Delhi District Court
State vs 1. Rakesh @ Mukesh on 13 July, 2010
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE1
EAST:KARKARDOOMA:DELHI
SC No. 174/09
FIR No. 503/06
PS Pandav Nagar
U/s 399,402 IPC
Instituted on 3.1.2007
Argued on 13.7.2010
Decided on 13.7.2010
State vs 1. Rakesh @ Mukesh
{Proclaimed Offender (P.O.)}
s/o Shri Jai Kishore
r/o Village Post Diviyapur
District Oraiya(UP)
2. Jugesh Kumar
s/o Shri Revan
R/o Jhuggi No.S82/60
Jagdamba Camp, Sheikh Sarai
Phase1,Delhi.
3. Manish Kumar
s/o Shri Mange Ram
r/o WZ362, 80 Gaj
Harijan Colony, Tilak Nagar, Delhi.
4. Vijender Kumar
s/o Shri Kripa Ram
r/o H.No.138, Khyber Pass Mess
Civil Lines, Delhi.
JUDGMENT
The accused in this case have been charged for commission of the offence u/s 399/402 IPC and 25 Arms Act. Briefly stated, the case of prosecution is that on 30.9.06 inspector Harpal Singh (Pw4) along with Ct.Naresh(Pw1), ct.Harender Singh(Pw8), SI Abhishek(Pw6) and Ct.Amit were on evening patrolling duty. During patrolling at about 7.20pm. when they reached near bus stand Samaspur village NH24, one secret informer met Pw4 who informed that near Noida flyover Yamuna Khadar towards South direction behind the bushes some persons had assembled and were planning to commit dacoity and they were having arms and if raided, they could be apprehended. IO(Pw4) informed SHO who directed them to conduct raid. Pw4 prepared raiding party consisting of aforesaid staff and secret informer and reached at spot. IO asked Ct. Naresh, who was in civil dress to hear the conversation of those persons. Other raiding party staff took their positions while hiding themselves near the place where those persons were sitting. At about 7.40pm, ct.Naresh gave a signal and thereafter raiding party staff conducted raid. They managed to apprehend four boys namely Rakesh @ Mukesh, Jugesh, Manish and Vijender while fifth one succeeded to ran away. One loaded kattta and one live cartridge was recovered from Jugesh, one loaded katta was recovered from Vijender. From pant's pocket of accused Manish, one ustara was recovered and from accused Rakesh one buttondar knife was recovered . On completion of investigation, IO filed challan in the court of ld.Metropolitan Magistrate on 25.11.06 who committed the case to the court of sessions on 23.12.06.Charge u/s 399/402 IPC was served to all the accused. Separate charges under section 25 Arms Act was served against accused Vijender, Jugesh and Rakesh @ Mukesh on 18.7.07. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial. During trial accused Rakesh @ Mukesh was declared proclaimed offender(P.O.) on 22.1.2010. 2 Prosecution in order to prove its case examined nine witnesses . Pw1 HC Naresh. Pw2 ASI Dharam Vir Singh . Pw3 HC Komal Prashad . He recorded FIR Ex.Pw3/A and made endorsement on rukka Ex.Pw3/B. Pw5 ASI Satish Chand. Pw6 SI A.K.Singh. Pw7 ct.Mahesh Chander. Pw8 Ct.Harender. Pw9 Sh.Kannan Jegadesan DCP Crime Against Women Cell Nanakpura, Delhi. Pw4 IO/Inspector Harpal Singh. On conclusion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused pleased innocence and falsely implicated .
3 I have heard submissions advanced by ld. Additional PP for State and ld.defence counsel and have perused the material on record carefully. Ld.APP submits that place of incident is not a public place , therefore public witnesses could not be joined and that fifth person ran away due to darkness. Ld.APP submits that two accused were found in possession of country made pistol and there was no enmity of police with the accused due to which they could be falsely implicated. Ld.defence counsel submits that there are major contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses regarding petrolling area, division of raiding party, time of sending rukka etc.He submits that in the site plan no point was shown from where all the accused persons were apprehended and it is nowhere mentioned in the site plan from where ct.Naresh heard the conversation of accused.
4 Pw1 deposed that they were patrolling the area of theka near liquor shop situated near jheel slip road NH 24. Pw4 IO deposed that they were on evening patrolling duty. He has not specified the area. Pw6 deposed that they patrolled the area of Patparganj, theka desi sharab whereas Pw8 deposed that they patrolled the area of PS Pandav Nagar. Pw8 deposed that secret informer left them from the bus stand Samaspur whereas other deposed that secret informer remained with them till ct.Naresh gave signal to IO for apprehension of accused persons. Pw1 deposed that IO divided the members into four raiding party.
Pw6 deposed that IO divided them into five raiding party whereas Pw8 deposed that two raiding parties were formed by the IO.
Pw1 deposed that all the writing work was done at the spot where the accused persons were apprehended whereas other Pws stated that all the writing work was done near the electric pole at Nizamuddin bridge.Pw1 deposed that ct.Amit and ct.Harender were having dandas and raiding party was formed at bus stand, Samaspur after 34 minutes they left for the place of occurrence. Pw1 deposed that SI Harpal informed the SHO PS Pandav Nagar through his cell phone and distance between bus stand Samaspur and the place of occurrence was half km. He could not tell the position of other police officials besides one.Pw1 deposed that search of accused was taken on the spot but they did not offer their search before taking search of accused persons.
Pw1 deposed that they all came out from Yamuna Khadar at Nizamuddin road at 8pm and writing work was started by SI Harpal at about 8.15/8.30pm. They remained at the spot till around 12.30midnight. Pw1 deposed that rukka was taken at about 9.45pm by him to PS and he came back at the spot at 10.45pm.Pw2 deposed that he reached at spot with ct.Naresh at about 10.45pm and place of occurrence was situated of 50 yards from Noida more. He did not remember the name of crops in the field at that time but the crops were in the field. Other Pws have stated that there was no crops . Pw2 did not specify in the site plan the place from where ct.Naresh heard the conversation of accused persons. He deposed that SI Harpal and ct.Naresh told that place from where ct.Naresh heard the conversation was at distance of 20 steps from accused persons. Pw2 also did not show the place of apprehension of accused persons in site plan. Pw4 deposed that they all were having weapons whereas other Pws stated that they did not know about weapons but two police officials were having dandas. Witnesses could not tell the clothes worn by the accused at the time of arrest and there is discrepancies about the time when the police left the PS. Members of raiding party admitted that they did not offered their search to the accused. Perusal of the aforesaid evidence on record shows that there are several contradictions and discrepancies in the evidence of police officials who were allegedly the members of raiding party. Admittedly,no public witness has been joined . Thus, recovery of country made pistol(katta) seems to be doubtful . The contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses makes them untrustworthy . It will not be safe to convict the accused on the basis of the evidence led by them. Hence accused are entitled to benefit of doubt. Accordingly, accused Jugesh Kumar, Manish Kumar and Vijender Kumar are hereby acquitted from the charges. Case property be confiscated to the state. File be consigned to record room u/s 299 Cr.P.C. as P.O.file.
Announced in the open court (VINAY KUMAR KHANNA)
on 13.7.2010. Additional Sessions Judge
1East/Karkardooma : Delhi