Delhi District Court
State vs Chandan Singh Etc. on 27 May, 2019
1
IN THE COURT OF MS. NIRJA BHATIA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE03, (WEST)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
SC No. 55922/2016
State Vs Chandan Singh etc.
FIR No. 94/2013
PS Maya Puri
U/s. 392/394/397/411/34 IPC
JUDGEMENT
1 Sl. No. of the case 55922/2016
2 Date of Committal to Sessions 20.02.2014 3 Name of the complainant Sattan Shah 4 Date of commission of offence 10.04.2013 5 Name and Parentage of 1. Chandan Singh S/o Sh.
accused Bishan Singh
R/o D48, Gali No. 1, Main
Sagar Pur, Delhi.
2. Asgar Khan S/o Rebbul
Khan
R/o RZ28, Gali No. 0, Main
Sagar Pur, Delhi.
3. Chander Dev S/o Sh.
Mohan Mandal,
R/o E399, MCD Colony,
Azad Pur, Delhi
SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 1 of 24
2
6 Offence complained of Under Section
392/394/397/411/34 IPC
7 Offence charged Under Section
392/394/397/411/34 IPC
8 Plea of guilt Pleaded Not Guilty
9 Final order Acquitted
10 Date on which order reserved 27.05.2019
11 Date on which order 27.05.2019
announced
BRIEF FACTS:
1. Facts of the present matter have been revealed through the statement of complainant Sh. Sattan Saah, S/o Late Jiya Lal, (R/o RZ101/46, Gali No. 13, Mohan Nagar, Pankha Road) disclosing that on 10.04.2013, at about 09.3010.00 pm, while he was on his way on foot towards Nangal Raya for making purchases and had reached in front of Arya Samaj Mandir at D Block School, when one motorcycle of black color and the number plate of which was covered with mud which was being ridden by three persons stopped near him. Out of the aforesaid, one person whose name was later disclosed as SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 2 of 24 3 Chandan S/o Bishan Singh R/o D48, Gali No. 1, Main Sagarpur Delhi held him from front of his shirt and put a knife on his neck due to which he also suffered injury on his neck due to this while his other accomplices held him from behind and third removed his purse forcibly from the pocket of his pant which was containing Rs.1,030/(Rupees One thousand and thirty), few of his photographs and also robbed him of his HMT wrist watch. During this, two police officials came on patrolling duty on their yellow color motorcycle and who helped the victim, Sattan Shah which resulted in apprehension of one of accused whose name was disclosed as Chandan Singh. However, two of his accomplices fled from the spot leaving the motorcycle pulsar which was found bearing registration no. DL4SAW4657. One knife was recovered from accused Chandan, which was found measuring 23.5 cm and out of which, the handle of the knife was measuring 9.5 cm in length and 1.8 cm in width whereas the blade was carrying length of 14 cm. The handle of the SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 3 of 24 4 knife was made of black plastic and was carrying inscription of FM product whereas the blade was made of metal and was found carrying zig zag 10 (ten) teeth.
2. On this statement, which was reduced in writing and was bearing the thumb impression of complainant, IO recorded the rukka and the FIR was lodged. Subsequent thereto, during investigation, accused were arrested and after completion of the charge sheet, the same was forwarded. Since the offence in this case was found to be sessions triable vide order dated 20.02.2014 the matter was committed. The charge against the accused persons was framed vide order dated. 03.09.2015.
3. Prosecution in all examined five witnesses.
4. The complainant Sattan Shah was examined as PW 1. in His examination, he stated that he did not remember the exact date, month and year of the incident, however, it occurred 23 years from the date of his making the statement in the court. He revealed that on the date of incident at about 09.00 pm, he left his home for Nangal Raya Market and when he had SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 4 of 24 5 reached near Arya Samaj Mandir, 34 persons came there on a motorcycle and caught hold of him and snatched from him his mobile phone, cash of Rs. 1030/ and he sustained injury in the occurrence as one of the accused had put knife on his neck. He stated that all the accused persons drove away after robbing him and since it was dark, he could not identify whether the accused present in the court are the same. He claimed that no robber was apprehended at the spot and he met a police official after having walked at some distance from the spot, where he narrated the incident and thereafter, was taken to PS where his particulars were recorded. He stated that his statement was made at the PS and his thumb impressions were obtained thereon which is Ex.PW1/A. He further stated that he cannot read and write Hindi and he did not point out the place of occurrence to the police. The information regarding arrest of accused persons was received by him through police. He further stated that no weapon was recovered in his presence. He was cross examined thereafter, SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 5 of 24 6 by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. He denied the suggestion that he did not identify the accused persons deliberately, that the wrist watch was shown to him which he identified as belonging to him, however, rest of the statement was denied qua identity of accused persons and site plan. He was not cross examined by Ld. defence counsel.
5. Ct. Shyam Sunder was examined as PW 2. he stated that while on duty on 03.04.2013, at around 09.3010.00 pm, he was on patrolling duty with Ct. Satya Narayan at D Block, Janak Puri on motorcycle and on reaching D Block, Janak Puri, they both heard the screaming noise, hearing which they rushed towards nearby school and on seeing them coming two accused ran from the spot while one who was in the process of fleeing on motorcycle, was apprehended by Ct. Satya Narayan. The Complainant Sattan Shah met them at the spot and informed them about the occurrence whereafter the cursory search of accused, apprehended, whose name was revealed as Chandan was carried out and from him, one knife SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 6 of 24 7 from his right side pocket was recovered. The information thereafter was given at PS on wireless whereas SI Yogesh and Ct. Ravinder reached at the spot to whom, the custody of accused Chandan was made over alongwith recovered knife and motorcycle of accused bearing no. DL 4S AW 4657. Thereafter, SI Yogesh recorded the statement of complainant in their presence and made a rukka which was handed over to Ct. Ravinder who went to the PS with the same and returned with copy of FIR and rukka where after, accused Chandan was arrested vide Ex.PW2/A and his personal search was carried out vide Ex.PW2/B. The pullanda of knife was prepared and sealed with the seal of YK vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/C. The interrogation of accused Chandan was made and his disclosure was recorded which is Ex.PW2/D. The witness stated that he could not see the faces of other two accused who fled from the spot and was informed about their arrest two days later and thereafter, saw them in the police station lock up. He thereafter, identified them in the court. It SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 7 of 24 8 was also stated that there was no street light.
6. Statement of Ct. Satya Narayan was recorded as PW 3 who also affirmed that on 10.04.2013, while being on patrolling duty with Ct. Shaym Sunder at about 09.3010.00 pm, when he reached at D Block, Janak Puri, Ct. Shyam Sunder who was pillion rider on the motorcycle which was being driven by him. He was told by Ct. Shyam Sunder about someone crying. At the instance of Ct., Shaym Sunder he turned the motorcycle towards the place from where the noise was coming. He further deposed that on seeing their motorcycle, two persons fled from there. Whereafter Ct. Shyam Sunder went down the motorcycle and apprehended one of the culprit and from his hand, knife was removed. The culprits had come on the motorcycle which was left on the spot. The mud from the rear registration number plate of the motorcycle was removed. He also informed the Duty Officer about the occurrence through wireless. The name of the culprit apprehended was revealed as Chandan Singh. SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 8 of 24 9
7. He also claimed that he saw accused Chandan was putting the knife on the hand of person who was crying for help. The name of complainant was told as Sattan Shah who informed of his being robbed off wrist watch, purse containing Rs. 1000/ by accused Chandan Singh and his associate.
8. SI Yogesh Kumar, IO of the case, reached at the spot with Ct. Ravinder and took accused Chandan Singh in custody. Knife was seized. The custody of motorcycle bearing number plate DL4SAW4657 make Pulsor of black colour was also handed over to SI Yogesh who during proceedings prepared the sketch of knife Ex.PW3/A. The pullanda of knife Ex.PW2/C, the statement of Sattan Shah was recorded by SI Yogesh. Whereafter, Ct. Ravinder went with original Rukka prepared by SI Yogesh to PS for getting the case registered and returned with the Rukka and copy of FIR which he handed over to SI Yogesh. IO also recorded disclosure statement of accused Chandan Ex.PW2/D. The arrest and personal search memos Ex.PW2/A and Ex.PW2/B were SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 9 of 24 10 made.
9. The wrist watch and purse of the complainant was not found from the possession of accused Chandan who disclosed that same was taken away by Asgar and Chander Dev. At the instance of accused Chandan, Asgar was arrested from his house at Sagarpur. His disclosure statement Ex.PW3/B was recorded. Whereafter the wrist watch of complainant and cash of Rs. 1000/ was recovered from his house. The pullandas of both the articles were made and sealed with the seal of YK against seizure memo Ex.PW3/C. The pointing out memo at the instance of accused Asgar was exhibited as Ex.PW3/D. Accused Asgar Khan was arrested and personally searched vide memos Ex.PW3/E and Ex.PW3/F
10.Accused Chander Dev was apprehended from Sagarpur near sweet shop and from his possession cash of Rs. 200/ and photograph of complainant was recovered, he was arrested and personally searched vide memos Ex.PW3/H and Ex.PW3/J. At his pointing out, the memo of place of SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 10 of 24 11 occurrence was made vide Ex.PW3/K. His disclosure was recorded Ex.PW3/L. He identified the case property recovered from accused persons. In cross examination, this witness admitted that no effort could be made for joining of public witnesses. He stated that the IO did the wiring work at main road at some distance from the spot. He claimed to have reached the house of accused Asgar Khan about 4.00 PM. IO had not given any notice to complainant to join the proceeding. Accused Asgar Khan was found alone at his residence. Therefrom they reached Pankha Road at about 5.00 PM where no public witness was joined by IO in investigation proceedings.
11.He stated that IO made no marking on the currency recovered from accused Chander Dev. After concluding the investigation, they reached back to the PS. The suggestions contrary to the aforesaid depositions were denied. He stated that the complainant accompanied them to PS.
12.PW4 IO SI Yogesh Kumar deposed that on 11.04.2013 SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 11 of 24 12 during his duty at PS Maya Puri and on receiving DD No 38A, he alongwith Ct. Ravinder reached at D Block, Janak Puri where they met Ct. Shyam Sunder and Ct. Satya Narayan alongwith complainant and they produced accused Chandan Singh with one motorcycle and knife. He prepared the sketch of knife Ex.PW3/A and sealed the knife with his seal, he also recorded the statement of complainant Ex.PW1/A and made Tehrir Ex.PW4/B and sent Ct. Ravinder to PS. The motorcycle was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/A. Accused Chanand was arrested and his personal search was conducted. His disclosure statement was recorded by this witness. Whereafter, he was produced before the court and his PC remand was obtained. Accused Chandan singh led them to the house of Asgar Khan at Sagarpur where, accused Asgar Khan was arrested and personally searched vide memo Ex.PW3/E and Ex.PW3/F. The disclosure statement of accused Asgar Khan was recorded where one HMT watch and purse of complainant was recovered. Whreafter, accused SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 12 of 24 13 Chander was apprehended near the Aggarwal Sweets Sagarpur. He was apprehended and his arrest and personal search was made. From his personal search amount of Rs. 200/ was recovered which was seized separately vide memo Ex.PW3/G. At the instance of this accused, pointing out memo was prepared. IO moved application for TIP of accused Asgar Khan and Chander. However, they refused. The copy of TIP proceedings was collected. Regarding the motorcycle separate kallanda u/s 103 DP act was made against accused Asgar Khan which he exhibited as Ex.PW4/C. He identified the case property produced in the court. In cross examination, he admitted that none from the public was joined in the proceedings. He stated that the complainant has gone to his house and did not accompany them to PS.
13.In his further cross examination, he stated that he did not serve any notice to the complainant to join proceedings. He did not remember the time when he reached the house of Asgar Khan. He did not remember whether any family SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 13 of 24 14 member of accused Asgar Khan was at home. He did not ask any person from the neighbourhood to join the proceedings.
14.He feigned ignorance about the time. He reached near Aggarwal Sweets. Admittedly he did not serve any notice to passersby or nearby shopkeepers. The contrary suggestions were denied.
15. The accused persons during trial admitted the documents, i.e., (1) FIR No. 94/2013 which was got registered by ASI Saranmal, Duty Officer (Ex.P2), (2) TIP proceeding of case property as well as of accused persons, which was conducted by Sh. Vishal Pahuja, Ld. MM (Ex.PW1/B and Ex.P3), (3) MLC No. 8771 dated 11.04.2013 which was prepared by Dr. Shibu Thomas under the supervision of Dr. Pallavi, Casualty Medical Officer (Ex.P4) and (4) DD entry no. 38A dated 10.04.2013. (Ex. P5) under Section 294 Cr.PC vide statement dated 23.08.2018.
16.Whereafter Ld. Addl. PP dropped PWs ASI Saran Mal, Dr. SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 14 of 24 15 Pallavi, Dr. Shivbu Thoma, and Sh. Vishal Pahuja the then Ld. MM from the array of witness.
17.Statements of accused persons were recorded on 20.05.2019 wherein they claimed to have been falsely implicated in the present case and the witnesses deposed against them are interested witnesses. The accused persons did not wish to lead any evidence in defence.
18.Final arguments were addressed by Ld. Addl. PP for the State and Sh. D Patnaik, Ld. Counsel for accused persons.
19.After having given my thoughtful consideration to the material placed on record, I am of the view that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts for the reasons below:
20.IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSED PERSONS The identity of the accused was not substantiated. The witness PW1 Satan Shah the victim / complainant and star witness of prosecution who had reported the occurrence in his examination made following submissions SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 15 of 24 16 "when I reached Arya Samaj Mandir, 34 persons came there on motorcycle. Those persons caught hold me and snatched my mobile phone, cash of 1030/ out of aforementioned 34 persons, one person put the knife on my neck due to which I sustained minor injury. All the above mentioned persons drove away from there, after robbing him. There was darkness at the spot, I cannot say if any of the robbers is present in the court today or not. No robber was apprehended at the spot."
At this stage, he was cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State who pointed out the identity of the accused person specially to him to which again the witness stated that "He cannot recognized them due to lack of time"
Thus, the star witness of the prosecution created doubt regarding the involvement of the accused persons brought by prosecution for trial and their identity came to be disputed. The PW2 and PW3 Ct. Shyam Sunder and St. Satya Narayan who claimed themselves to be on patrolling duty regarding SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 16 of 24 17 apprehension of accused Chandan made inconsistent statement.
The spot witnesses of prosecution who apprehended accused Chandan Singh allegedly from spot made inconsistent statements with each other and also with PW1 Sattan Shah complainant as.
Both the witnesses have not affirmed the version of the complainant who claimed about the occurrence having been caused at the instance of 34 persons. There was no corroboration of the presence of the exact number of the accused involved in causing the occurrence. Thus, creating doubt regarding the veracity of the witnesses' version. While, PW2 nowhere claimed to have got down from the motorcycle while being pillion rider with PW3 Ct. Satya Narayan and or him having pointed out to PW3 towards the place where from he heard the noise coming, which is claimed in the version of PW3, PW3 revealed that the accused Chandan was apprehended at the instance of PW2, SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 17 of 24 18 the exact manner of the aforesaid has nowhere been explained.
From the overall reading of version of PW2 and PW3 and PW4, the apprehension and arrest of accused Chandan and Asgar from Aggarwal Sweets, Sagarpur and the house of accused Asgar at Sagarpur is again nowhere inspiring sufficient trust. Neither the number of house of accused Asgar nor locality etc. is detailed. Even the time and place of arrest of accused Chander Dev inspire no confidence as there is no material except the disclosure statement of accused Chandan Singh for their arrest in this case and qua the arrest of accused Chanan from the spot in presence of complainant, again the statements having been made are inconsistence and lacking to lead to conclusive involvement of accused apprehended in this case.
21.DOUBT REGARDING THE RECOVERY The statement of PW1 discloses that at the time of occurrence he was robbed of cash purse and wrist watch. In his cross SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 18 of 24 19 examination he denied that he was keeping any purse and stated that he was carrying one polythene containing cash of Rs. 1030/, photographs in his pocket. The wrist watch that was robbed of him was made part of TIP proceedings which have been admitted by accused persons thus dispensing the appearance of Ld. MM whereby the complainant could not identify his wrist watch leading to failure of TIP of the case property. Thus, the case property and its recovery could not be linked to complainant conclusively. The photographs which are claimed to have been recovered from the possession of accused Chander and or the cash of Rs.100/ and subsequently, that of Rs.200/ from other accused could also not be connected to the complainant for want of any noting marking etc. Further, the investigation officer made no attempt to recover the mobile phone. Thought the make, number and SIM etc. were also not noted either in the statement Ex.PW1/A and or even during the process of subsequent investigation, to link SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 19 of 24 20 the offeence with the accused and thus, the disclosure statements yield no assistance. On this ground again, the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of accused persons.
22.INCONSISTENCY IN THE INVESTIGATION The IO at no stage, made any attempt to involve any public witness in the process of investigation. As per his assertion, complainant did not join them even till PS after his statement was noted at the spot, though PW3 in his examination, cross examination stated that complainant accompanied them to PS.
23. From Police Station as per the statement of PW3, the accused was taken to the house of accused Asgar as he narrated the following: "From the spot, complainant had accompanied us to the PS. IO had not given any notice to the complainant to join the proceedings. From the house of accused Asgar we had reached at Pankha road at bout 5.00 PM. IO had not asked any persons from nearby shops to join the proceedings."
SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 20 of 24 21
24. Whereas PW4 had made a different revelation and claimed ignorance regarding aforesaid material portion of the evidence stating as follows:
"From the spot, complainant had gone to his house and he did not accompany us to PS. Before going to the house of accused Asgar, I did not serve any notice to the complainant to join the proceedings. I do not remember at what time, we had reached at the house of accused Asgar. I do not remember whether any family member of accused Asgar was present in the house or not. I did not call anybody from the neighbourhood to join the proceedings. We had remained at the house of accused Asgar for about 15 minutes. I do not remember at what time, we had reached near Aggarwal Sweet, Sagarpur. There also I did not serve any notice to any passersby or shop owners to join the proceedings. There we remained for about 5 minutes and thereafter, we returned back to PS."
25.Regarding the statement of PW3 to have seen accused Chandan having put knife on the neck of complainant there is no corroboration or support from the statement of PW2 who also admittedly was with PW3 and rather he has made a SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 21 of 24 22 contradictory plea stating that as soon as he and PW3 reached nearby the school, two culprits fled away from there and one of them also tried to flee from there.
26.Even the TIP application fixed before Ld. MM for 16.04.2013, both the accused Asgar and Chander refused to participate in the TIP proceedings. However, neither in the application nor in the proceedings, while applying for the copy of TIP proceedings, the appearance and presence of complainant Sattan Shah for identification is mentioned.
27.Further, the knife recovered has not been produced during statement of any of the witnesses. Even the motorcycle recovered from the accused from the spot is not brought or made case property. In view of the aforesaid proceedings, I am of the view that the prosecution has not been able to conclusively established the guilt of the accused.
28.Regarding the veracity of investigation conducted by SI Yogesh Kumar, a completely contradictory version is made by PW2 who stated that there was no street light at the spot. SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 22 of 24 23
29.No investigation was done qua those two accused persons in my presence by IO. Again said, I do not remember regarding the proceedings, if any was conducted in respect of those two associates while, the IO PW4 claimed as under : I had done the writing work at the spot under the street light on the main road. Further, PW2 exhibited disclosure statement of accused Asgar which was exhibited as ExPW2/D meaning thereby the same to have been a procured document from PW2 Ct. Shyam Sunder since he denied his involvement or presence in the investigation proceedings qua accused Asgar and Chander Dev.
30.In view of the aforesaid discussions, I find that the entire investigation conducted by the IO establishes no linkage of accused having committed the offence for which they are charged. For the aforesaid, I find that the material placed on record is neither complete nor conclusive to record conviction against the accused. The accused deserves the benefit.
31. In view of the above discussions, accused persons namely SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 23 of 24 24 Chandan Singh, Asgar Khan and Chander Dev are acquitted for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 392/394/397/411/34 IPC.
32.The bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused persons are extended for a period of 6 months in terms of Section 437A of the Cr. P. C.
33.File be consigned to record room after completion of the necessary formalities.
Announced in the open court today i.e. 27th May, 2019 (NIRJA BHATIA) ASJ03, WEST/DELHI SC No. 55922/2016 State vs. Chandan Singh etc. 24 of 24