Delhi District Court
State vs Sharik on 16 January, 2026
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
IN THE COURT OF MS. PRIYA MAHENDRA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE- 09
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
In the matter of:
SC No. 89/2021
CNR No. DLWT01-001030-2021
FIR No. 236/2020
Police Station Anand Parbat
Under Section 392/397/411/34 IPC
State
Versus
1. Sharik
S/o. Sh. Naseem Ahmed
R/o. A-57, New Seelampur,
Delhi.
2. Mukul
S/o. Naresh
R/o. A-51, New Seelampur,
Delhi.
3. Irshad @ Mulla
S/o. Sh. Mustaq
R/o. H.No. 98, H Block,
New Seelampur,
Delhi. ...Accused persons
Date of institution 04.02.2021
Judgment reserved on 08.01.2026
Judgment Pronounced on 16.01.2026
JUDGMENT
PRIYA MAHENDRA
1. Accused Sharik and Irshad @ Mulla are facing trial in Digitally signed by PRIYA present case on allegations that on 28.08.2020 at about 12.15 MAHENDRA a.m., accused persons robbed the motorcycle bearing registration Date: 2026.01.28 16:54:49 +0530 Judgment 1 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
No. DL-6S BE-6011 of complainant Trinesh Kumar Kaim on the point of pistol; and the accused Sharik and Mukul Arya are charged for recovery of said motorcycle from their possession on 04.09.2020 at K Block, Tar Wali Gali, Seelampur, Delhi. Brief Facts
2. On 28.08.2020, a PCR call vide DD NO. 08-A regarding robbery of a motorcycle on gun point at Jhkhira Flyover, was received at PS Anand Parbat and the same was marked to ASI Rajesh Phad for necessary action. Upon which ASI Rajesh along with HC Sunil reached the place of information where complainant Mr. Trinesh Kumar Kaim S/o Lt. Ajeet Kumar Kaim was met and got recorded his statement wherein he stated that on 27.08.2020, after finishing his duty, he went to the house of his friend at Pitam Pura on his Motor Cycle No. DL-6SBE-6011 Hero Xtrem 160R. Thereafter, he went from Pitam Pura via Punjabi Bagh to Zakhira on his motorcycle. When he was going through Zakhira Flyover at 12.15 a.m., two boys, one boy aged 28 years wearing Black T shirt who was pillion rider and the boy aged 32 years wearing cheque T shirt who was driving the motorcycle, came to him and signaled him to stop the motorcycle. He stopped the motorcycle thinking they are seeking some help. When he stopped the motorcycle, the pillion rider of the motorcycle pushed him. Before he could understand anything, the pillion rider of the motorcycle snatched his motorcycle and they along with his motorcycle fled from the spot.
Judgment 2 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
3. On the basis of the statement of the complainant, ASI Rajesh prepared a Rukka and got the present FIR registered u/s 379/356/34 IPC and investigation of the case was marked to HC Shailesh.
4. During the course of investigation, the spot was visited and Site Plan was prepared at the instance of the complainant. Supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded wherein he stated that on 28.08.2020 at about 00:15, he was coming on his bike from his friend's house and when he reached near Zakhira Flyover, two accused persons aged about 25-30 years came on a Yamaha bike from behind. He was stopped by them and they robbed his motorcycle bearing No. DL 6S BE 6011 on a gun point. While fleeing from the spot, they also threatened to kill him in case he informs the incident to anyone. He can identify the assailants if they are shown to him. Thereafter, Section 392/397/34 IPC was added in this case and further investigation of the case was marked to SI Shiv Prakash.
5. On 05.09.2020, an information vide DD No. 86A from P.S Seelampur, was received wherein ASI Shoran Singh informed about arrest of Sharik and Mukul in case FIR No. 323/20 u/s. 25 Arms Act of P.S Seelam Pur, Delhi and accused Sharik disclosed that he alongwith Irshad @ Mulla robbed a motorcycle from Anand Parbat area. The robbed motorcycle has been recovered at the instance of accused Mukul and Sharik. IO collected the relevant documents of said FIR. The motorcycle No. DL8S CQ 1578 Make Yamaha R-15 used by the accused persons for Judgment 3 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
commission of present offence, one Katta and a live cartridge have also been recovered from the possession of accused Sharik. Accused Shank and Mukul were arrested in Mandoli Jail on 11.09.2020 in the present matter. Accused Sharik in a muffled face and accused Mukul were produced before the Duty MM/Tihar and they were sent to JC.
6. On 17.09.2020, another information vide DD No 71A from Special Staff of North District was received wherein IO ASI Rajender informed about the arrest of accused Irshad @ Mulla in case FIR No. 222/20 u/s. 25 Arms Act of P.S Timar Pur and he made Disclosure Statement about the commission of present offence with accused Sharik. Relevant documents were collected from the concerned IO. One Katta and live cartridge have also been recovered from the possession of accused Irshad. Accused Irshad was arrested in Tihar Jail on 08.10.2020 in the present matter. Accused Irshad was produced before the Ld. Duty MM/Tihar Jail in muffled face and he was sent to JC.
7. The robbed motorcycle was brought at P.S Anand Parbat from P.S Seelampur vide Road Certificate No. 106/21/20 dated 11.09.2020 and vide order dated 17.10.2020, the motorcycle was got released by the complainant. On 26.10.2020, applications for conducting TIP of accused Sharik and Irshad were filed and same was pending for 10.11.2020. Statements of other witnesses were recorded. As per the investigation conducted against accused Sharik and Mukul till that time, charge-sheet u/s. 411/34 IPC against accused Sharik and Mukul was filed before the Court.
Judgment 4 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
8. On 17.11.2020, TIP of accused Sharik and Irshad @ Mulla was conducted and the complainant identified both of them. Consequently, accused Sharik and Irshad @ Mulla were charge sheeted for the offences punishable u/s. 392/397/34 IPC by way of Supplementary Charge Sheet in addition to charge sheet for the offences punishable u/s. 411/34 IPC already filed against accused Sharik and Mukul.
Charge
9. On 06.02.2021, charge for the offences punishable under Section 392/397/34 IPC was framed against the accused Sharik and Irshad @ Mulla. Charge for the offence u/s. 411/34 IPC has also been framed against accused Sharik and Mukul Arya. Accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution Evidence
10. Prosecution has examined twelve witnesses in all. PW-1 Trinesh Kumar Kaim (Complainant), PW-2 Ct. Ravindra Singh, PW-3 ASI (Retired) Rajender Singh, PW-4 AI Ratan Kamble, PW-5 SI Shri Niwas, PW-6 W/Ct. Sudesh, PW-7 HC Nitesh Kumar, PW-8 Ct. Anuj, PW-9 HC Jaiveer, PW-10 ASI Rajesh, PW-11 HC Shailesh and PW-12 Inspector Shiv Prakash.
11. PW-1 Trinesh Kumar Kaim was robbed of his motorcycle bearing registration No. DL-6SBE-6011. He deposed that the incident took place on 27.8.2020. At that time he was working with Dutchuncle Tech. Solutions Pvt. Ltd. at Noida. On that day at about 12.15 am (night), he was going to his house on his motorcycle bearing registration number DL-6SB-E 6011. He was coming from Punjabi Bagh and going towards Mori Gate via Judgment 5 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
Zhakira Pull. While he was crossing the Zhakira Flyover, one motorcycle came from his right side and they signaled him to stop. He presumed that they were asking him to stop to seek help. There were two persons on that motorcycle. He stopped his motorcycle and then they also stopped their motorcycle. They asked him something which he could not understand. In the meantime the driver of that bike, took out key of his motorcycle. The pillion rider pushed him. Initially, he resisted however, he saw some weapon (may be Gun) in the dub of the pant of pillion rider. So he did not resist. He got scared and thereafter he left his bike. The pillion rider sat on his motorcycle and took key from his associate, i.e. the driver of that motorcycle. They both fled away from there after robbing his bike.
12. PW-1 further deposed that he was in trauma due to the incident. After sometime, he made call at number 100 and police reached the spot. Police recorded his statement Ex.PW1/A at the spot. The police made search of offenders in the nearby area but none of the offenders could be apprehended at that time. He was first taken to PS. Then another police official again brought him at the spot. Site plan Ex.PW1/B was prepared by the police at his instance.
13. PW-1 also deposed that after some days, he received information from police regarding the recovery of his motorcycle by police officials of PS Seelam Pur. He was called in the PS Anand Parbat and his motorcycle was shown to him. He identified his motorcycle in PS Anand Parbat. He got the same Judgment 6 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
released on Superdari after furnishing Superdarinama Ex.PW1/C. He had also furnished copy of invoice Mark A of his motorcycle. He produced the motorcycle in the Court and identified it as Ex.P-1.
14. PW-1 also deposed that after some days, he was informed by the police regarding joining of TIP proceedings of offenders at Tihar. Test Identification Parade was conducted through VC proceedings and his statement was recorded by at Tihar Jail and he had identified two offenders in the TIP proceedings. He correctly identified both the accused in the TIP by pointing out towards them stating that these are two persons who had robbed his motorcycle. PW-1 proved TIP proceedings of accused Irshad @ Mulla and Sharik as Ex.PW1/D and Ex.PW1/E. He failed to identify the country made pistol seized in FIR No. 323/2020, PS Seelam Pur to be the weapon of offence used for commission of offence. The witness correctly identified accused Sharik and Irshad in the Court.
15. PW-2 Ct. Ravindra Singh was posted at Special Staff, North in the year 2020. He deposed that he joined the investigation in case FIR No.222/20 on 12.09.20202. During investigation in the case FIR No.222/20, PS Timar Pur, one accused Mursleem @ Sameer was apprehended. Thereafter, accused Mursleem @ Sameer led him and his team members i.e. ASI Rajendra Singh and HC Pawan to Mohalla Sheesh Grass, Kasba Mehrara, District Etah, U.P. Accused Irshad @ Mulla was apprehended at the instance of accused Mursleem @ Sameer.
Judgment 7 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
Thereafter, they returned to Delhi. Copy of his Arrest Memo, Personal Search Memo and Disclosure Statement are marked as Mark A to C, respectively. He correctly identified the accused Irshad @ Mulla in the Court.
16. PW-3 ASI (Retired) Rajinder Singh is the IO of FIR No. 222/2020 under Section 25 Arms Act registered at PS Timarpur, Delhi. He deposed that on 11.09.2020, he was carrying investigation with Ct. Ravinder Kumar and HC Pawan and he arrested accused Murshlin @ Sameer Faheem. At the instance of Murslin @ Sameer Faheem, they reached at Mohalla Shishgram, Mehrara, Etah, Uttar Pradesh. They apprehended one accused Irshad @ Mulla and he arrested him vide Arrest Memo Mark A. Personal search of the said accused was also conducted vide Memo Mark B. He recorded Disclosure Statement of accused Irshad @ Mulla vide Mark C. He further deposed that in said Disclosure, accused Irshad @ Mulla revealed his involvement in the present case with co-accused Sharik. The said disclosure statement was shared with PS Anand Parbat. SI Shiv Prakash, Investigating Officer of the present case met him and he handed over relevant documents to him. PW-3 correctly identified accused Irshad @ Mulla in the Court.
17. PW-4 ASI Ratan Kamble is the Duty Officer of PS Anand Parbat. He deposed that on 28.08.2020, at about 01:10:25 hours, an information was received through Control Room and on the basis of said information, he lodged GD No.8A vide Ex.PW4/A. Judgment 8 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
The contents of GD was informed to ASI Rajesh for taking necessary action.
He further deposed that on same day, at about 03:27 a.m., HC Sunil brought a Rukka sent by ASI Rajan. He took the said Rukka to Computer Room and with the help of Computer Operator, he got registered the FIR Ex.PW4/B of present case. He also made endorsement Ex.PW4/C on the Rukka. He also issued Certificate u/s 65(B) of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW4/D. He handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to HC Sunil for handing over the same to HC Shailesh for investigation.
18. PW-5 SI Shri Niwas is the Duty Officer at PS Anand Parbat. He proved DD No. 86-A dated 05.09.2020 as Ex.PW5/A and DD NO. 71-A dated 17.09.2020 as Ex.PW5/B.
19. PW-6 W/Ct. Sudesh recorded the PCR call in respect of a robbery and proved the same as Ex.PW6/A.
20. PW-7 HC Nitesh Kumar was posted as a Constable in PS Anand Parbat. He deposed that on 11.09.2020, on the direction of IO/SI Shiv Prakash, brought the motorcycle No. DL-6S- BE-6011 from PS Seelam Pur vide Road Certificate as Ex.PW7/A.
21. PW-8 Ct. Anuj deposed that on 04.09.2020 he was posted at PS Seelampur and was on patrolling duty along with PSI Akhil. While patrolling when they reached at Gurudwara Road near Wine shop, they met ASI Vikram Dutt, ASI Vijender and Ct.
Judgment 9 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
Manish. PSI Akhil received secret information that one person with illegal weapon could met them in the Gali. PSI Akhil prepared Raiding Party and requested few passersby for joining the proceedings but they refused. At about 05:25 pm at the pointing out of informer, they managed to apprehend accused Sharik. He correctly identified accused Sharik in the Court. Upon formal search of accused, from the left side of his wearing pant, one loaded country made Katta was recovered.
He further deposed that accused Sharik has disclosed that one of his accomplice Mukul could meet them at GT Road, Seelampur, Red Light with stolen motorcycle. Accordingly, they reached at GT Road, Seelampur Red light and managed to apprehend accused Mukul while sitting on a motorcycle. He correctly identified accused Mukul. The said motorcycle make KTM Orange was found to be case property of case FIR No. 352/2020. In his presence, PSI Akhil prepared the Sketch of Katta and cartridge and also measured the same. Thereafter, the said country made Katta and cartridge was kept in clothed pulanda and was sealed with the seal of VSM.
PW-8 further deposed that PSI Akhil prepared Rukka and Rukka was handed over to Ct. Jaiveer and accordingly, they went to PS Seelampur and got FIR No. 323/2020 under Arms Act registered. Further investigation of the said case was conducted by ASI Soran Singh who arrested accused Sharik and Mukul in case FIR No. 323/2020 PS Seelampur and also recorded Disclosure Statement. Accused Sharik pointed out towards one motorcycle parked at Gali no. 21, Brahampuri, Delhi and got recovered the said motorcycle bearing no. DL8SC Q1578.
Judgment 10 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
Accused Sharik disclosed that they had been using the said motorcycle in the commission of offences.
PW-8 further deposed that during investigation of case FIR No. 323/2020, accused Sharik pointed out towards one motorcycle parked at K block, Seelampur, Delhi and got recovered one motorcycle and disclosed that they had robbed the said motorcycle from the area of PS Anand Parbat. ASI Soran Singh made inquiries about the said motorcycle from PS Anand Parbat. It was revealed that the said motorcycle bearing registration no. DL 6S BE 6011 make Hero Xtrene was robbed from the possession of one person and FIR No. 236/2020 was registered at PS Anand Parbat in this regard. ASI Soran Singh seized the motorcycle under Section 102 IPC vide Seizure Memo Ex.PW9/A which bears his signatures at point B.
22. PW-9 HC Jaiveer Singh deposed that on 04.09.2020, he was posted at PS Seelampur and was on patrolling duty along with ASI Vikram Dutt, ASI Vijender and Ct. Manish. While patrolling when they reached at Gurudwara Road near Wine shop, they met PSI Akhil and Ct. Anuj who informed them that they received an information that one person with illegal weapon could meet them in the gali. He further deposed on the lines of PW-8 Ct. Anuj. During investigation of case FIR No. 323/2020, accused Sharik pointed out towards one motorcycle parked at K block, Seelampur, Delhi and got recovered one motorcycle and disclosed that they had robbed the said motorcycle from the area of PS Anand Parbat. ASI Soran Singh made inquiries about the said motorcycle from PS Anand Parbat. It was revealed that the Judgment 11 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
said motorcycle bearing registration no. DL 6S BE 6011 make Hero Xtrene was robbed from the possession of one person and FIR No. 236/2020 was registered at PS Anand Parbat in this regard. ASI Soran Singh seized the motorcycle under Section 102 IPC vide Seizure Memo Ex.PW9/A which bears his signatures at point A.
23. PW-10 ASI Rajesh is the initial IO who prepared Rukka. He deposed that on 28.08.2020, a PCR call was assigned to him vide DD No. 8-A Ex.PW4/A in respect of a robbery of a motorcycle on gun point at Zakhira Flyover. He along with HC Sunil reached at about 1.20 a.m. at the place of information where complainant Krimesh Kumar was present. He recorded his statement Ex.PW1/A and attested it at point B. On the statement of the complainant, he prepared Rukka Ex.PW10/A and got the FIR registered through HC Sunil.
24. PW-11 HC Shailesh is the another IO visited the spot and at the instance of Complainant and prepared Site Plan Ex.PW1/B. He also recorded supplementary statement of complainant and the section u/s 392/397/34 IPC was added by him.
25. PW-12 Inspector Shiv Prakash is the subsequent IO. He deposed that on 05.09.2020 an information was received from PS Seelampur vide DD No. 86A whereby IO/ASI Shoran Singh reported regarding the arrest of two accused persons namely Sharik S/o Nasir and Mukul S/o Naresh in case FIR No. 323/2020 PS Seelampur u/s 25 Arms Act. Accused Sharik Judgment 12 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
disclosed his involvement in the commission of offence of the present case along with his associates Irshad @ Mulla. The robbed motorcycle of the present case was recovered from the possession of accused Sharik and Mukul.
PW-12 further deposed that on 06.09.2020 he went to PS Seelampur and met ASI Shoran Singh and collected the relevant documents from him. He also went to Tihar Jail on 10.09.2020 and after obtaining permission from Ld. Duty MM, he interrogated accused Sharik and Mukul at Mandoli Jail on 11.09.2020. He also arrested both the accused persons in the present case vide Arrest Memo Ex. PW12/A and Ex. PW12/B respectively A and conducted their personal search vide Memos Ex. PW12/C and Ex. PW12/D. He also recorded their Disclosure Statements Ex. PW12/E and Ex. PW12/F respectively. He moved an application to Jail Superintendent for producing both the accused persons before concerned Ld. MM on 12.09.2020 in Tihar Jail with a request to produce accused Sharik in muffled face and they were produced before Ld. MM and were remanded to JC.
PW-12 also deposed that on 17.09.2020 another information was received vide DD No. 71A from Special Staff of North District wherein ASI Rajender reported that he has arrested accused Irshad @ Mulla in case FIR No. 222/2020 u/s 25 Arms Act PS Timarpur. Accused Irshad disclosed his involvement in the commission of offence in the present case. On the same day, he went to the Office of Special Staff and collected the relevant documents from ASI Rajender. After taking permission from Ld. MM, he effected the arrest of accused Irshad in Tihar Jail on Judgment 13 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
08.10.2020 vide Arrest Memo Ex. PW12/G and conducted his personal search vide Memo Ex. PW12/H and recorded his Disclosure Statement vide Ex. PW12/I. PW-12 further deposed that on 26.10.2020 he moved an application for judicial TIP of accused Sharik and Irshad. During judicial TIP which was conducted on 17.11.2020, the complainant Trinesh Kumar has correctly identified accused Sharik and Irshad being the offenders who robbed him on 28.08.2020. He collected the copy of TIP proceedings. He correctly identified all the three accused persons Sharik, Mukul and Irshad @ Mulla in the Court.
Admission u/s. 294 Cr.P.C.
26. Vide statement u/s. 294 Cr.P.C. dated 14.12.2021, accused admitted the production of case file of FIR No. 222/2020, PS Timar Pur and TIP of accused Sharik and Irshad @ Mulla as Ex.AD1 (running into seven pages) prepared by Ld. MM (Malhila Court-02), West.
Plea of Accused
27. In his statement recorded under 313 Cr.P.C, accused persons stated that they are innocent. They have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of false disclosure made in another case.
28. I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for State and Ld. defense counsel at length and perused the material on record. Arguments
29. It is argued by Ld. counsel for the accused persons that the Prosecution has not been able to prove the identity of the Judgment 14 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. He submits that the complainant/victim has been vacillating on the identity of the accused persons. In his examination-in-chief, he correctly identified the accused persons as the robbers who had robbed motorcycle of the complainant on the day of incident. However, in his cross-examination, he first stated that he had seen them at the time of incident and later on, in the same breath admitted that the robbers were wearing masks at the time of incident. Hence, he could not see their faces clearly. So, his testimony regarding identity of accused Sharik and Irshad is not reliable and trustworthy.
30. Ld. counsel for the accused persons has also assailed the successful TIP of the accused Sharik and Irshad on the ground that in cross-examination of PW-1, he admitted that he was called in police station in the month of September where two boys were present and he had identified them in the police station. Later on, he even deposed in his cross-examination that perhaps it was October, 2020 when he visited the police station and identified the robbers. Moreover, he clearly admitted in his cross- examination that he had seen robbers at the police station prior to TIP. It is argued by Ld. counsel for the accused that the police could not identify and nab the real culprits and the accused persons have been made scapegoat by the police in the present matter. Identity of accused Irshad and Sharik has not been established beyond reasonable doubt.
He also submits that the Prosecution has not been able to prove the recovery of motorcycle at the instance of accused Judgment 15 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
Sharik and Mukul. No public person has been roped in the recovery proceedings and the robbed motorcycle was found parked at the public place. So, it is argued that even the charge against accused u/s. 411 IPC is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against accused Sharik and Mukul.
31. On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP has submitted that the prime witness of the Prosecution/complainant (PW-1) has fully supported the case of the Prosecution during examination in chief conducted on 06.03.2021 and also duly identified both the accused Sharik and Irshad in his testimony done on 06.03.2021. However, the witness intentionally made inconsistent deposition regarding identity of accused persons and stated, for the first time, that accused were masked in his cross-examination conducted on 14.12.2021. So, he submits that the evidence of the PW-1 recorded in his examination-in-chief on 06.03.2021 has to be accepted as true and any inconsistency made in the deposition of complainant recorded on 14.12.2021 deserves to be discarded completely. It is further argued that the charge is duly proved beyond reasonable doubt by the Prosecution against accused Sharik & Mukul found to be in possession of the stolen property. To support his arguments, he has relied the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Krishan v. State of Karnataka - 2009 SCC Online Kar 624.
Analysis and Discussion
32. As per the case of the Prosecution, the Complainant/injured was robbed of his motorcycle on the point of pistol by two unknown persons who came on motorcycle. The Judgment 16 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
said two accused persons were not known to the complainant. The stolen motorcycle was found from the possession of accused Sharik and Mukul. The accused Sharik and Mukul were arrested on 11.09.2020 whereas the accused Irshad @ Mulla was arrested on 08.10.2020. The application for TIP of accused Sharik and Irshad was moved on 26.10.2020 and both the accused persons were successfully identified by the Complainant in the TIP proceedings conducted on 17.11.2020.
33. The key witness of the Prosecution i.e. PW-1/complainant fully supported the case of the Prosecution regarding incident and identity of accused persons Sharik and Irshad in his examination in chief. In his cross-examination, PW-1 stated that he had narrated the entire incident after PCR took him to police station Anand Parbat and he also mentioned the physical description of both the robbers. Further, during his cross-examination, he denied the suggestion that he identified the accused Sharik and Irshad in the PS only after police officials told him that his bike has been recovered from there. He voluntarily stated that he had seen them at the time of offence. He again changed his statement and stated that robbers were wearing masks at the time of incident and, so, he could not see their faces. He further deposed that he identified them in the police station as the persons sitting there were looking similar to the robbers who had robbed him. The aforesaid testimony of the complainant is repleted with contradictions and inconsistencies regarding identification of accused Sharik and Irshad by the Complainant. The identification of accused Sharik and Irshad by Complainant in the Court, is not beyond the realm of doubt and cannot be relied upon.
Judgment 17 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
34. Test identification parade of the accused persons arrested as assailants, is conducted so as to ensure the real culprits are nabbed by the police. For any TIP proceedings to have efficacy, it is necessary that the accused persons are not shown to the Complainant/persons who are required to identify the accused, before TIP proceedings are conducted.
35. The incident in question occurred on 28.08.2020. The accused Sharik was found in possession of Katta on 04.09.2020 and consequently, FIR No. 323/2020 under Arms Act was registered against accused Sharik at PS Seelampur. Pursuant to his Disclosure Statement, he was arrested in the present matter on 11.09.2020. Further, as per the testimony of PW-8, during the investigation of the said FIR No. 323/2020, the accused Sharik disclosed involvement of one of his accomplice Mukul and stated that the accused Mukul could meet them at GT Road, Seelampur Redlight. Accordingly, they managed to apprehend the accused Mukul sitting on the motorcycle which was the case property of case FIR No. 352/2020. The accused Mukul was arrested in this case on 11.09.2020 by PW-12.
PW-2 deposed that he apprehended one accused Mursleem @ Sameer in case FIR No. 822/2020, PS Timar Pur. He made Disclosure Statement. On his Disclosure Statement, the accused Irshad @ Mulla was arrested in this matter on 08.10.2020 by PW-12.
36. The TIP of accused Sharik and Irshad was conducted n 17.11.2020. The Complainant correctly identified them during Judgment 18 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
TIP. The PW-1 admitted in his cross-examination that he had seen the two boys in the police station in the month of September and identified them as robbers. He then stated in his cross- examination that perhaps he visited the Police Station in October, 2020. Further, he denied the suggestion that he was shown photographs of the robbers by the IO before TIP. He thereafter volunteered that he had seen the robbers at the police station prior to TIP. So, the PW-1 has stated in no uncertain terms in his cross-examination conducted on 14.12.2021 that he was shown robbers at police station before TIP was conducted. In view of the said statement of complainant, the successful TIP of accused i.e. Sharik and Irshad loses its evidentiary value.
37. Ld. Addl. PP has heavily relied upon the judgment of Krishan v. State of Karnataka (supra) to contend that as PW-1 has categorically identified the accused persons in his examination- in-chief conducted on 06.03.2021, the inconsistencies made by him during his cross-examination on 14.12.2021 have to be completely discounted because there is a considerable time gap between his examination-in-chief and cross-examination. However, the judgments passed by the Courts are not passed in vaccum and relate to factual matrix of the each case. In the judgment of Krishna (supra) relied on by the Prosecution, the Court relied on examination-in-chief even when the witness turned hostile during cross-examination as deposition made in examination-in-chief was consistent with the allegations made in the complaint. However, in the present matter, the complainant has made inconsistent and contradictory statements in his cross-
Judgment 19 of 22
SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
examination regarding the identification of accused persons by the complainant. The complainant has otherwise given deposition completely consistent with his complaint. So, the inconsistencies in the evidence of complainant cannot be ignored and create dent in the case of Prosecution. Further, there is a time gap between the incident and the arrest of accused persons. The accused persons were arrested in the present matter on disclosure statements made by them on being arrested in other cases. In these circumstances, it was incumbent upon the Prosecution to prove the identity of accused persons and their involvement in the present case beyond reasonable doubt.
38. PW-1/complainant in his statements never claimed to have seen the faces of accused persons at the time of commission of robbery. During his cross-examination, he stated that they were wearing masks at the time of incident and his identification of robbers even in the police station was based on the fact that their appearance was similar to robbers who committed robbery with him on 28.08.2020. So, the identification of accused persons by the complainant in the Court is under the cloud of suspicion and not proved conclusively. There is a long distance between the Prosecution case "is true" and Prosecution case "may be true". The Prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and in case of any doubt, the benefit of doubt must necessarily accrue in favour of the accused.
39. The accused Sharik and accused Mukul have been charged u/s. 411 IPC. PW-8 and PW-9 in their evidence stated that during Judgment 20 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
investigation of case FIR No. 323/2020, PS : Seelampur, accused Sharik pointed out the towards one motorcycle parked at K block, Seelampur, Delhi and got recovered one motorcycle. He stated that they had robbed the said motorcycle from the area of PS Anand Parbat. Thereafter, ASI Soren Singh made enquiries about the said motorcycle from PS Anand Parbat. It was revealed that the said motorcycle bearing registration no. DL 6S BE 6011 make Hero Xtrene was robbed from the possession of one person and FIR No. 236/2020 was registered at PS Anand Parbat. Both PW-8 and PW-9 proved Seizure Memo of the said motorcycle made u/s. 102 IPC as Ex.PW9/A.
40. So, both PW-8 and PW-9 deposed that the robbed motorcycle of the complainant was discovered on the pointing out of accused Sharik. None of them made any deposition regarding any role of accused Mukul in recovery of the said motorcycle. There is also no other evidence on record that the accused Mukul was in possession of the robbed motorcycle of the complainant or it was recovered at his instance. Both PW-8 as well as PW-9 admitted that no public person was joined at the time of preparation of the Seizure Memo, Ex.PW9/A, nor the seizure proceedings were videographed or photographed. No plausible explanation is furnished for not roping in any public persons in the seizure proceedings. The cross-examination of PW-8 and PW-9 also reveals that the robbed motorcycle was parked in a street accessible to all. So, it cannot be said that parking of robbed motorcycle in the said street was within the special knowledge of the accused Sharik. In these circumstances, Judgment 21 of 22 SC No: 89/2021 State Vs. Sharik & Ors.
its exclusive possession cannot be attributed to accused Sharik. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 411 IPC are also not proved beyond reasonable doubt for accused Sharik and Mukul.
41. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the Prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, accused Sharik and Irshad @ Mulla are acquitted of the charge under Sections 392/397/34 IPC. Accused Sharik and Mukul are also acquitted of the charge under Sections 411/34 IPC.
Accused are directed to furnish bail bonds u/s. 437-A Cr.P.C in the sum of Rs 15,000/- each with sureties in the like amount.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court on 16th day of January, 2026.
(Priya Mahendra) Addl. Sessions Judge-09/West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
Judgment 22 of 22