos Ex. PW-1/C and Ex. PW-1/D. Thereafter, IO prepared the rukka of the complaint and handed over the same to Ct. Sanjeet for registration of FIR. He further deposed that after getting the FIR registered, he came back to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to ASI Shri Ram who was marked the investigation of the case. Thereafter, accused was arrested and his personal search was conduced vide memo Ex. PW-1/E and Ex. PW-1/F respectively. He further deposed that one broken lock make Harison (Silver and Golden Colour) Page No. 3 /8 FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur was found at the spot which was allegedly broken by the accused and the same was duly sealed by the IO/ASI Shri Ram with the seal of "RK" and same was seized vide memo Ex. PW-1/G. He further stated that the disclosure statement of accused was recorded by the IO vide memo Ex. PW-3/A and accused was medically examined and thereafter, sent to Lock-Up.

Brother of the complainant, Sh. Sumit Sharma was examined as PW4, who testified to the effect that on 30.05.2018, he was sleeping on the ground floor of his house. Upon hearing voices from the room situated on the first floor of the house, he along with his father went to the first floor where they found that accused was holding his brother's laptop and mobile phone. He immediately snatched the things out of the hands of that person and kept them at the table lying thereby and apprehended that person with the help of his father and elder brother. He further deposed that he vaguely recalled that his elder brother called on 100 number and informed the police that an unknown person had broken into their house and was trying to steal their belongings. He further deposed that after approximately half an hour, police arrived at their house and they handed over the accused to the police. He further deposed that accused was taken to the police station and they were also summoned to the police station for recording of their statements. He further deposed that at the police station, when police asked the accused the reason for entering their house, he started apologizing and thereafter, after recording of their statements himself, his elder brother and his father came back to their house.

IO of the case, ASI Shri Ram was examined as PW-5, who testified to the effect that on 30.05.2018, he was posted as ASI at PS Sagarpur and on that day. On receiving DD no.6A, he along with Ct. Sanjeet reached at the place of occurrence i.e. H.No. RZ-A-27, Gali No.4,Vashist Park, Pankha Road, Sagarpur, New Delhi. He further deposed that reaching there they both met with the complainant Aman Sharma who handed over the accused whose name was later revealed as Rishabh Jain along with one laptop bag along with laptop make HP, Page No. 4 /8 FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur charger, and one mobile phone make MI Note V Golden Colour belonging to the complainant. Complainant also gave his oral statement regarding the incident to him which was duly recorded by him. The said complaint is memo Ex.PW-1/A. He further deposed that thereafter, he prepared rukka Ex.PW-5/A on the basis of the complaint and handed over the same to Ct. Sanjeet for the registration of the FIR, who went to PS Sagarpur, got the FIR registered and came back to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to him. Thereafter, IO prepared the site plan at the instance of the complainant memo Ex.PW-1/B, seized the laptop bag with laptop make HP and charger through seizure memo Ex.PW-1/C which he signed at point 'C', seized the mobile phone make Redmi Note V from the accused vide seizure memo Ex.PW-1/D which he signed at point 'B'. He also found a broken lock make Harison Ex.P1 from the spot which he sealed with the seal of 'RK' and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW-1/G which he signed at point 'C', conducted personal search of the accused vide personal search memo Ex.PW-1/F and arrested the accused from the spot vide arrest memo Ex.PW-1/E. He also recorded the disclosure statement of accused Ex.PW-3/A which he singed at point 'B', deposited the property in the malakhana, got the accused medically examined at the DDU Hospital and thereafter sent the accused to Lock-Up. Thereafter, the IO was cross examined on 02.07.2022 and discharged.

Lastly, MHC (M) was examined as PW-6, who appeared with the summoned record and deposed that the case property i.e one laptop bag containing laptop, a charger and mobile phone make Redmi and a broken lock were received in the PS on 30.04.2018 and the entries were recorded in the Register No.19 vide Mud No. 1725-18 and the entry was exhibited as Ex.PW6/A (OSR). While the case property were released to the owner on 28.06.2018 from the malkhana of the police station, the lock remained in the malkhana and MHC(M) produced the said lock in the court. Thereafter, the witness was cross examined and discharged on 14.04.2022.

FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur

5. At request of Ld. APP for State, PE was closed on 14.07.2022 and statement of the accused u/s 313 Cr.PC was recorded wherein accused denied the case of the prosecution and stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. However, accused had chosen not to lead evidence in defence.

6. During final arguments, it was argued by Ld. APP for the State, that the case against the accused stood proved in view of the evidences led by the prosecution and testimonies of the star witnesses PW1, PW-2 and PW-4, who are also the eye witnesses of the case. Accordingly, he argued that the offences against the accused stood proved beyond reasonable doubt and the accused deserved to be convicted.

7. On the other hand, the Ld. LAC for the accused argued that the prosecution had failed to bring out a case against the accused and there are material discrepancies in the versions given by the complainant, his brother and his father and clearly, a false case has been foisted upon the accused. She further stated that accused is innocent and the documents were prepared by the police officials in the Police Station and false recovery has been shown from the accused to implicate him in this case and hence, accused is liable to be acquitted.

8. I have read the case file meticulously, perused the material on record and duly considered the arguments advanced.

9. The allegations against the accused are that he committed lurking trespass at night into the residence belonging to complainant and committed theft of the laptop bag with laptop and its charger and the mobile phone belonging to the complainant. Complainant entered the witness box and deposed as PW1 and stated that on 30.05.2018, around 02:00 AM complainant woke up from his sleep Page No. 6 /8 FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur after hearing some noises from the floor above and he went to check the room and found the lock on the room broken and saw that the accused was holding his laptop bag (with laptop and charger) and phone and when the accused tried to flee, he raised alarm and his brother and father came up to the room and helped the complainant to apprehend the accused. Thereafter, a call was made on the emergency no. 100 by the brother of complainant and police arrived at the spot and the accused and the belongings retrieved from the accused were handed over to the police. Although, there are some discrepancies in the versions of the incident given by the brother and father of the complainant in their testimonies, complainant who is also the eye witness has throughout corroborated the contents of the complaint originally filed by him with the police. Also, the recovery of items was made at the spot and also accused was caught red handed by the complainant and all that the accused had to do was to 'move' the things belonging to the complainant which were the laptop bag, laptop and its charger and the mobile phone belonging to the complainant with the intention of taking them dishonestly and without the consent of the complainant in order to constitute the offence of theft. At no point was a different version given by the accused during the cross examination of the complainant, whose testimony is of sterling quality and remained unrebutted throughout . Accused never gave a suggestion that he was not present at the house of the complainant or that he never intended to take the things belonging to complainant and also, he never proved that he did not surreptitiously enter the house of complainant at night to commit the offence of theft.

10. Thus, in the light of the aforementioned, in the opinion of this Court, prosecution has established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and the accused Rishabh Jain S/o Sh. Rajender is convicted for the offences u/s 380 IPC and 457 IPC. Accused is directed to furnish bail bonds and surety bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each under Section 437A Cr.PC.

FIR No. 168/18 (State vs. Rishabh Jain) PS Sagarpur The convict is also directed to file the affidavit of his assets and income in the format of Annexure-A prescribed in judgment titled, Karan v. State NCT of Delhi 277(2021) DLT 195 (FB) within 10 days. Ld. APP for the State is directed to disclose the expenses incurred on prosecution on affidavit along with the supporting documents within 30 days.

Announced in open court
on 22.07.2022                                            (Manu Shree)
                                                   MM-03/PHC/NDD/22.07.2022

Certified that this judgment contains eight pages and each page bears my signature.

(Manu Shree) MM-03/PHC/NDD/22.07.2022 Page No. 8 /8