Delhi District Court
State vs . Surender Mohan Thakur & Anr. on 27 May, 2015
IN THE COURT OF SH AJAY GARG
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate01, New Delhi
State Vs. Surender Mohan Thakur & Anr.
FIR N0. : 434/06
U/Sec. 120 B IPC, 417 r/w. 511 IPC & 471/511 r/w. 467 r/w. 120 IPC
PS : IGI Airport
J U D G M E N T
J U D G M E N T
a) ID No. of the case : 02403R0106692011
b) Date of commission of offence : 25.04.2006
c) Date of institution of the case : 03.02.2011
d) Name of the complainant : Sh. Rameshwar Prasad
e) Name & address of the :(i). Surender Mohan Thakur
accused S/o. Sh. Ganpat Rai
R/o. H. No. 63, Gali no. 3,
Hargovind Colony, Ghas Mandi,
Basti Sheikh, PS Division No. 5,
Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.
(ii) Gurmeet Singh @ Nota
S/o. Sh. Boota Ram
R/o. VIII Raipur Peebakshwala,
PS Bholath, Distt. Kapurthala,
Punjab.
(iii) Rajinder Singh
S/o. Lt. Sh. Nishan Singh
R/o. Village Nikki Miani,
Bhagopuria, PS Begowal,
Distt Kapurthala, Punjab.
(already convicted vide order dt. 03.03.2012).
f) Offence complained off : U/S: 420/468/471/120B IPC.
g) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty and claimed
trial
FIR NO.: 434/06 POLICE STATION: IGI Airport
U/Sec. 120 B IPC, 417 r/w. 511 IPC & 471/511 r/w. 467 r/w. 120 IPC 1 Of 4
h) Arguments heard on : 27.05.2015
i) Final order : Acquitted
j) Date of Judgment : 27.05.2015
Brief statement of reasons for such decision :
1.As per prosecution accused Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh @ Nota being the agents alongwith coaccused Rajinder Singh (already convicted) being the passenger entered into a criminal conspiracy to facilitate the journey of accused Rajinder Singh to Italy on the basis of forged documents i.e CDC of Republic of Liberia. In furtherance of the conspiracy on 25.04.2006 during immigration clearance at IGI Airport it was found that he was having forged CDC of Republic of Liberia arranged by accused persons. On these allegations, present case was registered against the accused persons for the offences punishable U/s. 420, 468, 471 & 120 B IPC.
2. The main chargesheet against accused Rajinder Singh was filed and the matter qua accused Rajinder Singh was disposed vide plea bargaining proceedings held on 03.03.2012. However, thereafter supplementary chargesheet u/s. U/s. 420, 468, 471 & 120 B IPC qua accused namely Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh was filed on 06.10.2012.
A charge for the offences punishable 120 B IPC, 417 r/w. 511 IPC & 471/511 r/w. 467 r/w. 120 IPC was settled against the accused persons namely Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh. However accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
FIR NO.: 434/06 POLICE STATION: IGI Airport U/Sec. 120 B IPC, 417 r/w. 511 IPC & 471/511 r/w. 467 r/w. 120 IPC 2 Of 4
3. Thereafter, prosecution has examined only two witnesses.
(i) Ms. Manjeet Kaur, mother of accused Rajinder Singh was examined as PW1, who pleaded ignorance about the present case and turned hostile and denied the statement Mark X. She also refused to identify the accused persons namely Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh @ Nota, before the Court.
(ii) Sh. Baljeet Singh, relative of accused Rajinder Singh was examined as PW2, who also pleaded ignorance about the present case and turned hostile and denied the statement Mark Y. He also refused to identify the accused persons namely Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh @ Nota, before the Court.
4. Remaining prosecution evidence was closed by the order of the Court as the both material witnesses namely PW01 Ms. Manjeet Kaur and PW2 Baljeet Singh have turned hostile and the remaining witnesses were formal in nature who could have deposed on procedural aspects only.
5. As no incriminating evidence has come on record, statement of accused persons namely Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh @ Nota U/s. 313 Cr. PC were dispensed with.
6. Final arguments on behalf of parties heard. Record perused. Considered.
7. In the instant case the both material witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution i.e. namely Ms. Manjeet Kaur and Baljeet Singh have turned hostile. There is no other incriminating evidence available on record against the accused persons except the disclosure statement of coaccused FIR NO.: 434/06 POLICE STATION: IGI Airport U/Sec. 120 B IPC, 417 r/w. 511 IPC & 471/511 r/w. 467 r/w. 120 IPC 3 Of 4 Rajinder Singh. However, as no recovery pursuant to the disclosure statement has been effected, the same is of no use. Further confession made to police officer is hit by Section 25 & 26 of Indian Evidence Act. Even otherwise the confession of coaccused can be used only in support of other evidence and cannot be made the foundation of a conviction. (Reference Bhuboni Sahu v. R. AIR 1949 PC 257). Reliance can also be placed on the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case titled as Sidharth v. State (2005) 12 SCC 545 wherein it is held that: "Confession of a coaccused can not be the sole basis of conviction of any other accused. But, it can be used in support of and to lend assurance to other independent evidence available against the other accused"
8. In view of the above discussion it is held that, the prosecution has totally failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts against the accused persons namely Surender Mohan Thakur and Gurmeet Singh @ Nota. Hence, they stand acquitted of all the charges levelled against them. Ordered accordingly.
Announced in the open
Court on 27th May 2015 AJAY GARG
ACMM01/New Delhi District
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi
This judgment contains 04 pages and each paper is signed by me.
FIR NO.: 434/06 POLICE STATION: IGI Airport U/Sec. 120 B IPC, 417 r/w. 511 IPC & 471/511 r/w. 467 r/w. 120 IPC 4 Of 4