Delhi District Court
State vs Rakesh Dass Ors on 20 September, 2025
IN THE COURT OF DR. RAKESH KUMAR
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC-02) SOUTH EAST
SAKET COURT COMPLEX: NEW DELHI
CNR No: DLSE010005502015
Session Case No.1635/2016
FIR No.300/2015
Police Station: Govind Puri.
State
Versus
1) Rakesh Das
Son of Dipankar Das,
Resident of 843, Pocket-14,
Block A, Kalkaji Extension,
New Delhi.
2) Sachidanand
Son of Surender Nath,
Resident of House No.550, Pocket A-14,
Sri Lal Chowk, Kalkaji,
New Delhi.
Date of Institution : 04.06.2015
Judgment reserved on : 15.09.2025
Date of Decision : 20.09.2025
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 1 of 48
JUDGMENT
1. A police report was put up by the State through officer-in-charge of the police station Govind Puri before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate with the view to take cognizance of offences under sections 307/394/397/411/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') against the accused persons, namely, Rakesh Das and Sachidanand for having committed the said offences.
2. As per the police report on 06.03.2015, this case FIR was registered in police station Govind Puri for the offence punishable under section 307 IPC.
3. As per the police report, upon receipt of DD No.58B dated 05.03.2015 regarding stabbing, Assistant Sub-Inspector Om Bir Singh along with constable Moti Lal reached at the spot i.e. Pocket-14, Gol Chakkar, Okhla Service Road but no injured or complainant was found there and on inquiry, it was revealed that the injured had already been taken to the Trauma Center, AIIMS and no eye-witness was found there.
4. It is further reported in the police report that Assistant Sub-Inspector Om Bir Singh along with the Constable Moti Lal had reached Trauma Center, AIIMS and found the injured Om Prakash Dubey under treatment vide MLC No.477959/15, on which the doctor had opined alleged H/O Assault Nature of injury Pending investigation and the patient was 'unfit for statement', and the investigating officer also FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 2 of 48 searched for any eye-witness relating to the place of incident to the hospital also but found none.
5. It is further reported in the police report that from the contents of DD entry, perusal of MLC, from the circumstances and from the inquiry, the offence under section 307 IPC has been made out and therefore, a case under that section was got registered and further investigation was taken up by Assistant Sub-Inspector Om Bir Singh himself.
6. It is further reported in the police report that during the course of investigation, the investigating officer had again gone to the place of incident and made search for an eye-witness nearby the place of incident but found none and the injured was continued to be 'unfit for statement'.
7. It is further reported in the police report that upon receipt of information regarding the accused persons involved in the present case, the investigating officer along with Ct. Moti Lal and the secret informer reached at Khatta Khazana School, Park behind Bhumiheen Camp, and apprehended four persons standing there, whose names on inquiry were revealed as (1) Rakesh Das (2) CCL 'V' (3) Sachidanand (4) CCL 'R', who admitted their involvement in the incident of the present case during interrogation.
8. It is further reported in the police report that JWO SI Abhishek was called at the spot and the accused Rakesh Das was joined in the investigation and on interrogation, he had disclosed that they all four, in furtherance of their common design, had FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 3 of 48 committed robbery upon a pedestrian on the Okhla Service Road on the previous night by inflicting knife injuries on his person, who was caught hold by the accused Rakesh Das and the JCL 'R' had inflicted knife injury on his chest and the accused Sachidanand had taken out Rs.5000/- and JCL 'V' had taken out mobile phone from the pocket of the injured.
9. It is further reported in the police report that on collection of sufficient material against the accused Rakesh Das after interrogation, he was arrested in the present case and the documents regarding his arrest were prepared and the Resume (ID) of the injured snatched from him and Rs.400/- which had come to the share of the accused Rakesh Das were seized vide seizure memo and taken into police possession.
10. It is further reported in the police report that JWO SI Abhishek had interrogated the JCLs 'V' 'S' & 'R', and their apprehension memo, social report and conflict report were prepared and all the JCLs were apprehended in presence of their parents.
11. It is further reported in the police report that from the JCL 'V', the robbed mobile phone Nokia 1600 Black Colour was recovered, which was seized vide seizure memo and taken into police possession.
12. It is further reported in the police report that at the instance of JCL 'R', the knife used in the incident was recovered underneath the stone lying near wall of Khatta Khajana School, Bhumiheen Camp, which was kept on a white paper and a sketch FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 4 of 48 map was prepared and on its measurement, the total length of the knife was measured as 21.4cms (length of handle 12.3cms and of blade 9.1cms) which was kept in a white cloth and a pullanda was prepared and sealed with the seal of 'O.S'.
13. It is further reported in the police report that the money recovered from the accused persons was seized vide seizure memo and taken into police possession and a separate pointing out memo of the place of incident was prepared and the case-properties were deposited in the police malkhana.
14. It is further reported in the police report that on 07.03.2015, the accused Rakesh Das was produced in the concerned Court and sent to JC and all three JCLs 'R' 'S' 'V' were produced in the JJB-II Delhi Gate and they were sent to the Child Welfare Home.
15. It is further reported in the police report that sections 394/397/411/34 IPC were added in the present case and statement of witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded separately.
16. It is further reported in the police report that the caller/informant of the incident, namely, Shahrukh was inquired, who had informed that on 05.03.2015 at about 08.30 p.m., he was going to Veer Bazar, Okhla Service Road for purchasing some articles, and when reached near Okhla Gol Chakkar he had heard the sound of 'bachao-bachao', he had seen one person was lying in the middle of two tempos and he had been making alarm that his mobile phone and money had been robbed and he had also been stabbed and blood was oozing out from his chest, so, he FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 5 of 48 (Shahrukh) had wrapped a cloth on his chest and called 100 number; that the PCR Van had taken the injured to the hospital, and his separate statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded.
17. It is further reported in the police report that the injured was still 'unfit for statement', and the investigating officer had obtained documents regarding date of birth of the JCLs 'R' 'V' 'S' from the concerned school, and age of the JCL 'S' was found to be above 18 years, whose documents were produced in JJB, and the accused Sachidanand was sent to judicial custody.
18. It is further reported in the police report that the CDR request qua the mobile phone robbed in the present was got sent and thereafter, on 06.05.2015, the injured Om Prakash Dubey was declared 'fit for statement' and he was inquired by the investigating officer.
19. It is further reported in the police report that the complainant/injured Om Prakash Dubey has, inter-alia, stated as follows:
"I live at the abovementioned address and am a native of village Majidhana Post Haridhawa, District: Gadwa Jharkhand and works in a DUST Company, Okhla Phase-II. On 05.03.2015 at about 08.10 p.m. in the night, I had come to Veer Bazar Okhla Road for purchasing some household articles and when reached at drainage near Pocket-14 on Okhla Service Road, four boys whose age were about 18 to 20 years suddenly came to me and surrounded me. The boy who was oldest of them and caught hold me and the second boy who was of blackish colour put out a knife and gave a blow on his chest and wrist of right hand and rib and other two boys took out FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 6 of 48 Nokia mobile phone 1600 of black colour and Rs.500/- from his pocket and ran away from the spot, whom I can identify if they are produced before me."
20. It is further reported in the police report that separate statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. of the complainant was recorded and on his pointing out, site-plan of the place of incident was prepared and the JCLs 'V' & 'R' have been released from the shelter home.
21. It is further reported in the police report that the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand were in judicial custody and both of them had refused to join the TIP proceedings before the Magistrate and the copy of the such order is attached with the file.
22. It is further reported in the police report that result on the MLC of the injured was obtained on which the doctor opined the injury to be 'dangerous sharp'.
23. It is further reported in the police report that the MLC of the injured and the recovered knife were sent to the doctor at Trauma Center, AIIMS for obtaining subsequent opinion, on which the doctor opined, "MLC No.477959/15 dated 05.03.2015 in respect of Om Prakash Dubey Son of Paras Nath Dubey caused by the alleged weapon of offence i.e. knife submitted for examination IO is advised to submit the weapon for sero-biological examination to FSL for further correlation.
24. It is further reported in the police report that CDR of the mobile phone number 7838174880 robbed from the FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 7 of 48 complainant Om Prakash Dubey was obtained which is attached with the file.
25. It is further reported in the police report that on 29.05.2015, TIP of JCLs 'R' & 'V' were got conducted in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, and the injured Om Prakash Dubey and correctly identified both the JCLs 'R' & 'V', and copy of TIP proceedings were obtained from the concerned Court and attached herewith.
26. It is further reported in the charge-sheet that the aforesaid acts on the part of the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand and the JCLs 'R' & 'V' revealed commission of offences punishable under sections 307/394/397/411/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is, therefore, prayed that cognizance of the offences committed by the accused persons may be taken and they should be tried as per the provisions of law.
27. After completion of the investigation, the investigating officer had filed the charge sheet before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate.
28. On the police report, on 18.06.2015, the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate had taken the cognizance of the offence and both the accused persons were also produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate. Copies of police report and other documents in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C. were supplied to both the accused persons.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 8 of 4829. On 26.06.2015, the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate found the section 307 IPC to be exclusively triable by the Court of Session and therefore, committed the case to the Court of Session.
30. On 30.09.2015, upon considering the police report and the documents sent with it under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and after hearing the Additional Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused persons, the charge was framed against the accused persons, namely, Rakesh Das and Sachidanand for their having committed offence punishable under sections 394/397 read with section 34 Indian Penal Code and the charge was also framed against the accused Rakesh Das for his having committed offence punishable under section 411 of Indian Penal Code.
31. The charge was read over and explained to both the accused persons and they were asked if they pleaded guilty of the offences charged or claimed to be tried. The accused persons did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
32. In support of its case, the prosecution got examined PW1 Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Yad Ram, PW2 Head Constable (HC) Radhe Shyam, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, PW4 Shahrukh, PW5 Head Constable (HC) Santosh Kumar, PW6 Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Moti Lal Meena, PW7 Sub- Inspector (SI) Abhishek, PW8 Sub-Inspector (SI) Om Bir Singh (Investigating Officer). During the examination of the prosecution witnesses, the documents Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW2/A, Ex.PW2/B, Ex.PW2/C, Ex.PW3/A, Ex.PW6/A, Ex.PW6/B, FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 9 of 48 Ex.PW6/C, Ex.PW6/D, Ex.PW6/E, Ex.PW6/F, Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/C, Ex.PW8/D, Ex.PW8/E, Ex.PW8/F; and 'Pullanda' Ex.P1, Ex.P2, Ex.P3 (colly), Mark A, were also tendered in evidence.
33. On 01.05.2025, prosecution evidence was closed and matter was posted for examination of the accused persons under section 313 Cr.P.C and for their statements.
34. On 29.05.2025, this court examined the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and their separate statements were recorded. During their examination under section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused persons denied the correctness of incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence against them. During their examination under section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused persons took the defence that they are innocent. It is further stated by the accused persons that they have been falsely implicated in the present case and nothing was recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that they were apprehended from their house and their signatures were obtained on blank papers. It is further submitted that they never made any confession to the police.
35. The accused persons expressed their desire to lead evidence in their defence.
36. I have heard Mr. Ashesh Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Kedar Yadav, Advocate for the accused Sachidanand and Mr. Rizwan Ali, LAC for the accused FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 10 of 48 Rakesh Das and have gone through the record of the case carefully.
37. Having drawn my attention on the testimonies of PW1 ASI Yad Ram, PW2 HC Radhe Shyam, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, PW4 Shahrukh, PW5 HC Santosh Kumar, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, PW7 SI Abhishek, PW8 ASI Om Bir Singh; and the documents Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW2/A, Ex.PW2/B, Ex.PW2/C, Ex.PW3/A, Ex.PW6/A, Ex.PW6/B, Ex.PW6/C, Ex.PW6/D, Ex.PW6/E, Ex.PW6/F, Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/C, Ex.PW8/D, Ex.PW8/E, Ex.PW8/F; and 'Pullanda' Ex.P1, Ex.P2, Ex.P3 (colly), Mark A, and the law laid down in the judgment in Shri Bhagwan v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 2001 SC 2342, it is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State that from the evidence led, the prosecution has been able to the case set up against the accused persons. It is further submitted that the incident had happened on 05.03.2015 when the accused persons and two CCLs had robbed the complainant of mobile phone and cash amount and stabbed the complainant. It is further submitted that the complainant/injured Prakash Dubey (PW3) has proved the case and the incident happened to him and he has also identified the knife used in the commission of offence. It is further submitted that PW4 Shahrukh, a passerby had seen the complainant in injured condition and called the police. It is further submitted that recovery of robbed articles was affected soon after the incident and there is a presumption under section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is further submitted that the accused persons were apprehended on 06.03.2015 on the basis of secret information and on the same day, the robbed articles were FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 11 of 48 recovered. It is further submitted that Rs.550/- in cash and Rs.400/- were recovered from the accused persons Sachidanand and Rakesh respectively and the case property was identified by the complainant. It is further submitted that the accused persons had refused to join TIP proceedings. It is further submitted that minor contradictions in the testimonies and errors cannot affect the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that the accused persons have failed to show any reason of false implication. It is further submitted that as per the testimonies of PW4 Shahrukh, the complainant had informed him that he was robbed also.
38. Per contra, learned counsel for the accused Rakesh Das has drawn my attention on the testimonies of PW1 ASI Yad Ram, PW2 HC Radhe Shyam, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, PW4 Shahrukh, PW5 HC Santosh Kumar, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, PW7 SI Abhishek, PW8 ASI Om Bir Singh; and the documents Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW2/A, Ex.PW2/B, Ex.PW2/C, Ex.PW3/A, Ex.PW6/A, Ex.PW6/B, Ex.PW6/C, Ex.PW6/D, Ex.PW6/E, Ex.PW6/F, Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/C, Ex.PW8/D, Ex.PW8/E, Ex.PW8/F; and 'Pullanda' Ex.P1, Ex.P2, Ex.P3 (colly), Mark A, and submitted that the incident had happened on 05.03.2015 and the present FIR was registered on 06.03.2015 on the basis of DD. It is further submitted that recovery of knife was affected from the CCL 'V' and mobile phone of the injured was recovered from the CCL 'R'. It is further submitted that there was no reason for the accused Rakesh Das to keep the ID resume of the complainant with him. It is further submitted that there is no witness of recovery from the accused persons, and as per the FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 12 of 48 testimonies of PW6, the secret informer had even not accompanied the police party to the place of recovery. It is further submitted that the accused Rakesh Das had refused to participate in the TIP proceedings as photographs of the accused was obtained by the investigating officer and the accused was produced in the Court on the same day when the complainant was also present in the Court as per the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. of the complainant. It is further submitted that no CDR has been produced to prove the link of the accused persons with the commission of the offence and there are contradictions about the robbed articles as at one place the complainant has said that an amount of Rs.5000/- were robbed and at another place he has said that Rs.7500/- were robbed. It is further submitted that the accused has been falsely implicated.
39. The learned counsel for the accused Sachidanand has drawn my attention on the testimonies of PW1 ASI Yad Ram, PW2 HC Radhe Shyam, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, PW4 Shahrukh, PW5 HC Santosh Kumar, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, PW7 SI Abhishek, PW8 ASI Om Bir Singh; and the documents Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW2/A, Ex.PW2/B, Ex.PW2/C, Ex.PW3/A, Ex.PW6/A, Ex.PW6/B, Ex.PW6/C, Ex.PW6/D, Ex.PW6/E, Ex.PW6/F, Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B, Ex.PW8/C, Ex.PW8/D, Ex.PW8/E, Ex.PW8/F; and 'Pullanda' Ex.P1, Ex.P2, Ex.P3 (colly), Mark A, and the law laid down in the judgment in Phool Kumar v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1975 SC 905, it is submitted that the offender who had actually used a deadly weapon can only be convicted for the offence under section 397 IPC and such provisions do not attract vicarious liability. It is further submitted FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 13 of 48 that as per the testimonies of the complainant/injured, the knife was used by the CCLs and not by the accused persons who are facing trial in this Court. It is further submitted that there is no charge under section 411 IPC framed against the accused. It is further submitted that the accused had refused to join the TIP proceedings as his Adhar card and photographs were taken by the investigating officer. It is further submitted that the statement of the complainant was recorded after two months of the incident, then how come the investigating officer got to know that the articles belong to the complainant. It is further submitted that it was a DD of quarrel and robbery between the injured and somebody else and the recovery of the accused persons is irrelevant and doubtful.
40. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made on behalf of the parties.
41. The accused persons have been charged for the offence punishable under sections 394/397/411/34 IPC. Sections 394/397/411/34 read as follows:
394. Voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery-If any person, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery, voluntarily causes hurt, such person, and any other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
397. Robbery, or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt. - If, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 14 of 48 grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.
411. Dishonestly receiving stolen property.-- Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
34. Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.--When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
42. The facts of the case have already been noticed earlier, here, I would like to only focus on the evidence that has been adduced by the prosecution.
43. To bring home the guilt of the accused persons, the prosecution had examined eight (8) witnesses.
44. PW1 ASI Yad Ram has deposed that on 05.03.2015, he was working as DD writer at police station Govindpuri, New Delhi and on the day at about 08.57 a.m, he had received information that one person had caused injury at pocket-14, Gol Chakkar, Govind Puri, and that information was reduced into writing vide DD No.58/B (Ex.PW1/A).
45. PW2 HC Radhe Shyam has deposed that on 06.03.2015, he was working as duty officer at police station Govind Puri from 12:00 Noon to 8:00 p.m. and on that day at FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 15 of 48 about 01:25 p.m., Ct. Moti had come to him and produced a rukka sent by ASI Ombir Singh, and on the basis of rukka, he had registered the present FIR (Ex.PW2/A) and also made endorsement (Ex.PW2/B) on the rukka. It is further deposed by PW2 HC Radhe Shyam that after registration of the FIR, he had handed over original rukka and copy of FIR to Ct. Moti to hand over the same to ASI Ombir Singh. PW2 HC Radhe Shyam has also brought the original FIR register in the Court.
46. It is further deposed by PW2 HC Radhe Shyam that on that day at about 12:17 p.m., an information was received from Trauma Center, AIIMS regarding the admission of the injured Om Prakash in the hospital, and the said information was reduced into writing vide DD No.50A (Ex.PW2/C). PW2 HC Radhe Shyam has also brought the original register.
47. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has deposed that in the year 2015, he has been working in Daks India Company and on 05.03.2015, after duty of his company, he was going to Veer Bazar for purchasing some goods and when he had reached near Pocket 14, Okhla Gol Chakkar, suddenly four boys had come there and tried to overpower him but somehow he had tried to save himself, however, one of them had taken out his knife and stabbed him on his chest.
48. It is further deposed by PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that after injury of knife, he had fallen down on the road and during the scuffle, said boys had snatched Rs.7500/- from the pocket of his pant and his mobile phone Make Nokia 1600, and FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 16 of 48 those persons had run away from the spot. It is further deposed by PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that due to knife injury, he was loosing his consciousness, and he had requested some passerby to inform the police. It is further deposed by PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that one of them had informed the police and police had come and taken him to the hospital. It is further deposed by PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that in the hospital, he had lost his consciousness and regained it after 20 days.
49. It is further deposed by PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that after one month of regaining his consciousness, he was able to make statement to the police. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has identified his signature on his statement (Ex.PW3/A). It is further deposed by PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that after 04-06 months on asking of police officials, he had gone to Juvenile Court, where he had identified Juvenile, namely, 'R' and 'V' of this case.
50. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey further deposed that he could identify the accused persons if shown to him, and both the accused persons, who were present in the Court were correctly identified by the witness. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey further deposed that the accused Rakesh had caught hold him during the incident and another accused Sachidanand had taken out mobile phone from his pocket. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey further deposed that he could identify the knife if shown to him.
51. During examination-in-chief of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, MHC(M) has produced one sealed pullanda with the seal of FSL, and the seal was broken with the permission of the Court FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 17 of 48 and one knife was taken out and shown to the witness. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has correctly identified the knife (Ex.P-1).
52. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey further deposed that he could also identify the other case property if shown to him.
53. During examination-in-chief of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, MHCM has also produced another sealed pullanda with the seal of 'OS', and seal was broken with the permission of the Court and one mobile phone with Nokia was taken out and shown to the witness. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has correctly identified the mobile (Ex.P-2) to be belonged to him.
54. During examination-in-chief of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, MHCM has also produced another sealed four pullandas with the seal of 'OS', and in the name of Sachidnand, Rakesh Das, Ravi Kumar and Vishal Singh, seal was broken with the permission of the Court and currency notes were taken out from the every pullanda, out of which, five notes are taken out from pullanda of Vishal Singh in the denomination of four of 100/- and one was 50/-, totaling to Rs.450/-. Five notes were taken out from pullanda of Ravi Kumar in the denomination of four of 100/- and one of 50/- totaling to Rs.450/-. Six notes were taken out from the pullanda of Sachinand in the denomination of five of 100/- and one of 50/- totaling Rs.550/-. Four currency notes were taken out from the pullanda of Rakesh Das in the denomination of four of Rs.100/-, totaling to Rs.400/-. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has correctly identified the FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 18 of 48 currency notes (Ex.P-3 colly.) but he was not sure the currency notes are the same or not.
55. PW4 Shahrukh has deposed that he did not remember the date, month and year of the incident, however, one-two years before, when he was going to Okhla Service Road near Goal Chakkar, he had heard a voice of help, and he had gone to the spot and seen that one person was lying between two TSR in injured condition and blood was oozing from his chest. It is further deposed by PW4 Shahrukh that he had brought a cloth from auto and tied the chest of the injured person and informed the police at number 100. It is further deposed by PW4 Shahrukh that after sometime, PCR had come to the spot and taken injured person to the hospital. PW4 Shahrukh has further deposed that he did not know anything else, and police had recorded his statement.
56. During his examination, PW4 Shahrukh was cross- examined on behalf of the State as he was resiling from his earlier statement given to the police.
57. During the leading questions put to the witness, PW4 Shahrukh has admitted that the the injured had told him that someone had snatched his mobile phone and money and stabbed him. PW4 Shahrukh has also admitted that due to lapse of time, he could not have recollected the said fact.
58. PW5 HC Santosh Kumar has deposed that on 06.03.2015, he was working as constable at police station Govind FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 19 of 48 Puri and on that day at about 05.15 p.m., when he was on patrolling and reached near the park of Khata Khazana School, he had seen the investigating officer ASI Ombir Singh had apprehended four persons, namely, Rakesh Das, 'V', 'R' and Sachidanand and Ct. Moti Lal had also reached at the spot. PW5 HC Santosh Kumar has further deposed that the accused Rakesh Das was arrested in the present case by the investigating officer and remaining three accused persons were found juvenile and JWO SI Abhishek Singh was called at the spot, who interacted with the juvenile persons.
59. PW6 ASI Motilal Meena has deposed that on 05.03.2015, he was posted as Constable at police station Govind Puri and on that day, he was on emergency duty along with the investigating officer/ASI Om Bir from 08.00 p.m. to 08.00 a.m., when the investigating officer/ASI Om Bir had received a PCR call regarding stabbing at Okhla Service Road, thereafter he along with the investigating officer had gone to the spot i.e. Okhla Service Road Gol Chakkar, where they could not find the injured and came to know that the injured had already been shifted to Trauma Center, AIIMS, thereafter, they had gone to Trauma Center, AIIMS where they had found the injured in unconscious state and was under treatment, and the doctor had declared him 'unfit for statement'. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that the investigating officer had prepared rukka on the DD No.583 and handed over the same to him for registration of the FIR, thereafter, he had gone to the police station and got the present case registered. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that after registration of the case, he FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 20 of 48 had gone to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to the investigating officer.
60. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that they had searched the accused persons but could not find and after sometime, the investigating officer had received secret information regarding whereabouts of the accused persons, thereafter, he along with the investigating officer had gone to Park near Bhoomiheen Camp, Govind Puri.
61. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that the investigating officer had also called beat Ct. Santosh at the park, who had also come there. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that they had found four persons present in the park, and the investigating officer had interrogated them and found one as adult and other juvenile, who had disclosed their involvement in the present case.
62. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that the investigating officer had arrested the accused Rakesh Das vide arrest memo (Ex.PW6/A) and conducted his personal search vide memo (Ex.PW6/B), both bearing his signatures at point A and also recorded his disclosure statement (Ex.PW6/C).
63. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that Juvenile officer from the police station had also come there and enquired and conducted proceedings against the JCL and also prepared apprehension memo (Ex.PW6/D) bearing his signature FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 21 of 48 at point 'A' and other documents of JCL 'S' who was declared and directed to be tried as major.
64. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that upon the search of the accused Rakesh Das, they had recovered the ID card of the complainant and Rs.400/- in the denomination of 100x4 and taken into possession vide seizure memo (Ex.PW6/E) bearing his signature at point 'A'. It is further deposed by PW6 ASI Motilal Meena that the investigating officer had also prepared pointing out memo (Ex.PW6/F) bearing his signature at point 'A' of the place of occurrence, thereafter, they had returned to the police station and the accused persons were kept in the lockup and the case property was deposited in the malkhana.
65. PW6 ASI Motilal Meena has correctly identified both the accused persons in the Court.
66. PW7 SI Abhishek has deposed that on 06.03.2015, he was posted as Sub-Inspector at police station Govind Puri and was looking after the duties of Juvenile Welfare Officer (JWO) and on that day, the accused Sachidanand (correctly identified by the witness) was apprehended by the investigating officer SI Ombir. It is further deposed by PW7 SI Abhishek that since, the accused Sachidanand had claimed his juvenility, therefore, further proceedings in the present case qua him were assigned to him, and he had apprehended Sachidanand.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 22 of 4867. PW8 SI Om Bir Singh has deposed that on 05.03.2015, he was posted as ASI at police station Govind Puri, and on that day, while he was on emergency duty, a call vide DD No.58B (Ex.PWI/A) was received at the police station and the same was marked to him for necessary action, and pursuant to that call, he along with Ct. Moti Lal had reached the place of incident i.e. Golchakkar, Pocket 14, Okhla service road, Govindpuri, and it was revealed that the injured had already been removed to the hospital, accordingly, they both had gone to the Trauma Center, AIIMS and the injured Om Prakash Dubey was found under treatment there.
68. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that he had made an application (Ex.PW8/A) bearing his signature at point A, for seeking permission from the doctor to record the statement of the injured but the injured was declared 'unfit for making statement', and endrosement of the doctor to that effect was at point B to B.
69. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that he had made endrosement on the DD entry (Ex.PW1/A) at point B to B bearing his signatures at point C, and got the present FIR registered through Ct. Moti Lal, and the DD entry (Ex.PW2/C) regarding admission of the injured at the said hospital was made.
70. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that from the hospital, he had returned to the place of incident, and Ct. Moti Lal had also come up there and handed over copy of FIR and Rukka to him.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 23 of 4871. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that after returning from the hospital to the spot, he had inspected the spot and tried to search the eyewitnesses, but could not find any eyewitness and by that time, the injured was 'unfit for statement'.
72. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that at the spot, he had received a secret information that the accused persons involved in the present case were present at Khatta Khajana Park, near Bhoomiheen Camp, Govind Puri, Delhi, therefore, he along with Ct. Moti Lal had reached at the said park, and found four boys present in suspicion condition there inside the park. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that before entering the aforesaid park, he had called the beat officer Ct. Santosh, who had also come and accompanied him, and they all had apprehended all the four boys and inquired them.
73. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that those four boys had revealed their identities as Rakesh Das, Sachidanand, CCL 'R' and CCL 'V', and initially, the accused Sachidanand had told his age as 17 years, therefore, he had called SI Abhishek, Juvenile Welfare Officer, who had reached the spot and conducted proceedings qua the accused Sachidanand, CCL. 'R' and CCL 'V'.
74. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that he had taken cursory search of the accused Rakesh Das and from FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 24 of 48 his wearing pant, currency notes of Rs.400/- and one ID (resume) of victim Om Prakash Dubey son of Paras Dubey was found, and he had seized the same vide seizure memo (Ex.PW6/E) bearing his signature point 'B'.
75. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that the accused persons Rakesh Das, Sachidanand and other CCLs, upon inquiry, had accepted that they had robbed victim Om Prakash Dubey and CCL 'R' gave knife blow to the victim during aforesaid robbery.
76. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that he had recorded disclosure statement (Ex.PW6/C) bearing my signature at point 'B' of the accused Rakesh Das and arrested the accused Rakesh Das vide arrest memo (Ex.PW6/A) bearing his signature at point 'B', and also conducted personal search of the accused Rakesh Das vide memo (Ex.PW6/B) bearing his signature at point 'B'.
77. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during cursory search of CCL 'V', one mobile phone Make Nokia was found in his possession which he had seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW8/B) bearing his signature at point 'A'. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that upon inquiry, CCL 'V' had told that the said mobile was the same which was robbed by him and other co-associates including the accused persons from the FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 25 of 48 victim on 05.03.2015, near drainage of Okhla Service Road, Sector 14.
78. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during their search, currency notes of Rs.450/- were recovered from CCL 'R', currency notes of Rs.550/- were recovered from the accused Sachidanand, currency notes of Rs.450/- were recovered from CCL 'V', which he had seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW6/11) bearing his signature at point 'B'.
79. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that pursuant to his version, CCL 'R' had led them and pointed out, and got a knife recovered lying under a stone near the wall of Khatta Khajana Park, Bhoomiheen Camp, Govind Puri, Delhi, and he had measured the recovered knife and seized it after sealing with his seal of 'OS' vide seizure memo (Ex.PW8/C) bearing his signature at point 'A', and before sealing the knife, he had prepared its sketch map (Ex.PW8/D) bearing his signature at point 'A'.
80. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that at the spot, where the accused persons and CCLs were apprehended, SI Abhishek had prepared apprehension memo of the accused Sachidanand (Ex.PW6/D) bearing the signature of SI Abhishek at point 'B', and SI Abhishek had also recorded version of the accused Sachidanand (Ex.PW8/E) bearing his signature at point 'A'.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 26 of 4881. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that the accused persons had pointed out the place of incident where recovery from Om Prakash Dubey had taken place and he had prepared site-plan (Ex.PW6/F) bearing his signature at point 'B', and during the investigation, the CCL Sachidanand was found adult and accordingly, report was submitted in JJB, Delhi Gate, and the accused Sachidanand was declared adult.
82. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during investigation, after victim Om Prakash Dubey got discharged from the hospital, he had inquired him and recorded his statement (Ex.PW3/A) bearing his signature at point B.
83. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during investigation, he had filed application for judicial TIP of both the accused persons, namely, Rakesh Das and Sachidanand, but they both had refused to participate in the judicial TIP, and he had obtained copy of the proceedings and placed the same on record.
84. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during investigation, he had obtained opinion (Ex.Al) on the MLC of the victim which was opined as 'dangerous', caused by 'sharp object'.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 27 of 4885. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during investigation, he had applied for obtaining opinion regarding use of seized weapon of offence and he had submitted the seized knife along with original MLC of the victim and other relevant documents at Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Trauma Centre, AIIMS Hospital and obtained the subsequent opinion (Ex.A-4) which was placed on record.
86. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that as per the MLC and subsequent opinion on MLC of the injured, he had added sections 394 & 397 IPC in the present case, and during investigation, he had also got conducted judicial TIP of CCL 'R' and CCL 'V' which were successful.
87. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during investigation, he had obtained CAF and CDR of mobile no.7838174880 which was being used by the victim and placed the same on record, and during investigation, he had also recorded statement of the caller of the incident, namely, Sharukh.
88. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during investigation, he had prepared the site-plan (Ex.PW8/F) bearing his signature at point A, of the place where knife was recovered.
89. It is further deposed by PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that after completion of the investigation, he had prepared chargesheet against the accused Rakesh Das and Sachidanand FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 28 of 48 and filed the same in the Court, PW8 SI Om Bir Singh has correctly identified the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand in the Court.
90. PW8 SI Om Bir Singh has further deposed that he could identify the case property, if shown to him.
91. The case properties i.e. knife, mobile phone and the currency amount have already been produced and exhibited in the testimony of PW3/victim and their identity and existence was not disputed by the learned defence counsel, and the resume (Ex.MO-1) was recovered from the accused Rakesh Das.
92. During the prosecution evidence, the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand have admitted MLC (Ex.A1) of victim, TIP proceedings (Ex.A2) of the accused Rakesh Das conducted by Ld. MM, TIP proceedings (Ex.A5) of the accused Sachidanand conducted by Ld.MM, CDR, CAF along with certificate under section 65B (Ex.A3colly.) of the Indian Evidence Act of mobile No.7838174880 and subsequent opinion dated 29.05.2015 (Ex.A4).
93. In the light of the charge framed against the accused persons and the arguments advanced before the court, following are the points for determination:
1. Whether the accused persons, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery along with other FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 29 of 48 persons (CCLs 'V' & 'R') jointly concerned in committing robbery, had voluntarily caused hurt to the complainant Om Prakash Dubey and robbed his mobile phone and cash amount.
2. Whether at the time of committing robbery, the accused persons had used a deadly weapon, or caused grievous hurt to one Om Prakash Dubey.
3. Whether the accused Rakesh Das had dishonestly retained any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property.
4. Whether the accused persons along with the JCLs 'V' & 'R' had acted in concert while committing the above offences.
DISCUSSION ON THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
94. On these points, to prove the commission of robbery of mobile phone and cash by the accused persons, the testimonies of PW1 ASI Yad Ram, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, PW4 Shahrukh, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena and PW8 SI Om Bir are relevant.
95. The information regarding the incident involved in the present case was given to the police station Govind Puri which was recorded in daily diary register vide DD No.58B dated 05.03.2015 police station Govind Puri, New Delhi.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 30 of 4896. The DD No.58B (Ex.PW1/A) has been proved by PW1 ASI Yad Ram, who as per his testimony, was working as DD writer at police station Govind Puri on the relevant date, and at about 08.57 a.m., he had received information that injury had been caused to one person at Pocket-14, Gol Chakkar, Govind Puri and he had reduced such information in writing vide DD No.58B.
97. The DD (Ex.PW1/A), as per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, was assigned to him for necessary action. It is in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that upon receipt of said DD, he along with Ct. Moti Lal had reached the place of incident i.e. Pocket-14, Gol Chakkar, Okhla Service Road, Govind Puri, and it was revealed that the injured had already been removed to hospital, accordingly, they both had gone to the Trauma Center, AIIMS and the injured Om Prakash Dubey found under treatment there.
98. PW2 HC Radhey Shyam has proved the DD No.50A (Ex.PW2/C) regarding receipt of information from the Trauma Center, AIIMS about admission of the injured Om Prakash in the hospital.
99. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that he had made an application (Ex.PW8/A) for seeking permission from the doctor for recording the statement of the injured but he was declared 'unfit for making statement' vide the endorsement of the doctor at point B to B. FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 31 of 48
100. Regarding registration of this case, as per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, he had made endorsement on the DD (Ex.PW1/A) at point B to B and got the present FIR registered through Ct. Moti Lal.
101. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that from the hospital, he had returned to the place of incident, Ct. Moti Lal had also come up there and handed over copy of FIR and rukka to him.
102. PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, who was posted as constable at the police station on the date of incident and had accompanied SI Om Bir Singh to the place of incident, and therefrom to the Trauma Center, AIIMS has duly corroborated the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh regarding taking the rukka to the police station and getting the FIR registered.
103. PW2 HC Radhey Shyam was working as duty officer on the date of incident. PW2 HC Radhey Shyam has duly corroborated the above testimonies of PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena and PW8 SI Om Bir Singh and as per his testimonies, he had registered the FIR (Ex.PW2/A) and he has also proved his endorsement (Ex.PW2/B) and his signature at point 'A' on the rukka.
104. From the testimonies of PW2 HC Radhey Shyam, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena and PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the prosecution has been successful in proving the registration of present FIR. During the cross-examination of prosecution FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 32 of 48 witnesses and in the course of arguments, the registration of present FIR has not been disputed by the defence counsel. No delay in the registration of FIR has been pointed out by the defence.
105. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the accused persons has contended that FIR in the present case has been registered on the basis of DD and not on the basis of statement of the injured, and it is not clear how come the investigating officer got the FIR registered under section 307 IPC.
106. The above contention raised by learned counsel for the accused persons seems to be without any basis. From the evidence discussed hereinabove, it is quite clear that the investigating officer had gone through the Trauma Center, AIIMS, and sought permission from the doctor, the injured was declared 'unfit for statement'. As per the DD No.58B (Ex.PW1/A), the information regarding the incident was recorded vide the said DD wherein it has been recorded that "Pocket-14, Gol Chakkar jhagde main chaku lag gaya". As per DD No.50A (Ex.PW2/C), an information regarding "Om Prakash Dubey S/o Pran Nath Dubey, age 30 years Resident of Okhla Phase-II, jo 3217 se India Company near Himgir Apartment se jhagde main chaku lagne se Mazroob hokar K-62 ne MLC No.477959/15 par daakhil hospital karaya hai. IO bhaija jave" was received from Trauma Center, AIIMS to the police station Govind Puri. As per the testimonies of PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, the injured was in unconscious state. Therefore, keeping in view the condition of FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 33 of 48 the injured and the contents of the DDs (Ex.PW1/A & Ex.PW2/C), the investigating officer had rightly got the present FIR registered under section 307 IPC.
107. For providing the incident, as per the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, in the year 2015, he had been working in Daks India Company and on 05.03.2015, after duty of his company, he was going to Veer Bazar for purchasing some goods. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that when he had reached near Pocket 14, Okhla Gol Chakkar, suddenly four boys had come there and tried to overpower him. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that when he somehow had tried to save himself, one of them, had taken out his knife and stabbed him on his chest.
108. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that after injury of knife, he had fallen down on the road and during the scuffle, said boys had snatched Rs.7500/- from the pocket of his pant and his mobile phone Make Nokia 1600, and those persons had run away from the spot.
109. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that due to knife injury, he was loosing his consciousness, and he had requested some passersby to inform the police, and one of them had informed the police.
110. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that the police had come and taken him to the hospital and in the hospital, he had lost his consciousness and regained it after 20 FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 34 of 48 days. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that after one month of regaining his consciousness, he was able to make statement to the police.
111. The prosecution has also examined the informant PW4 Shahrukh, and as per his testimonies, on the day of incident, when he was going to Okhla Service Road near Gol Chakkar, upon hearing a voice for help, he had gone to the spot and seen that the injured in such condition lying between two TSR and blood was oozing out from his chest. It is also in the evidence of PW4 Shahrukh that he had brought a cloth from auto and tied the chest of the injured and informed the police at number 100. It is also in the evidence of PW4 Shahrukh that after sometime, PCR had come to the spot and taken injured person to the hospital.
112. From the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, the incident happened to him is duly proved. For providing the incident, the testimonies of PW4 Shahrukh are also of much relevance as soon after the incident, he had seen the injured in such condition with blood oozing out from his chest. For establishing the commission of robbery on the injured also, testimonies of PW4 Shahrukh are relevant as the injured had informed him that he had been robbed of his mobile phone and money and was also stabbed.
113. For proving the injuries caused to the person of the injured Om Prakash Dubey and the nature of the injuries, the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey and PW8 ASI Om Bir FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 35 of 48 Singh are relevant. As noted above, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has during his testimonies proved the fact that during the incident, one of the offenders had inflicted knife injury on his chest and due to such injury, he was loosing his consciousness.
114. It is in the evidence of PW8 ASI Om Bir Singh that during the course of investigation, he had obtained opinion (Ex.A1) on MLC of the injured, which was opined as 'dangerous, caused by sharp object'.
115. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that as per the MLC and subsequent opinion on MLC of the injured, he had added sections 394/397 IPC in the present case.
116. It is important to note here that during trial, the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand have made statements under section 294 Cr.P.C., whereby they have admitted the following documents:
(i) MLC (Ex.A1) of victim,
(ii) TIP proceedings (Ex.A2) of the accused Rakesh Das conducted by Ld. MM,
(iii) TIP proceedings (Ex.A5) of the accused Sachidanand conducted by Ld.MM,
(iv) CDR, CAF along with certificate under section 65B (Ex.A3colly.) of the Indian Evidence Act of mobile No.7838174880.
(v) Subsequent opinion dated 29.05.2015 (Ex.A4).
117. As noted above, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has explained about the injury on his person during his testimonies. As per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the investigating officer, in the subsequent opinion on the MLC of FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 36 of 48 the injured Om Prakash Dubey, the injury had already been opined by the doctor as 'dangerous, caused by sharp object'.
118. As per the MLC (Ex.A1), one patient, namely, Om Prakash Dubey was brought to the hospital by the police official Vijay Pal Belt No.7768 with alleged history of "ASSAULT AT OKHLA, WITH INJURY TO THE TO THE ANTERIOR CHEST AND BLEEDING, HE WAS BROUGHT TO JPNATC BY POLICE" and sustained 'INCISED LOOKING WOUND AT 3RD INTER COSTAL SPACE LEFT OF STERNUM 2X1 CM'.
119. As per the MLC (Ex.A1), the nature of injury given in the MLC was 'dangerous'; and the kind of weapon used for inflicting injury on the person of the injured was 'sharp'. As noted above, the MLC (Ex.A1) has been admitted by the accused persons by way of their statements under section 294 Cr.P.C., therefore, the MLC and its contents stand duly proved.
120. It is noteworthy here that nothing material has been brought to my notice from the cross-examination of above prosecution witnesses for suspecting the truth of the version given by either of them and their testimonies have remained consistent to prove the fact of causing dangerous injury on the person of the injured Om Prakash Dubey by a sharp-edged weapon i.e. knife and robbing him of Rs.7500/- in cash and his mobile phone and when the injured had tried to save him, one of the offenders had given stab injury on the chest of the injured. Certain minor contradictions have been pointed out by learned counsel for the accused persons. It is well settled by the Hon'ble FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 37 of 48 Supreme Court in Firoz Khan Akbarkhan v. The State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No.257 of 2013 and Shahja @ Shahajan Ismail Mohd. Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No.739/2017 that minor discrepancies on trivial matters not touching the core of the case would not ordinarily harm the case of the prosecution.
121. Regarding arrest and identification of the accused persons, the testimonies of PW5 HC Santosh Kumar, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, PW7 SI Abhishek and PW8 SI Om Bir Singh are relevant.
122. As per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, from the hospital, he had gone to the spot of incident, inspected the spot and tried to search for the eye-witnesses but could find none.
123. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that at the spot, upon receipt of secret information regarding presence of the accused persons involved in the present case at Khatta Khazana Park near Bhumiheen Camp, Govind Puri, New Delhi, he along with Ct. Moti Lal had reached there, and found four boys in suspected condition. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that before entering the said park, he had also called Ct. Santosh, Beat Officer, who had also come and accompanied him.
124. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that they had apprehended all the four boys, inquired them and FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 38 of 48 they had revealed their identity as Rakesh Das, Sachidanand, CCL 'R' and CCL 'V'.
125. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that initially, the accused Sachidanand had told his age as 17 years, therefore, SI Abhishek, Juvenile Welfare Officer was called, who also reached at the spot.
126. PW8 SI Om Bir Singh has also proved arrest memo (Ex.PW6/A), personal search memo (Ex.PW6/B) and disclosure statement (Ex.PW6/C) of the accused Rakesh Das.
127. PW8 SI Om Bir Singh has also proved the fact that SI Abhishek had prepared apprehension memo (Ex.PW6/D) and version (Ex.PW8/E) of the accused Sachidanand.
128. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during the investigation, the CCL Sachidanand was found adult and accordingly, upon submission of report to that effect, he was declared adult by the J.J.B. Delhi Gate.
129. PW5 HC Santosh Kumar, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena and PW7 SI Abhishek have duly corroborated the above testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh regarding apprehension, arrest, personal search and disclosure statement made by the accused persons.
130. As per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand had disclosed and admitted to have been involved in the commission of offence of FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 39 of 48 robbery on the injured Om Prakash Dubey and that the CCL 'R' had given knife blow to the victim in committing of robbery.
131. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that the accused persons had led them to the place of incident where robbery on the injured Om Prakash Dubey had taken place, and he had compared site-plan (Ex.PW6/F) of the place of occurrence.
132. Regarding recovery of the robbed articles, it is in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during cursory search of CCL 'V', one mobile phone Make Nokia was found in his possession which was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW8/B) bearing his signature at point 'A'. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that upon inquiry, CCL 'V' had told that the said mobile was the same which was robbed by him and other co-associates including the accused persons from the victim on 05.03.2015, near drainage of Okhla Service Road, Sector 14.
133. It is also in the evidence of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh that during their search, currency notes of Rs.450/- were recovered from CCL 'R', currency notes of Rs.550/- were recovered from the accused Sachidanand, currency notes of Rs.450/- were recovered from CCL 'V', which he had seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW6/11) bearing his signature at point 'B'.
134. Regarding recovery of the weapon of offence, as per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, pursuant to his version, CCL 'R' had led them and pointed out, and got a knife recovered FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 40 of 48 lying under a stone near the wall of Khatta Khajana Park, Bhumiheen Camp, Govind Puri, Delhi, and he had measured the recovered knife and seized it after sealing with his seal of 'OS' vide seizure memo (Ex.PW8/C) bearing his signature at point 'A', and before sealing the knife, he had prepared its sketch map (Ex.PW8/D) bearing his signature at point 'A'.
135. PW3 Om Prakash Dubey (the injured) has correctly identified the knife (Ex.P1) during his evidence. Even otherwise, during the examination-in-chief of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the existence and identification of the knife (Ex.P1) is not disputed by the defence.
136. The testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh regarding recovery of cash amount from the accused Rakesh Das have been duly corroborated by PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena.
137. To prove the identity of the accused persons, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey (the injured) has correctly identified both the accused persons in the Court and deposed that the accused Rakesh had caught hold him during the incident and another accused Sachidanand had taken out mobile phone from his pocket. It is also in the evidence of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey that he had identified the juveniles 'R' & 'V' in the Juvenile Court.
138. PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the investigating officer of this case has also correctly identified both the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand in the Court.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 41 of 48139. Even otherwise, the evidence of the injured eye- witness is always of great value. Regarding trustworthiness of the injured eye-witness, it has been held by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Yogender Singh v. State, Criminal Appeal number 265/2001 as follows:
"28. When the evidence of an injured eye-witness is to be appreciated, the under-noted legal principles enunciated by the courts are required to be kept in mind.
(a) The presence of an injured eye-witness at the time and place of the occurrence cannot be doubted unless there are material contradictions in his deposition.
(b) Unless, it is otherwise established by the evidence, it must be believed that an injured witness would not allow the real culprits to escape and falsely implicate the accused.
(c) The evidence of an injured witness is always of great value to the prosecution and it cannot be doubted on account of some embellishment in natural conduct or minor contradictions.
(d) If there be any exaggeration or immaterial embellishments in the evidence of an injured witness, then such contradiction, exaggeration or embellishment should be discarded from the evidence of injured, but not the whole evidence.
(e) The broad substratum of the prosecution version must be taken into consideration and discrepancies which normally creep due to loss of memory with passage of time should be discarded."
140. There is one injured eye-witnesses of the incident, namely, Om Prakash Dubey, who has given his ocular account of this case. The injured eye-witness did not have animus or grudge against the accused persons. The manner of the incident as described by him is corroborated by the MLC which shows the presence of 'INCISED LOOKING WOUND AT 3RD INTER COSTAL SPACE LEFT OF STERNUM 2X1 CM'.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 42 of 48141. Further, the accused persons have not been able to spell out any plausible reason for their false implications. As direct testimonies of injured witness are available to prove the guilt of the accused persons and his testimonies are the biggest guarantee of the truthfulness of the prosecution case as he has suffered injury.
142. PW8 SI Om Bir Singh has correctly identified the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand in the Court for the respective roles he has assigned to them during his testimonies.
143. In the light of the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, PW4 Shahrukh, PW5 HC Santosh, PW6 ASI Moti Lal Meena, PW7 SI Abhishek and PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, identity of the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand to be the persons, who along with the CCLs 'R' & 'V' had committed robbery of mobile phone, cash amount of Rs.7500/- and causing dangerous injury to the injured Om Prakash Dubey is duly established and proved.
144. Now, I proceed to examine, in the light of evidence led on behalf of the prosecution if it would be safe to convict the accused persons for the commission of offence punishable under sections 394/397 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
145. Section 394 IPC provides for punishment for voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery and section 397 IPC provides for punishment for using any deadly weapon at the FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 43 of 48 time of committing robbery, or dacoity, or with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt.
146. Section 394 applies to the cases where during the course of robbery voluntary hurt is caused. For obtaining conviction under this section, the prosecution must prove:
(i) that the accused, or some one jointly concerned with him, committed or attempted to commit robbery;
(ii) that the accused, or such other person, voluntarily caused hurt in doing so.
147. An act would only fall within the mischief of section 397 IPC if at the time of committing a robbery or dacoity the offender-
(i) uses any deadly weapon; or
(ii) causes grievous hurt to any person; or
(iii) attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person.
148. It has been held by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in State of Maharastra v. Vinayak Tukaram Utekar and Another, 1997 Cri.LJ 3988 that knife is a deadly weapon within the ambit of an expression "deadly weapon" as used in section 397 IPC.
149. In the light of testimonies of the injured Om Prakash Dubey, it has been duly proved that during the committing of robbery by the accused persons and two CCLs 'R' & 'V', one of them had inflicted an injury, which has been proved to be dangerous by medical evidence admitted by the accused persons, FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 44 of 48 on the person of the injured. The nature and seriousness of the injury on the person of the injured is also corroborated by the MLC (Ex.A1), a perusal of which reveals that several times it has been noted by the doctor that the patient was not 'fit for statement'. As per the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey (the injured), he regained his consciousness after 20 days of incident and after one month of regaining his consciousness, he was able to make statement to the police. Testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey have been duly corroborated by the testimonies of other witnesses and medical record, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been successful in proving that in committing robbery, the accused persons, Rakesh Das and Sachidanand along with other persons (CCLs 'R' & 'V') jointly concerned in committing such robbery, voluntarily caused hurt (dangerous injury) to the injured Om Prakash Dubey.
150. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Phool Kumar's case (supra) as follows:
"The term 'offender' in s. 397 is confined to the offender who uses any deadly weapon. The use of a deadly weapon by one offender at the time of committing robbery cannot attract s. 397 for the imposition on another offender who had not used any deadly weapon. In that view of-the matter use of the gun by one of the culprits whether he was one of the accused or somebody else could not be and has not been the basis of sentencing the appellant with the aid of s. 397."
151. It is well settled law that section 397 IPC postulates only the individual act of the accused relevant to attract the said section. It inevitably negates the use of the principal of constructive or vicarious liability engrafted in section 34 IPC.
FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 45 of 48152. From the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, although, it has been proved that one of the four offenders, two accused persons, namely, Rakesh Das and Sachidanand (facing trial in this Court in the present case) and two CCLs 'R' & 'V', had inflicted knife injury on the person of the injured during commission of offence of robbery, but it is not clear from his evidence who specifically had inflicted the knife injury. In his evidence, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has assigned specific role to the accused Rakesh to be the person who had caught hold him during the incident and the accused Sachidanand had taken out mobile phone from his pocket. Whereas, PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the investigating officer of this case, has assigned specific roles to the accused persons as per the disclosure statements made by the accused persons and version given by the CCLs 'R' & 'V'. As per the testimonies of PW8 SI Om Bir Singh, the CCL 'R' had given knife blow to the injured during the commission of offence of robbery. Since, only CCL 'R' had used the deadly weapon i.e. knife, therefore, it would not be safe to convict the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand for the offence punishable under section 397 IPC.
153. From the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution which has been discussed herein above, the prosecution has been successful in proving that (i) the accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand and other persons (CCL 'R' & CCL'V') jointly concerned in committing of such robbery had robbed the injured of his mobile phone and cash amount (ii) the accused persons in committing robbery, voluntarily caused dangerous injury to the injured, (iii) the accused persons along with (CCL 'R' & FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 46 of 48 CCL'V') had acted in concert while committing the robbery, and
(iv) when the act of committing robbery was resisted to by the injured, the CCL had used a deadly weapon and caused injury by that weapon to the person of injured.
154. The accused Rakesh Das has also been charged for the offence under section 411 IPC for retaining Rs.400/- and resume of the injured knowingly or having reason to believe the same to be robbed property.
155. During the testimonies of PW3 Om Prakash Dubey, he has nowhere stated that his resume was also robbed of in committing of robbery to the injured. During his examination-in- chief, PW3 Om Prakash Dubey has also failed to identify the currency notes recovered from the accused Rakesh Das as he was not sure that the currency notes were the same which were robbed from him. Therefore, it would not be safe to convict the accused Rakesh Das for the offence punishable under section 411 IPC.
156. The accused persons Rakesh Das and Sachidanand have not tendered any reasonable explanation of their conduct.
157. The accused persons have not led any evidence in their defence.
158. To sum up, in view of above discussion, the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt the charge under section 394/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused Rakesh Das and Sachidanand, so the accused persons FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 47 of 48 Rakesh Das and Sachidanand are hereby convicted for having committed the offences punishable under sections 394/34 IPC. The accused Rakesh Das is acquitted of the offence punishable under sections 397/411 IPC. The accused Sachidanand is acquitted of the offence punishable under section 397 IPC.
159. Let both the convicts be heard on the question of sentence. Digitally signed RAKESH by RAKESH KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2025.09.20 17:06:26 +0530 Pronounced in the Open Court (DR. RAKESH KUMAR) th on 20 September, 2025. Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC)-02, South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi FIR No.300/2015 P.S. Govind Puri State versus Rakesh Das & Ors Page 48 of 48