Delhi District Court
State vs . Ranbir Singh on 18 February, 2008
IN THE COURT OF SH KULDEEP NARAYAN M.M. PHC NEW DELHI
STATE Vs. Ranbir Singh
FIR no.288/96
PS Delhi Cantt.
U/S 186/189/353/341IPC
JUDGMENT
a. Sl. NO. of the case : 886/2
b. Date of commission of
offence : 15.6.1996
c. Date of Institution : 4.6.1998
d. Name of the complainant : P.C.Sehgal.
e. Name of the accused. : Ranvir Singh s/o late Sh.Rajpal r/o
V269, Village Jharera, Delhi.
f. The offence complained of : 186/189/353/341IPC
g. The plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
h. Order reserved on : Not reserved.
i. Final order : Acquitted
j. Date of order : 18.02.2008
Brief facts of the case:
1. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 15/6/96, at about 2.00 pm at Jhareda Village, H.No. T28 accused Ranbir Singh with other co accused who could not be apprehended voluntarily obstructed Laxmi Narain, Mistry with DVB, a public servant in discharge of his public function and further threatened to caused him injury thereby delaying him from exercise of his public function and assaulted him while being equipped with blunt weapon such as grass cutter etc with intended to prevent Laxmi Narain from discharging his duty of attending to complaint in House no. T 28 and thereby committed offence u/s 186/189/353/341IPC. On the basis of said incidence FIR was lodged against accused Ranbir Singh on the same day and investigation was carried out and accused Ranbir Singh was charge sheeted to face trial in the present case.
2. After filing of the charge sheet, the accused Ranbir Singh was summoned, compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C was made and charge U/S 251 Cr.P.C. for offences U/S 186/189/353/341 IPC was given to the accused on 6/5/04 to which he had pleaded not guilty. Thereafter case was fixed for prosecution evidence.
4. Prosecution has failed to examine even a single witnesses despite giving ample opportunities for PE. In the present case the FIR was registered on 15/6/96 u/s 186/189/353/34 IPC against accused Ranbir Singh. Sufficient opportunities have been granted to the prosecution to complete prosecution evidence and reasonable efforts were also allowed to be taken by the IO of the case as well as SHO concerned however, not a single prosecution witness has been examined so far. In absences of the testimony of any prosecution witness nothing incriminating against the accused has come on record hence recording of the statement of accused was dispensed with.
5. As nothing incriminating has come on record, the accused is acquitted of the charges punishable U/s 186/189/353/341 IPC.
6. B/B of accused person is cancelled and suety discharged.
7. File be consigned to Records Pronounced in open court (KULDEEP NARAYAN) Dt. 18.2.08. M.M. PHC NEW DELHI FIR No.288/96 PS Delhi Cantt.
18/2/2008 Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused on bail with counsel Sh. Ajay Singh.
No PW present. It is submitted by the counsel for the accused that no PW has been examined in this case which pertains to the year 1996.
Submissions heard. Record perused.
In the present case the FIR was registered on 15/6/96 u/s 186/189/353/34 IPC after investigation the accused Ranbir Singh was chargesheeted. Thereafter, a charge was framed vide order dated 6/5/04 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claim trial. Thereafter, the matter was fixed for prosecution evidence.
The perusal of the record reveals that sufficient opportunities have been granted to the prosecution to the complete its prosecution evidence and reasonable efforts were also allowed to be taken by the IO as well as SHO concerned however, not a single prosecution witness has been examined so far. Ld. APP for the State requests for giving last and final opportunity to complete the entire prosecution evidence.
In the given circumstances, when already on two occasions last and final opportunities have been granted to the prosecution, I do not deem it fit to give another opportunity to the prosecution. Request of the Ld. APP is hereby declined.
PE stands closed.
Since not a single prosecution witnesses has been examined in the present case there is no incriminating evidence available on record against the accused hence recording of statement of accused is hereby dispensed with.
Vide my separate judgment accused stands acquitted. File be consigned to Records.
(KULDEEP NARAYAN) MM PHC. NEW DELHI