Delhi District Court
State vs . Mohd.Afroz Etc. Fir 458/14 ... on 20 September, 2017
State Vs. Mohd.Afroz etc. FIR 458/14 (56724/2016)
IN THE COURT OF SHRI MANISH YADUVANSHI
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE 05: WEST : DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF
Case No. 56724/16
FIR No. 458/14
PS Uttam Nagar
U/s 394/392/397/34 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
KUNAL @ SANJAY
S/O SARWAN KUMAR
R/O H.NO. 11/46, DAKSHIN PURI,
DELHI.
Date of Institution : 24.09.2014
Date of Reserving Judgment : 20.09.2017
Date of Judgment : 20.09.2017
Result: Acquitted Page 1 of 6
State Vs. Mohd.Afroz etc. FIR 458/14 (56724/2016)
JUDGMENT
1.The present accused namely Kunal @ Sanjay has been facing trial
for the offence punishable U/s 392/394/34 IPC and 397 IPC.
FACTS :
2.In brief, the prosecution's case is to the effect that several assailants entered the house of the complainant/PW3 forcibly on 07.05.2014 which is situated at Plot No. 108, Near Sai Vatika, Vipin Garden, Delhi, having common intention amongst them to commit robbery. One of the accused person was having knife. During the course of such act, they committed robbery of gold ear rings of the complainant/PW3 and also gave her knife blows due to which she was hospitalised.
3.During the investigation, a secret information was received pursuant to which one of the accused namely Mohd.Afroz was apprehended from the Police Picket on 24.05.2014 riding Motorcycle bearing no. DL10S2249 at 09:00 PM. He was interrogated and disclosed about the commission of this offence and also about the coaccused persons.
4.Subsequently, accused Kunal @ Sanjay was arrested in this case on Result: Acquitted Page 2 of 6 State Vs. Mohd.Afroz etc. FIR 458/14 (56724/2016) 29.05.2014 and after completion of investigation, the Chargesheet was filed.
5.On the basis of record, a Charge for the commission of offence Punishable U/s 392/394/34 IPC was framed jointly against this accused and his coaccused Mohd.Afroz (still facing trial). Additional Charge for the commission of Offence Punishable U/s 397 IPC was also framed against accused Kunal @ Sanjay on 25.11.2014.
6.The Prosecution in support of its case, has examined as many as 13 witnesses i.e. PW1 HC Suresh, PW2 HC Vijay Kumar, PW3 Smt.Kiran Verma, PW4 HC Sanjeev Kumar, PW5 ASI Ajeet Singh, PW6 Ms.Preeti Aggarwal, PW7 Dr.Ashish Kumar Khetan, PW8 Dr.G.Adhikari, PW9 HC Manoj Kumar, PW10 Dr.Gaurav Bansal, PW11 Ct.Mohit, PW12 Sh.Ranbir Solanki and PW13 Retired SI Brahm Prakash.
7.Out of these witnesses, PW3 Smt.Kiran is the main witness/Victim.
She has supported the fact that the incident dt. 07.05.2013 had Result: Acquitted Page 3 of 6 State Vs. Mohd.Afroz etc. FIR 458/14 (56724/2016) occurred however, so far as the accused Kunal is concerned, she did not identify him as one of the robbers despite extensive cross examination by the Ld.Addl.P.P.for the State.
8.The remaining witnesses/concerned doctors are police witnesses except one public witness i.e. PW12 Sh.Ranbir Solanki, who provided the police with Footage of CCTV Camera installed at his Plot between 07.05.2014 to 08.05.2014.
9.I have carefully perused the entire evidence in the light of Charge sheet and all the incriminating circumstances that have come on record as far as accused Kunal @ Sanjay is concerned, absolutely no incriminating evidence has come on record against him. As a matter of fact, the arresting official ASI Bhoop Singh could not be examined being dead. The Arrest Memo of this accused has been sought to be proved through PW13 SI Brahm Prakash (Retired) alongwith his Personal Search Memo and the Pointing out Memos. Even he has not explained the circumstances in which this accused was arrested.
Contd......2.
Result: Acquitted Page 4 of 6State Vs. Mohd.Afroz etc. FIR 458/14 (56724/2016)
10.Perusal of police file reveals that accused Kunal @ Sanjay was arrested after obtaining Production Warrants in some other case. He was arrested only on the disclosure statement of coaccused Mohd.Afroz. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from him.
11.Further, the Victim PW3 Smt.Kiran has failed to identify the accused Kunal @ Sanjay in her Court testimony as her assailant.
12.The Electronic Evidence in the form of photographs taken from the recordings of the CCTV Camera installed in the premises of PW12 are so unclear that the accused Kunal @ Sanjay could not be identified in it.
13.The attempt of the Ld.Addl.Public Prosecutor to have this accused identified through the photograph Ex.PW3/4 also failed as the witness stated that she did not know the said person.
14.Record perusal shows that the said photograph is also very hazy.
Moreover, the original DVR was never seized by the IO.
15.Refusal to take part in Judicial TIP is therefore, the only circumstance but it has not resulted into culmination as not corroborated by other evidence.
16.Hence, requirement of recording statement of accused Kunal Result: Acquitted Page 5 of 6 State Vs. Mohd.Afroz etc. FIR 458/14 (56724/2016) @ Sanjay U/s 313 Cr.P.C.was ordered to be dispensed with.
17.Consequently, the accused Kunal @ Sanjay is entitled for benefit of doubt and according the same to him, he is acquitted of the Charges Punishable U/s 392/394/34 IPC as well of Section 397 IPC.
18.He is directed to comply with the Provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C. by furnishing PB/SB in sum of Rs.20,000/ (Rupees twenty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount.
Announced in open Court (Manish Yaduvanshi)
on 20.09.2017 ASJ05(W)/THC
Delhi/20.09.2017(P)
Result: Acquitted Page 6 of 6