Delhi District Court
State vs Sunny Arora on 1 April, 2026
IN THE COURT OF SHRI DEEPAK WASON
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-04 : SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT
DWARKA COURTS : NEW DELHI
SC No. 440656/2016
CNR No. DLSW01-001762-2015
State Vs. (1) Sunny Arora
S/o Sh. Vijay Arora,
R/o - T-60, Jain colony,
Part-1, Uttam Nagar, ND.
(2) Wasim @ Tiku
S/o Md. Kesar
R/o - B-201, Sec-3, Dwarka
New Delhi.
FIR No. : 487/2015
Police Station : Dwarka North
Under Sections : 365/392/397 IPC
Date of committal to Sessions Court : 11.09.2015
Date on which judgment was reserved : 19.03.2026
Date on which Judgment pronounced : 01.04.2026
Final order : Accused-Sunny Arora is
acquitted for the offences under Section 365/392/397 IPC and accused
Wasim @ Tikku is acquitted for the offences u/s 365/392 IPC.
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:
1. The present case was registered on the complaint made by the complainant Baljinder Singh, wherein he has stated that on 23.06.2015 at about 12:30 Am, he was in his Swift dezire car bearing no. PB12T4803, and was going from Radison blue Dwarka Sector -12 towards Lodhi Road. He further stated that when, he reached at service road cut of Sansad Bihar Sport Cant, Sec-3 Dwarka, he stopped his car for nature call. He further FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 1 of 30 stated that after attending nature call, when he sat in his car, two boys came there, and one of the boys put pistol on his ear and asked him for keys and further asked him to shift on the another seat of his car. He further stated that thereafter, out of fear, he shifted to another seat and the second boy who sat on back seat and asked him "Chilana mat nahi toh goli maar denge" ; He further stated that thereafter, one boy started driving car and stopped the car in a isolated place and also snatched his mobile phone make Samsung white color and threw him out from the car and ran away alongwith his car. He has further stated that on 23.06.2015, he again joined the investigation, along-with police officials and at around 10:00 AM, after receiving information through GPS Location, he found his car in abandoned condition in a vacant plot in front of farm house of MLA Sukhbir Dalal. In his presence, police inspected the car along-with crime branch and took 3 Chance print from car and one from blender pride bottle which was lying in the car. Accordingly, on his complaint, the FIR was registered in the present case. During investigation, his two supplementary statements were recorded, i.e. on 07.07.2015 and another on 30.08.2015.
2. During the inquiry, police officials came to know that there was one GPS on the said car. As per GPS location, it was found that robbed car was moved towards Hirankunda Nangloi. Thereafter, police officials, reached there and found that car was found in a open plot in a lane situated in front of office of MLA Sukhbir Dalal. Four chance prints were also obtained there alongwith one bottle of blender pride. Further investigation was also conducted there. On 04.07.2015, on the information of secret informer, accused Sunny Arora, was arrested and during interrogation, he FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 2 of 30 confessed his crime. Thereafter, Inspector Mukesh Kumar(the then SI), moved an application for TIP proceedings and accused Sunny Arora refused to join the TIP proceedings. During PC remand, on 07.07.2015, complainant Baljinder identified accused Sunny in PP Sec-3 when, complainant came to PP Sec-3, to collect his car on Superdari.
3. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused Sunny Arora before the Ld. concerned MM and the copies of charge sheet were supplied to him in compliance of Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called as Cr.P.C.) and thereafter, matter was committed to the Sessions Court on 11.09.2015 and charge under Section 365/392/397 Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called as IPC) was framed against accused Sunny Arora on 01.10.2015, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution was thereafter given opportunity to prove the accusation against the accused Sunny Arora and in support of its case, prosecution has examined certain witnesses.
5. PW-1 is Ganesh Pandey. As per prosecution, this witness was from OLA Cab regarding, GPS system of car no. DL1YD2204. He has deposed that vehicle no. DL1YD-2204 was subscribed with the OLA Cabs .
He further deposed that Mr. Tanupam Akuli, who was his colleague, a senior manager and an authorized representative gave the information to the IO during investigation about the owner, address, registration certificate of the said car, permit and driving licence of Baljinder, who is the registered FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 3 of 30 owner of the said car. He further deposed that the said information was furnished as Ex.PW-1/A. He further deposed that he had seen the route map of the said car from 10:12 p.m. of 22.06.2015 till 3:00 a.m. of 23.06.2015. He further deposed that the route map showing by arrow of the said car from Sector-13, Dwarka - Dichaun Kalan, Hiran kudna, New Delhi. He further deposed that as per GPS system installed in the said car, the route map of the said car is Ex.PW-1/B. This witness was cross examined by Ld. Counsel for accused.
6. PW-2 is Harish. As per prosecution, he is the witness to whom accused person namely Sunny Arora and Wasim have requested that their swift car be kept in his house. However, this witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and stated that he does know anything about the present case, however, they have a plot in Hiran Kudna which is opened and he cannot tell how his name came in the present case.
7. At the request of Ld. Addl. PP for the State, the witness was cross examined as he was resiling from his statement wherein he denied various suggestions given to him. He denied that on the intervening night of 22/23.06.2015 at about 02:15 AM, accused persons namely Wasim and Sunny Arora came to his house and woke him up and requested him that their swift desire car on which, there was number plate of Punjab had broken, and they requested him to park the car in the vacant plot. He also completely exonerated the accused persons from the present case. This witness was not cross examined by the Ld. counsel for accused-Sunny Arora.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 4 of 308. PW-3 is Baljinder. As per prosecution, he is the complainant/ victim of the present case and his testimony would be considered at later stage.
9. PW-4 is Inspector Gyanender Singh. As per prosecution, he is incharge crime team at fingerprint Bureau and who has deposed that on 23.06.2015, he was posted as Incharge of Crime Team at Finger Print Bureau, PS Kamla Market. He further deposed that on that day, he on the request of IO of the present case reached at village Hiran Kudna alongwith his team, where IO also met him there with his team. He further deposed that the photographer of the crime team took the photographs of the scene of crime from different angles and he inspected the spot alongwith his subordinate namely ASI Raj Kumar and he had prepared the crime team report under his supervision, the crime team report is Ex.PW4/A. This witness was cross examined by Ld. defence counsel of accused Sunny Arora.
10. PW-5 is HC Dharampal. As per prosecution, he was DO and has deposed that in the intervening night of 22/23.06.2015, he was posted as Duty Officer at PS Dwarka North and his duty hours were from 12:00 midnight to 8:00a.m, at about 2:55a.m, he received a rukka from Ct. Neeraj sent by S1 Rattan Singh. He further deposed that on the basis of that rukka he got registered the FIR of the present case by Computer Operator CIPA through W/Ct Monu. He further deposed that the computerized copy of FIR as Ex.PW5/A (OSR). He further deposed that after getting the FIR registered, he handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to Ct.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 5 of 30Neeraj. He further deposed that he also made his endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW5/B, and after registration of FIR, the investigation of the present case was handed over to SI Mukesh as per the direction of the SHO concerned. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused-Sunny Arora.
11. It is a matter of record that another accused Wasim @ Tikku was arrested on 04.05.2016 and during his TIP proceedings, he was correctly identified by the complainant and after completing investigation qua him, a supplementary charge sheet was filed against accused Wasim @ Tiku and vide order dated 24.10.2016, separate charge u/s 395/392 IPC was framed against him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
12. It is a matter of record that thereafter again, PW-1 Ganesh Pandey, examined afresh qua denovo trial of accused Wasim @ Tikku vide examination dated 10.07.2017.
13. It is a matter of record that PW-2 Harish also examined afresh qua denovo trial of accused Wasim @ Tikku vide examination dated 12.01.2017.
14. It is a matter of record that PW-3 Baljinder Singh examined afresh qua denovo trial of accused Wasim @ Tikku vide examination dated 12.01.2017.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 6 of 3015. It is a matter of record that statement of accused Wasim u/s 294 Cr. PC also recorded on 10.07.2017, wherein he admitted certain documents i.e. FIR no. 487/2015 of PS North already Ex. PW-5/A and Crime Scene report is Ex. PW-4/A. Accordingly, PW-4 and PW-5 were not examined again and dropped as witnesses in dennova trial of accused Wasim @ Tikku.
16. It is also a matter of record that vide order dated 15.11.2017, Ld. Addl PP for the State had given a separate statement for dropping ASI Raj Kumar as prosecution witness in view of the report dated 26.08.2015 of Finger Print Bureau.
17. Thereafter, the prosecution examined remaining witnesses:
18. PW-6 is HC Rajiv Kumar. As per prosecution, he was with the IO SI Mukesh Kumar and who has deposed that on 04.07.2015, he was posted at PS Dwarka North as Constable at PP Sector 3 and Secret informer informed to SI Mukesh Kumar at about 10.30pm when he was at PP Sector 3. He further deposed that the secret informer had informed about the car robbers. He further deposed that he accompanied SI Mukesh Kumar, Ct.Govind near Matiala Bus Stand. He further deposed that at that place, secret informer pointed out towards three boys standing there on service road and said that these were the boys who had snatched few days ago, vehicle from Sansad Vihar Apartment. He further deposed that when they gave signal to those boys to stop, those boys started running, two boys ran away from there on motorcycle, he and Ct. Govind were able to FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 7 of 30 apprehend one boy at that place. He further deposed that later on name of that boy was revealed as Sunny Arora. He further deposed that IO interrogated accused Sunny Arora. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora gave disclosure statement as Ex.PW-6/A. He further deposed that IO inquired from accused Sunny Arora about the robbed car. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora led them and pointed out towards white colour Swift Desire car lying in the vacant plot opposite Farm House of MLA Sh. Sukhbir Dalal which was having Punjab number and number he does not recollect, which pointing out memo and seizure memo was prepared, as Ex.PW-6/B. He further deposed that said vehicle was brought to PS. He further deposed that they then searched for the accomplices of accused Sunny Arora but they could not be found. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora was got medically examined. He further deposed that in personal search of accused Sunny Arora, a purse was found and it was found containing papers of some other person. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora was arrested vide memo as Ex.PW-6/C. He further deposed that personal search of accused Sunny Arora was conducted vide memo Ex.PW-6/D. He further deposed that on inquiry accused Sunny Arora had told that the papers found in his personal search were of driver of TATA INDIGO Car which was robbed by them few days ago, accused Sunny Arora had also pointed out the place of incident of robbery of the car vide memo as Ex.PW-6/E. He further deposed that he has seen positives of 4 photographs of Swift Dezire Car no. PB12T4803 from Court record and identified the vehicle which was recovered at the pointing out of the accused Sunny Arora and these photographs are Mark P6/1 to Mark P6/4. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused-Wasim @ FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 8 of 30 Tiku and was cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny Arora.
19. PW-7 ASI Raj Kumar, As per prosecution, he lifted chance print from the spot and has deposed that on 23.06.2015, he was posted in Finger Print Bureau, Kamla Market, New Delhi, he with Inspector Gyanender Singh, ASI Kapil, one photographer and driver, had gone on 23.6.15 to Hiran Kudna village in the vacant plot behind home in the street in front of farm house of Sukhbir Dalal. He further deposed that at aforesaid place there was a Swift Dezire car of white colour having no. 4803 was parked. He further deposed that the scene of crime was examined. He further deposed that one empty bottle of Blenders Pride was there near the car aforesaid. He further deposed that aforesaid car was examined. He further deposed that he had lifted 4 chance prints. He further deposed that one chance print was lifted from aforesaid empty bottle of wine. He further deposed that one chance print was lifted from the left side mirror of the car aforesaid. He further deposed that one chance print was lifted from right side mirror of the car aforesaid. He further deposed that once chance print was lifted from the left side window of the aforesaid car and report in this regard is previously Ex.PW-4/A. He further deposed that the lifted finger prints were taken to the office where he had prepared the report. This witness was cross examined by both Ld. defence counsels at length.
20. PW-8 is Ct. Neeraj. As per prosecution, he took tehrir to PS and has deposed that on 23.06.2015, he was posted in PS Dwarka North. He further deposed that he was in emergency duty with SI Rattan Singh, Call was received in the night time and he accompanied SI Rattan Singh to FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 9 of 30 Sansad Apartment, Sector 3, Dwarka where they met Baljinder Singh, victim. He further deposed that SI Rattan Singh recorded statement of Baljinder Singh. He further deposed that SI Rattan Singh recorded tehrir which he took to PS Dwarka North and gave it to duty officer and case FIR was registered. He further deposed that Tehrir and copy of FIR were given to him by DO which he gave back to IO at spot and at the instance of victim Baljinder, IO prepared site plan. This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsels for accused persons.
21. PW-9 Ct. Govind. As per prosecution, he was on patrolling duty alongwith SI Mukesh. He has deposed that on 04.07.2015, he was on patrolling duty with Ct. Rajeev and SI Mukesh, Incharge PP and at 10.30 or 10.45pm, a secret informer met them on the way and accompanied them to the police post and he told them that car jackers were roaming in the area. He further deposed that Incharge SI Mukesh asked informer to show that place. He further deposed that they all accompanied secret informer near Matiala Bus stand. He further deposed that on service road, three suspects with a motorcycle were found there in suspicious condition. He further deposed that as soon as they called them, two of those three suspects ran away and they were successful in apprehending one of those persons whose name on inquiry revealed as Sunny Arora. He further deposed that accused was inquired there. He further deposed that he was brought towards police post, near police post and again accused was inquired. He further deposed that SI Mukesh took rough notes of what all was told by accused. He further deposed that SI Mukesh recorded disclosure statement of accused Sunny Arora which is previously Ex.PW6/A. He further deposed that accused FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 10 of 30 Sunny Arora was arrested vide memo previously Ex.PW-6/C. He further deposed that personal search of accused Sunny Arora was conducted vide memo previously Ex.PW-6/D. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora was taken to the place of incident. He further deposed that IO prepared site plan there. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora had shown the place where the Sikh driver of the vehicle was thrown out and pointing out memo previously as Ex.PW-6/E was prepared. He further deposed that accused Sunny Arora took them to the route where the vehicle was taken and where the vehicle was parked and shown the plot there which was opposite from the farm house and pointing out memo previously Ex.PW6/B was prepared. He further deposed that they then went to DDU hospital and accused was got medically examined, while returning family members of accused were informed and accused was brought to PS and lodged in lock up. This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny Arora and was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Wasim @ Tiku.
22. PW-10 IO SI Ratan Singh. As per prosecution, he was the first police official, who received a PCR call of the incident. He has deposed that in the intervening night of 22/23.06.2015, he was on emergency duty at PS Dwarka North from 8pm to 8am. He further deposed in the night around l am, he received a PCR call vide DD no.4A dated 23.06.2015 upon which he with Ct. Neeraj had gone to Sanchar Vihar Apartment, Dwarka. He further deposed that he met PCR caller there and he inquired from him and he told that he was native of Punjab. He further deposed that he recorded the statement of said person as Ex.PW-3/A. He further deposed that he scribed FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 11 of 30 tehrir as Ex.PW-10/A and gave it to Ct. Neeraj for getting FIR registered at PS through duty officer and further investigation to be handed over to some other officer. This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny Arora and was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Wasim @ Tiku.
23. PW-11 HC Rajender Prasad. As per prosecution, he was along SI Vinay Kumar when crime branch official produced accused Wasim @ Tikku before the court. He has deposed that on 04.05.2016, he joined investigation of this case with SI Vinay Kumar and they came to the court. Crime Branch officials had produced the accused Wasim @ Tikku before the court in muffled face. He further deposed that IO made application for permission to interrogate the accused. He further deposed that IO had interrogated the accused and arrested him vide memo as Ex. PW-11/A . He further deposed that IO had recorded disclosure statement of the accused vide memo as Ex. PW-11/B and IO moved TIP of the accused as the TIP was fixed on 07.05.2016. He further deposed that thereafter, the accused was sent to judicial custody. He further deposed that IO had recorded his statement. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused persons.
24. PW-12 ASI Virender. As per prosecution, at relevant time, he was in crime branch and during the arrest of accused Wasim, he was also there. He has deposed that on 28.04.2016, he along with ASI Yudhvir, HC Kuldeep, HC Ravinder, HC Hanuman and Ct. Sandeep Nahra left their office on the basis of secret information which was received to HC Kuldeep FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 12 of 30 about accused Wasim. He further deposed that they left office vide DD No. 8 as Mark A and at about 4:30 pm when they reached Dwarka Court main gate, HC Kuldeep met with secret informer who told that accused Wasim will come near Rajkiya Pratibha Vikas Vidhalaya Road, Dwarka Sector 11, near bus stand in between 5:30-6:00 pm and if raid took place he would be apprehended. He further deposed that they reached to the abovesaid spot i.e. at Rajkiya Pratibha Vikas Vidhalaya Road Dwarka Sector 11, near bus stand, where HC Kuldeep had requested 4-5 public persons / passersby to join the raiding party but none joined the raiding party and went away without disclosing their names and identity. He further deposed that at about 6:00 pm, secret informer pointed out towards accused Wasim who was coming by foot and they apprehended the said person whose name was revealed as Wasim, HC Kuldeep arrested the accused vide memo Mark B. He further deposed that personal search of accused Wasim was conducted vide memo Mark C. He further deposed that thereafter, accused was brought to the court in muffled face on the next day and sent him to judicial custody. This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Wasim and not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny.
25. PW-13 is ASI Kuldeep. As per prosecution, at relevant time, he was also in crime branch and during the arrest of accused Wasim, he was also there and deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-12 ASI Virender. This witness was not cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny and cross examined by accused Wasim.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 13 of 3026. PW-14 is Inspector Mukesh Kumar. As per prosecution, he is Investigation Officer of the case and who has deposed that on 23.06.2015, at about 02:30 AM, investigation of FIR no. 487/15 was entrusted to him after registration of FIR. He has further deposed that he visited the spot alongwith Ct. Govind, other staff was also present at the spot in front of i.e. Sansad Vihar, Sec-3, Dwarka, where complainant Baljinder Singh was also present. He further deposed that on his pointing out, he prepared site plan, as Ex. PW-3/B. He further deposed that in the site plan as Ex. PW-3/B Mark X is shown from where the complainant was kidnapped and Mark Y is shown from where complainant was thrown and accused persons took away his swift desire car no. PB12T4803. He further deposed that during inquiry with complainant Baljinder Singh, they revealed that in this car, he used GPS of Ola cab no. DL1YD2204. He further deposed that he contacted ola to provide the GPS location of said number. He further deposed that as per GPS location, it was found that robbed car was moved towards Hirankudna, Nangloi. He further deposed that he alongwith complainant and staff SI Ratan Singh, HC Bijender and other staff reached at Hirankudna Village where robbed above car was found parked in a open plot in a lane situated in front of office of MLA Sukhbir Dalal. He further deposed that he called FSL at the spot who inspected and photographed the above said car. He further deposed that FSL team lifted 4 chance prints and handed over to him alongwith one bottle of blender pride and above said car alongwith their fingerprint expert report as Ex. PW-4/A. He further deposed that he prepared the site plan of recovery of car same as Ex. PW-14/A, the car no. PB12T4803 seized vide memo as Ex. PW-14/B. He further deposed that the bottle of blender pride which was recovered from the above said car FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 14 of 30 seized vide seizure memo as Ex. PW-14/C. He further deposed that he brought the above said car to PS with the help of crane. He further deposed that he made search of accused persons, however, no clue was found of the accused persons. He further deposed that on 04.07.2015, he alongwith Ct. Rajiv and Ct. Govind were in area patrolling at about 10:15 PM, informer informed them that three suspected accused person of above robbery case were present at Matiala bus stop. He further deposed that they reached at the spot and apprehended one suspect but other two were escaped over motorcycle. He further deposed that they apprehended suspect Sunny Arora at the instance of secret informer. He further deposed that during interrogation, accused Sunny Arora confessed to commit the robbery of present case alongwith his associates Wasim @ Tiku and Goggy. He further deposed that thereafter, accused Sunny arora arrested vide arrest memo as Ex. PW-6/C. He further deposed that personal search of accused conducted vide memo as already Ex. PW-6/D. He further deposed that during personal search one Mohd Arshad and one pursue black color containing Rs. 30/- were recovered. He further deposed that he recorded disclosure statement of accused sunny, as Ex. PW-6/A. He further deposed that thereafter, he prepared pointing out memo of the spot from where they had kidnapped and robbed the complainant, as Ex. PW-6/E. He further deposed that thereafter, he prepared pointing out memo at the instance of accused Sunny, from where car was parked by the accused persons as Ex. PW-6/B. He further deposed that thereafter, accused was produced before the court and he moved an application for TIP proceedings as Ex.PW-14/C on which accused refused to join the TIP proceedings. He further deposed that thereafter, he obtained three days PC remand to the accused. He FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 15 of 30 further deposed that during PC remand on 07.07.2015, complainant Baljinder identified accused Sunny in PP Sec-3, when complainant came at PP Sec-3 to collect his car on Superdari. He further deposed that thereafter, he tried to search the accused person Wasim and Goggy, however, they could not be traced out and thereafter, he moved an application for NBW against the accused Wasim as Ex. PW-14/D. He further deposed that proceedings u/s 82 Cr. PC, against accused Wasim @ Tiku was obtained from court on 30.09.2015. He further deposed that during investigation, he served notice u/s 91 Cr. PC to the Director Ola Cab as Ex. PW-14/E and collected details of vehicle no. DL1 YD 2204 and GPS Location of 22/23.06.2015 and placed with the file. He further deposed that he also recorded the statement u/s 161 Cr. PC of witnesses. He further deposed that after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet of the case against accused Sunny Arora. He further deposed that thereafter, he was transferred from PS DWK (N) and investigation of the present case was marked to other IO. This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsels for accused persons.
27. PW-15 is Inspector Vinay Kumar. As per prosecution, he was IO qua accused Wasim @ Tikku and who has deposed that on 28.04.2016, DD no. 53 B as Ex. PW-15/A was lodged in PS Dwaka North regarding arrest of accused Wasim @ Tikku was received, who was wanted in case FIR no. 487/15 and FIR No. 517/16, and accused Wasim@ Tikku would be produced before L.d. CMM, Dwarka. He further deposed that on the basis of DD no. 53 B, he reached in the Court of Ld. CMM, Dwarka, however, accused Wasim @ Tikku was already sent to JC in case FIR no.517/2016, FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 16 of 30 therefore, he moved an application for production warrants. He further deposed that on 04.05.2016, accused Wasim @Tikku was produced in the Court of Ld. CMM and he moved an application for interrogation and formal arrest of the accused Wasim @ Tikku, as Ex. PW-15/B, and after taking permission from the Court, accused Wasim @Tikku was arrested vide memo as Ex. PW-11/A, thereafter, he recorded his disclosure statement, as Ex. PW-11/B. He further deposed that thereafter, he moved an application for the TIP of accused Wasim Tikku, as Ex. PW-15/C. He further deposed that during the TIP proceedings, complainant correctly identified accused Wasim Tikku and the TIP proceedings is Ex. PW-15/D. He further deposed that thereafter, he moved an application for obtaining the copy of TIP proceedings, as Ex. PW-15/E. He further deposed that on 16.05.2016, he moved an application for 01 day PC remand of accused Wasim @ Tikku, as Ex. PW-15/F. He further deposed that during PC remand, accused Wasim @ Tikku pointed out the place from where they parked the robbed car, as Ex. PW-15/G. He further deposed that thereafter, he prepared pointing out memo of the spot as Ex. PW-15/H. He further deposed that after PC remand, accused Wasim @Tikku was sent to JC. He further deposed that after preparing the charge sheet, he filed the same before the Court, as Ex. PW-15/1. This witness was cross examined by accused Wasim @ Tikku and not by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny Arora.
28. It is a matter of record that on 12.02.2026, additional joint statement of both accused was recorded u/s 294 Cr. PC wherein, they admitted certain documents i.e. DD no. 4A dated 23.06.15 as Ex. A-1, DD no. 3 dated 23.06.2015 is Ex. A-2, DD No. 79 B dated 04.07.2015 is Ex.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 17 of 30A-3, Chance print report dated 26.08.2015 is Ex. A-4, DD no. 4 B dated 05.07.2015 is Ex. A-5, Event details of (all fields) of vehicle no. DL1YD2240 is Ex. A-6, Superdarinama dated 07.7.2015 is Ex. A-7, Panchnama dated 07.07.2015 is Ex. A-8 and accordingly, one witness was dropped from the list of witnesses.
29. Thereafter, after completion of evidence, prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 23.09.2025. Thereafter, statement of both accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded wherein they stated that they do not want to lead defence evidence. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned for final arguments.
30. I have heard the arguments advanced by Sh. Brijesh Kumar, Ld. Addl PP for the State and Ld. Counsels for both the accused and have perused the record.
31. Accused Sunny Arora is facing trial for the offences u/s 365/392/397 IPC and accused Wasim @ Tiku is facing trial for the offences u/s 365/392 IPC. In order to prove the offense U/s 365/392/397 IPC against accused persons, the prosecution was required to prove beyond reasonable doubt that on 23.06.2015 at about 12:30 AM near Sansad Vihar, Sec-3, Dwarka, accused Sunny Arora alongwith co-accused Wasim @ Tikku abducted complainant Baljinder Singh and subsequently robbed his swift dezire car bearing registration no. PB12T-4803 and his white color mobile phone, make samsung Galaxy having connection no. 8130449603 on the point of pistol and the said pistol was used by the accused Sunny Arora.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 18 of 30Henceforth, court shall now proceed further to evaluate the evidence available on record to find out if the prosecution has succeeded in its task or not.
32. It is a settled law that as a general rule the court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness provided, he is wholly reliable. There is no legal impediment in convicting a person on the sole testimony of a single witness. But if there are doubts about the testimony, the court will insist on corroboration. It is a sound and well-established rule of law that the court is concerned with the quality and not with the quantity of the evidence necessary for proving or disproving a fact. Generally speaking, oral testimony in this context may be classified into three categories, namely:
i) Wholly reliable.
ii) Wholly unreliable.
iii) Neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable.
33. In the first category of proof, the court should have no difficulty in coming to its conclusion either way - it may convict or may acquit on the testimony of a single witness, if it is found to be above reproach or suspicion of interestedness, incompetence or subornation. In the second category, the court equally has no difficulty in coming to its conclusion. It is in the third category of cases, that the court has to be circumspect and has to look for corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct or circumstantial.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 19 of 3034. In Jagdish Prasad v. State of M.P. (AIR 1994 SC 1251). The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that as a general rule the court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness provided, he is wholly reliable. There is no legal impediment in convicting a person on the sole testimony of a single witness. That is the logic of Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short 'the Evidence Act'). But if there are doubts about the testimony the courts will insist on corroboration. It is for the court to act upon the testimony of witnesses. It is not the number, the quantity, but the quality that is material. The time-honored principle is that evidence has to be weighed and not counted. On this principle stands the edifice of Section 134 of the Evidence Act. The test is whether the evidence has a ring of truth, is cogent, credible and trustworthy, or otherwise.
35. Law of Evidence does not require any particular number of witnesses to prove a relevant fact. In the case of Joseph Vs. State of Kerala [AIR 2003 SC 507(510)], Hon'ble Apex Court held: -
"...................Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that no particular number of witnesses in any case be required for the proof of any fact and, therefore, it is permissible for a court to record and sustain a conviction on the evidence of a solitary eye- witness. But, at the same time, such a course can be adopted only if the evidence tendered by such witness is cogent, reliable and in tune with probabilities and inspires implicit confidence. By this standard, when prosecution case rests mainly on the sole testimony of an eye-witness, it should be wholly reliable."FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 20 of 30
36. Accordingly, the testimony of the complainant / victim namely Sh. Baljinder is crucial / material one as he is the victim / complainant in the present case and only eye witness of the present case. Complainant Baljinder was examined as PW-3, who deposed that he brought the car i.e. case property Ex. P1. He deposed that on 19.06.2015, he had come to Delhi from his native village. He further deposed that on 22.06.2015, again said on 23.06.2015, he came to Dwarka to drop passenger near Sector-10, Dwarka in his Swift Dzire car bearing registration no. PB12T-4803, thereafter, he went to Hotel Raddisson Blue to have dinner alongwith his friend who was a driver and working for Hotel Radisson Blue. He further deposed that after taking dinner, he proceeded towards Airport, Delhi in his car, at about 12:30 a.m., he reached near Sector-3, Dwarka and waited there for about 15 minutes for Ola booking but there was no response of booking. He further deposed that thereafter, he switched off the device, which was provided to him by the Ola Cab and got down from the car to answer the call of nature (for urinating). He further deposed that after urinating when he sat in his car, two boys came there and one of them put pistol on his temple and specifically deposed that the accused who had put pistol on his temple is accused Sunny Arora (correctly identified him in the court). He further deposed that the person who had put pistol on his temple asked him to move to the seat of the car and took him on the pistol point by putting pistol on his back and the other boy came and sat on the driver seat of the car. He further deposed that the other accused extorted that "agar chilaya toh goli maar dunga" and he sat quietly. He further deposed that the boy who was sitting on the driver seat drove car in a high speed and when car reached in a gali behind Vardhman Market, on seeing the isolated road, they FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 21 of 30 tried to drop him there but on seeing one motorcycle, the boy sitting on the driver seat dragged him inside the car and the accused again extorted that "agar chillaya toh goli maar dunga". He further deposed that the moment the said motorcycle passed from there, they pushed him outside the car and asked him if he had any purse and he said that the same was lying in the diggy of the car, however, the documents of the car and one mobile phone make Samsung and one device provided by the Ola Cabs had already been picked up by the accused persons which were lying in the dash board, thereafter, they took away his car. He further deposed that thereafter, he ran on bare foot towards market and took phone from an old aged person who was present in the market and called to his brother and thereafter at 100 number. He further deposed that thereafter, PCR came there and he was enquired as to what had happened with him. He further deposed that thereafter, they took him to the police post, Sector-3. He further deposed that in Police Post there was one lady Probationary IPS Officer made enquiries from him and he narrated all the facts. He further deposed that he told that there was GPS system in his car. He further deposed that in the police post, Sector-3, Dwarka statement was recorded by SI Mukesh. He further deposed that his statement is Ex. PW-3/A. He further deposed that in the meantime, his brother Lakhbir Singh also arrived at Police Post, Sector-3. Dwarka. He further deposed that he told his brother that there was GPS system installed in his car and Police official told his brother to follow the route as per GPS track.
37. He further deposed that thereafter, he told the Lady IPS about the location of his car and then she directed the police staff to follow the FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 22 of 30 location of said car and accordingly, police officials proceeded further and thereafter, he was taken to the police station by the police officials.
38. He further deposed that on the next day, police officials and his brother brought his car in the police station by towing and he paid the expenses of towing. He further deposed that his mobile phone, key of the car and documents were not found in the car, however, the purse was in his pocket and he misled the accused persons that the purse was lying in the diggy of car. This witness was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State regarding some point and he clarified those things in his cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. This witness was cross examined by Ld. counsel for accused-Sunny Arora at length.
39. It is a matter of record that this witness was again examined in the dennova trial of accused Wasim @ Tikku in which he deposed that apart from his earlier statement made on 22.01.2016, today i.e. on 12.01.2017, he is not able to identify the accused Wasim @ Tiku and thereafter, at the request of Ld. Addl. PP for the State, the witness was cross examined as he was resiling from his previous statement wherein he denied various suggestions given to him. He also completely exonerated the accused Wasim @ Tikku from the present case. This witness was not cross examined by the Ld. counsel for accused-Wasim @ Tiku.
40. Prosecution has examined 15 witnesses to prove its case. The complainant PW-3 Baljinder Singh, who is the star witness of the prosecution, narrated the incident but failed to identify accused Wasim @ FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 23 of 30 Tikku during trial and he totally exonerated accused Wasim @ Tikku. Hence, there is no evidence before this court qua accused Wasim @ Tikku. Though, he identified accused Sunny Arora in the court.
41. It is to be kept in mind that in cases, where FIR is lodged against unknown person, material collected during the investigation plays an important role to determine whether there is a credible case against the accused. In such type of cases, the court has to meticulously examine the evidence regarding, how the investigating agency derived clue about the involvement of the accused in the crime and in the manner in which the accused was arrested and the manner in which the accused was identified. Apart from above, discovery /recovery of any looted articles on the disclosure made by the accused from his possession are also material facts.
42. In the instant case, neither the accused persons were named nor they were known either to the complainant. The date of incident in the present case i.e. in the intervening night of 23.06.2015 i.e. around 12:50 AM. As per prosecution case, search of accused persons were made, however, no clue was found but on 04.07.2015, i.e. around after 11 days, PW-14 Inspector Mukesh Kumar, the then SI, on the information of informer apprehended the accused Sunny Arora, who disclosed his involvement in this present case.
43. During personal search one DL of Md. Arshad and one purse black color containing Rs. 30/- were recovered, and nothing related to present case was recovered from the accused-Sunny Arora. IO Inspector FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 24 of 30 Mukesh Kumar moved an application for TIP proceedings which was refused by accused Sunny Arora on the ground that he was shown to the witnesses.
44. Further, as per prosecution, when accused was in PC remand, on 07.07.2015, complainant Baljinder, identified accused Sunny in PP sec-3 i.e. after 14 days of incident when he came to PP Sec-3, Dwarka, to collect his car. At this stage, it would be relevant to say that the incident took on the intervening night of 23.06.2025 i.e. at around 12:50 PM, and even after 14 days, complainant was able to identify the accused in the PP sec-3, Dwarka during PC remand of accused. On 07.07.2015, the supplementary statement of complainant was recorded wherein, he stated that the accused Sunny Arora was the person, who was sitting on the back side of the car and was using pistol on his back. Again his supplementary statement was recorded on 30.08.2015, and he explained his further statement. It is a matter of record that why he has not explained all the facts when his supplementary statement was recorded on 07.07.2015, better reasons known to the IO.
45. Admittedly, there is no recovery from the present accused. The identification of accused Sunny Arora at the police post is a weak piece of evidence. Again this witness identified the accused Sunny Arora before the court on 22.01.2016 during his examination as PW-3 i.e. around 6 months after the incident. This witness was cross examined at length by Ld. counsel for accused Sunny Arora, wherein, he stated that he was called by the police to reach Police post and from there, he was sent to AATS offices and where, FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 25 of 30 accused Sunny Arora shown to him. However, as per record, no AATS officers are involved in the investigation of the present case. This also creates doubt in the story of the prosecution. This witness has further stated in his cross examination that accused Sunny Arora confessed before him that he had robbed his car on 23.06.2015 and he does not know if statement of accused Sunny Arora was recorded by AATS. He further stated in his cross examination that his statement was recorded by the police on the day, when he identified the accused Sunny Arora. It is clear from the record that disclosure statement/confession statement of accused Sunny Arora does not find mention the signature of the complainant. When accused Sunny Arora made disclosure statement, in the presence of complainant, why his signatures were not obtained on disclosure statement. Further, as per complainant, his statement was not recorded by the police on the day, when he identified the accused.
46. As per cross examination of PW-14, complainant identified accused Sunny Arora on 07.07.2015, during PC remand and it is clear from the record that in this regard, his supplementary statement was recorded on the same day i.e. 07.07.2015, which is contrary to the statement given by PW-3 i.e. his statement was not recorded by the police on the day, when he identified the accused.
47. Further, there is no whisper by the IO of this case i.e. PW-14 regarding joining of any AATS official during the investigation. None of the AATS officials have been cited as a witness in the present case. PW-3 has specifically deposed about the involvement of AATS officials.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 26 of 3048. Further as per prosecution story, the another accused i.e. Wasim @ Tikku was correctly identified by PW-3 during TIP proceedings but in the court, PW-3 did not identify accused Wasim @ Tikku and he was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, and did not say a single word qua accused Wasim @ Tikku. As per prosecution story, accused Wasim @ Tikku was with accused Sunny Arora but PW-3 did not say a single word qua accused Wasim @ Tikku.
49. Admittedly, this is a case of night incident and normally, where the accused persons are unknown and are not named in the FIR, the court should proceed cautiously with other evidence. The above said circumstances are creating doubt regarding identity of accused Sunny Arora and testimony of PW-3 does not inspire confidence regarding identity of accused Sunny Arora.
50. It is an admitted case of the prosecution that on the next day of incident, car was found in a vacant land. As per prosecution, one witness Harish was examined during investigation, and as per his statement given u/s 161 Cr. PC, he stated that both accused have parked the vehicle in his vacant plot. However, when he was examined in the court as PW-2, he did not support the case of the prosecution and denied all the suggestions.
51. At this stage, it would be relevant to go through the testimony of HC Rajeev Kumar who was examined as PW-6. The testimony of this witness reveals that accused Sunny Arora led them and pointed out towards white colour Swift Desire car lying in the vacant plot opposite Farm House FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 27 of 30 of MLA Sh. Sukhbir Dalal which was having Punjab number. He has further stated that said vehicle was brought to PS. He has further stated that in personal search of accused Sunny Arora, a purse was found and it was found containing papers of some other person. He has further stated that personal search of accused Sunny Arora was conducted and on inquiry accused Sunny Arora had told that the papers found in his personal search were of driver of TATA INDIGO Car which was robbed by them few days ago.
52. It is a quite surprising fact that vehicle was already recovered on the next day of incident then how accused Sunny Arora led police party and pointed out towards white color swift desire car, lying in vacant plot and the said vehicle was brought to PS. Further, as per PW-6, in personal search of accused Sunny Arora some papers were of driver of TATA INDIGO Car which was robbed by them, few days ago. However, no such papers are on record. It also create doubt in the story of prosecution.
53. In the present case, chance prints were also lifted from the car. As per PW-7 car in question was examined. Further, PW-7 had lifted 4 chance prints, one chance print was lifted from empty bottle of wine, one chance print was lifted from the left side mirror of the car aforesaid, one chance print was lifted from right side mirror of the car aforesaid and one chance print was lifted from the left side window of the aforesaid car and report in this regard is Ex. A-4 dated 26.08.2015.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 28 of 3054. The perusal of Ex. A-4 shows that chance prints mark Q1 and Q4 are not identical with fingerprints of person mentioned at part I C i.e. accused Sunny Arora. The report further reveals that prints mark Q1 and Q3 do not disclose sufficient number and they are unfit for comparison. Hence, chance prints are not matching with accused Sunny Arora. The testimony of PW-7 shows that the chance prints were lifted on the same day and there was no delay. Hence, it also creates doubt about the involvement of accused Sunny Arora in the present case. As far as other accused Wasim @ Tiku is concerned, as stated above, PW-3 complainant has not identified him before the court.
55. Hence, the prosecution story suffers from material contradictions, lack of independent corroboration, absence of reliable identification, and failure to recover incriminating articles. The cumulative effect of these deficiencies creates a serious doubt regarding the prosecution version.
56. At this stage, it would be relevant to go through the judgment, titled as 'Allrakha K. Mansuri Vs. State of Gujrat' 2002 (1) CR (Cr.P.C) 748 (c), wherein it is held that the golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal case is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to innocence, the view favorable to accused should be adopted. The paramount consideration of the Court should be to avoid miscarriage of justice.
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 29 of 3057. It is a settled principle of criminal law that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and if two views are possible, the one favourable to the accused must be adopted.
58. In the light of the above said discussion and appreciation of evidence, the Court is of the view that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the both accused beyond reasonable doubts, hence, benefit of doubt is given to both accused and accordingly, the accused- Sunny Arora is acquitted for the offences under Section 365/392/397 IPC and accused Wasim @ Tikku is acquitted for the offences u/s 365/392 IPC.
59. Both accused are directed to furnish bail bonds in terms of Section 437A Cr.P.C in the sum of Rs.15,000/-each. Both accused persons have furnished bail bonds in terms of Section 437A Cr.P.C, same are accepted and shall remain in force for six months from today.
60. File be consigned to Record room, after necessary compliance.
DEEPAK Digitally signed by DEEPAK
WASON
Announced in open Court today
WASON Date: 2026.04.01 14:05:57 +0530
on 01.04.2026 (Deepak Wason)
Additional Sessions Judge-04
South-West, Dwarka Courts/ New Delhi
FIR No. 487/15 State Vs Sunny Arora & ANR Page 30 of 30