Delhi District Court
Sc No.40/14 State vs Satdev @Dev Page 1/2 on 30 May, 2015
IN THE COURT OF ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE : SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
WEST DISTRICT : TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI
PRESIDED BY : MR. RAKESH KUMARI
IN THE MATTER OF
SESSIONS CASE NO.40/14
FIR NO.368/14
P.S. RANJIT NAGAR
U/S 392/397 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
SATDEV @DEV,
S/O MR. DAMODAR,
R/O A580, KATHPUTLI COLONY,
RANJIT NAGAR, DELHI.
ORDER ON SENTENCE
1. Vide separate judgement announced today, accused Satdev
@Dev has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 392
IPC in this case FIR No.369/14 Police Station Ranjit Nagar.
2. The record has been carefully and thoroughly perused.
Submissions of learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State and learned
amicus curiae for convict have been heard on the point of sentence. The
respective submissions of either side have been considered.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State has prayed for
deterrent punishment, however, learned amicus curaie for convict has
prayed for lenient view.
4. Learned counsel for convicts has submitted that convict
Satdev @Dev is twenty six years old young boy. He is illiterate. He is
SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 1/2
unmarried. He has to look after his widower father, three younger brothers.
He is having one married elder sister. He used to earn his livelihood by
doing the work of ear cleaning. He is not a previous convict. He is in
custody since 03.07.2014.
5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case,
young age of the convict, the lenient view is taken. Convict Satdev @Dev is
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eleven months for the
offence punishable under section 392 IPC and fine in sum of Rs.1,000/ is
also imposed and in default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple
imprisonment for one week.
6. Fine not paid by the convict. Benefit of section 428 Cr.P.C. is
also given to the convict. Copy of judgement / order on sentence be
supplied to the convict free of cost.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
ON : 30th MAY, 2015 (RAKESH KUMARI)
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
(WEST) DELHI / TIS HAZARI COURTS
SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 2/2
IN THE COURT OF ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE : SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
WEST DISTRICT : TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI
PRESIDED BY : MR. RAKESH KUMARI
IN THE MATTER OF
SESSIONS CASE NO.40/14
FIR NO.368/14
P.S. RANJIT NAGAR
U/S 392/397 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
SATDEV @DEV,
S/O MR. DAMODAR,
R/O A580, KATHPUTLI COLONY,
RANJIT NAGAR, DELHI.
.....ACCUSED
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 29.10.2014
DATE OF RESERVING THE ORDER : 30.05.2015
DATE OF DECISION : 30.05.2015
J U D G M E N T
CASE OF PROSECUTION
1. Briefly stating as per the case of prosecution on 23.06.2014 at about 12:30 AM while going towards Kathputli Colony, through wrong side of Shadi Pur Flyover, Ranjit Nagar, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station Ranjit Nagar, accused Satdev @Dev robbed the PW2 Mr. Abhishek Mishra of his mobile phone and black wallet(Ex.P1) containing RS.270/, photocopy of election Icard, card of More Mega Store and two coloured photographs of PW2 and at the time of committed the robbery, the accused also showed the screw driver (Ex.P2) to PW2.
SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 3/2CHARGE
2. Accused Satdev @Dev is facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 392/397 IPC. The charge was framed vide order dated 16.04.2015.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
3. Prosecution in all examined the following four witnesses : PW1 Assistant SubInspector Ram Singh, the duty officer has proved the copy of the FIR is Ex.PW1/A, the endorsement on rukka Ex.PW1/B;
PW2 Mr. Abhishek Mihsra, the complainant;
PW3 Head Constable Mahender Singh has accompanied the IO in
all proceedings;
PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh, the investigating officer of the
case has proved various documents prepared during the course of investigation;
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
4. Statements of accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. has been recorded wherein the accused has denied the case of prosecution and stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case; nothing was recovered from his possession or at his instance.
FINDINGS & ANALYSIS
5. The record has been carefully and thoroughly perused. Submissions of learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State and learned amicus curiae for the accused have been heard. The respective submissions of either side have been considered.
SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 4/26. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State has submitted that the prosecution has duly proved its case, however, learned amicus curiae for the accused has submitted that the no case under section 397 IPC is made out against the accused as the screw driver does not cover under the category of "deadly weapon".
7. A perusal of record shows that PW2 Shaan Mohd. is the only material witness in this case. He has deposed that on 23.06.2014 at about 12.30 AM midnight he was returning from duty on foot by coming from Shadipur Flyover side and was going towards Katputli Colony and accused Satdev @Dev came from his back side and caught hold his bag which he was holding on shoulder and he(accused) put some sharp edged weapon on abdomen of PW2 and exhorted "JO CHIZ APKE PASS HAI NIKAL KE MUJHE DE D0, HILNA MAT NAHI TO PET MEIN CHAKU GHOP DUNGA". PW2 has deposed that eue to fear, he remained mum and stood peacefully there. Thereafter, accused Satdev @ Dev immediately removed his purse containing some documents, cash amount of Rs.270/ from pocket of his pant and also snatched his mobile phone make Micromax X
222. After committing robbery, accused directed to leave that place peacefully and thereafter, he ran away towards Katputli colony. Due to fear PW2 could not follow him. PW2 went to his house and due to fear he did not inform the police at that time.
8. PW2 Mr. Abhishek Mishra has further deposed that on 03.07.2014 he went to police station Ranjeet and informed the police about the incident of robbery happened with him on 26.03.2015. Thereafter, his statement was recorded by PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh which is Ex.PW2/A. SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 5/2
9. PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh prepared rukka Ex.PW4/A and handed over the same to duty officer/ PW1 Assistant SubInspector Ram Singh for the registration of case. On the basis of the rukka, PW1 got registered the FIR Ex.PW1/A and made his endorsement Ex.PW1/B and handed over the copy of the FIR and rukka to PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh.
10. PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh alongwith PW3 Head Constable Mahender Singh, Constable Ravinder and PW2 Mr. Abhishek Mishra left the Police Station and reached at the place of occurrence i.e. Shadipur Flyover, Ranjit Nagar, where PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh prepared Site Plan Ex.PW3/A at the instance of PW2. Thereafter, they all left the spot in search of accused towards Kathputali Colony but at that time they did not find any clue. They all came back to the Police Station.
11. PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh had shown the dossier of the criminals to PW2 Mr. Abhishek Mishra in Police Station and PW2 identified photograph of accused as the same person who committed robbery from him. Thereafter, PW4 along with staff and PW2 left the Police Station in search of accused and when they reached near Sulabh Sauchalaya situated under Shadipur flyover, accused Satdev @ Dev, was apprehended from there on the pointing out of PW2.
12. PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh interrogated and arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex.PW2/B and his personal Search was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW2/C. Accused made disclosure statement Ex.PW3/B. Pursuant to disclosure statement, the accused recovered one purse(Ex.P1) containing some documents belonging to PW2 and also got recovered one screw driver(Ex.P2) from his jhuggi. The purse alongwith SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 6/2 documents was sealed by PW4 in a pullanda with the seal of RTNGR II and was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW2/D. PW4 also sealed the Screw driver(Ex.P2) with the same seal which was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/E.
13. PW4 SubInspector Thakur Singh prepared the Site Plan of the place of recovery of articles Ex.PW3/C. Accused also pointed out the place of occurrence and PW4 SI Thakur Singh prepared the pointing out memo Ex.PW3/D. The purse and other documents were duly identified by PW2 at the time of recovery.
14. In view of foregoing discussion, the prosecution has duly proved its case against the accused Satdev @Dev for the offence punishable under section 392 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. However, as regards the offence under section 397 IPC is concerned, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused that he had used a "deadly weapon" or caused grievous hurt to PW2.
15. Section 397 IPC reads as under : "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 grievous hurt to any person.......
16. PW2 Mr. Abhishek Mishra has deposed that the accused had put some sharp edged weapon on his abdomen and exhorted "JO CHIZ APKE PASS HAI NIKAL KE MUJHE DE D0, HILNA MAT NAHI TO PET MEIN CHAKU GHOP DUNGA", however, as per the case of the prosecution, pursuant to his disclosure statement the accused got recovered a screw driver(Ex.P2) from his jhuggi. First of all, the screw driver is not a deadly SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 7/2 weapon and moreover, PW2 has nowhere deposed that the accused caused any injury to him, then what to talk of 'grievous' injury. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused for the offence punishable under section 397 IPC.
CONCLUSION
17. Prosecution has been able to bring home guilt of the accused under Section 392 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, accused Satdev @Dev is convicted for the offence punishable under section 392 IPC, however, he is acquitted for the offence punishable under section 397 IPC.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
ON : 30th MAY, 2015 (RAKESH KUMARI)
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
(WEST) DELHI / TIS HAZARI COURTS
SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 8/2
SC No.40/14 State V/s Satdev @Dev Page 9/2