Delhi District Court
Sc No.81/15 Fir No.562/06 State vs Nazim Etc. Page No. 1/33 on 7 May, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SH. NARESH KUMAR MALHOTRA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE05, WEST, TIS HAZARI
COURTS, DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF
SESSIONS CASE NO.81/15 & OLD SC No. 29/11
ID No. 02401R0264862009
FIR No. 562/06
P.S Uttam Nagar
U/S 457/380/436/201/411/34 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
(1) Nazim @ Bhura
S/o Sh.Sabir
R/o PO Gokul Pur,
PS Karel, Distt.Main Puri, U.P.
(2) Kapil
S/o Sh.Om Prakash Sharma
R/o RZA28, Bhagwati Garden,
Uttam Nagar, Delhi.
(3) Sonu Chopra
S/o Sh.Om Prakash
R/o 80/116, Mohan Garden,
Uttam Nagar, Delhi.
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 16.08.2011
DATE OF RESERVING THE ORDER : 26.04.2016
DATE OF DECISION : 04.05.2016
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 1/33
JUDGEMENT
1. The essential facts of the present case are that on receipt of DD no. 70B, ASI Vijay Pal alongwith Ct. Devender went at the spot and found that back side of H.No.B107, Mohan Garden was under fire. Fire Brigade came and fire was extinguished and he recorded the statement of Suresh Singhal to the effect that he is running a Card board factory. On the night of 29/30.06.2006, he alongwith his family came to attend the marriage of his niece at about 08:00 PM at G.T.Karnal Road, Clouds Farm House, after locking his house. At about 11:00 PM, his neighbour Sharmaji telephoned him and informed him that smoke was coming from his house. On hearing this, he left the marriage party alongwith his children and came to his house and saw that the locks of the backside of his house were found broken and house was under
fire. Fire brigade came there and fire was extinguished. Thereafter, he went inside the house and cash of Rs.3.50 lacs, gold and silver jewellery were found missing. He raised suspicion on accused Sonu, who was working as an electrician in the locality.
2. On the statement of the complainant, FIR no. 562/06 of SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 2/33 PS Uttam Nagar U/s 457/380/436 IPC was registered and investigation was carried out.
3. During investigation, accused Sonu Chopra was arrested on 30.06.2006 and his confessional statement was recorded. Accused Sonu Chopra got recovered cash of Rs.6,000/, one silver glass and one pair of silver Pajeb from his house. On 02.07.2006, accused Nazim and Kapil were arrested. Accused Kapil and Nazim had pointed out the spot and pointing out memos were prepared. Accused Sonu Chopra also pointed out the place of occurrence. Confessional statements of the accused persons Nazim and Kapil were recorded. Thereafter, accused Nazim got recovered one black colour raxin bag in which one iron Aari (Loha cutter), one iron rod (one side of which was turned pointed), two big screwdrivers, one iron Plaas, one Cutter (knife), one silver glass on the bottom of which SS and (T100) was written and one silver coin on which photo of Laxmi & Ganesh were inscribed. Accused Kapil also got recovered one silver glass on the bottom of which SS and (T100) was written, one silver coin on which photo of Laxmi & Ganesh were inscribed. Site plan was prepared.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 3/33Statements of the witnesses were recorded. During investigation, TIP of the case property was conducted and complainant identified the case property. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against all the three accused persons.
4. Charge for the offence U/s 457/380/201/436/34 IPC were framed against all the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. To prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 7 witnesses, which are as follows :
PW1 Suresh Kumar Singhal, PW2 HC Sri Ram, PW3 HC Satyavan, PW4 Ct.Prem Chand, PW5 Sh.Bhupesh Kumar, PW6 Ct.Devender Singh and PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh.
6. PW1 Suresh Kumar Singhal has deposed that he is a businessman and having a factory of cardboard boxes. He has further stated that on 29.06.2006, he left his house at about 07:00/07:30 PM with his family for attending the marriage of his niece, which was being held in a Farm House at G.T.Karnal Road. At about 11:00/11:15 PM, he received a telephone call from his neighbourer Sh.Satish Sharma, who informed him that smoke was coming out SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 4/33 of his house. He told him to visit his house and to find out the cause for smoke as it would take them two hours for reaching home. Thereafter, Sh.Satish Sharma went to the backside of his house and when he pushed the door, he found the same broken and saw his house on fire. Thereafter, complainant also reached his house with his family. Fire Brigade had reached by that time. He has further stated that the flames were doused and he entered into his house. On checking, cash of Rs.3.50 lacs, gold & silver jewellery articles were found missing from his house. He also found silver coins, gold ear rings, gold ring and gold bangles missing. He suspected Sonu behind the incident as he was seen outside his house with bag by the neighbour Revti Aggarwal.
This witness has identified accused Sonu before the court. He has also proved his statement Ex. PW1/A made before the police and identified his signatures at point A on Ex. PW1/A. This witness has also proved the seizure memo Ex.PW1/B of the broken locks, one of Harrison make and other of Panther make. This witness has also identified the abovesaid two locks as Ex. P.1 & Ex. P.2.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 5/33He has further stated that on 30.06.2006, at abut 06:00 PM, accused Sonu Chopra was arrested on his identification vide Arrest memo Ex. PW1/C and he has also identified his signatures at point A on Ex. PW1/C. He has also identified his signatures at point A on the disclosure statement of accused Sonu Chopra Ex.PW1/D. He has further stated that accused Sonu Chopra has produced three silver glasses, two silver coins, one pair of silver Pajeb and Rs.6,000/ and the same were taken into possession by AI Vijay Pal Singh. This witness has also identified his signatures at points A & B on the TIP proceedings of case property Ex.PW1/E. He has also correctly identified the case property before the court i.e.currency notes Ex.P.3, pair of silver Pajeb Ex. P.4,three silver glasses Ex.P.5 to Ex.P.7 and two silver coins as Ex. P. 8 & Ex.P.9.
This witness was crossexamined by the Ld.Addl. P.P.for the State wherein he has admitted that on 30.06.2006, he had joined the investigation of this case with IO ASI Vijay Pal and other police official and they went to the house of accused Sonu but he was not found there and at about 04:30 PM, he again joined the SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 6/33 investigation and at about 06:00 PM, accused Sonu was found at Peepal Chowk and on his identification, he was apprehended. He has also admitted in the cross examination done by Ld.Addl. P.P.for the State that accused made disclosure statement and on his disclosure statement cash of Rs.6,000/, one silver glass, one pair of silver Pajeb were recovered from his house vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/F. He has also admitted in the cross examination done by Ld.Addl. P.P.for the State that during the investigation, he had placed the suspicion on accused Sonu. He also admitted in the crossexamination done by Ld.Addl. P.P.for the State that on 02.07.2006, accused Nazim and Kapil pointed out his house as the place of occurrence and he signed on the pointing out memos Ex.PW3/G and Ex.PW1/G.
7. PW2 HC Sri Ram has proved the carbon copy of FIR as Ex.PW2/A and his endorsement at point A on the rukka Ex. PW2/B.
8. PW3 Satyavan has deposed that on 02.07.2006, he had joined the investigation with ASI Vijay Pal Singha and Ct.Prem Chand. Accused Sonu was taken out from the lock up and they alongwith him went to Mohan Garden SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 7/33 for the search of other accused persons. He has further stated that in Mohan Garden, secret informer met them and told that accused Nazim and Kapil who were wanted in this case, would come at Nawada Metro Station parking at at about 04:30 PM and could be arrested. Thereafter, they went to Nawada Metro Station with accused Sonu and secret informer. Secret informer pointed towards accused Nazim and Kapil who were sitting near the wall of parking. They tried to apprehend them. Accused Kapil Sharma surrendered himself but accused Nazim tried to run away but he was apprehended.
This witness has identified both the accused Nazim and Kapil before the court. He has also proved the arrest memos Ex.PW3/A & Ex.PW3/B, personal search memos Ex.PW3/C & Ex. PW3/D and disclosure statements Ex.PW3/E and Ex. PW3/F of accused persons Nazim and Kapil. He has further stated that both the accused persons pointed out the place of occurrence vide memos which are proved as Ex.PW3/G. He has further stated that accused Kapil Sharma got recovered one silver glass, one silver coin from his house which were seized SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 8/33 by the IO vide memo Ex. PW3/H after sealing the same with the seal of VPS. He has further stated that accused Nazim got recovered one silver glass, one silver coin in a plastic polythene and two screw drivers, plaas, cutter, iron rod etc. in a black coloured raxin bag from his house. IO seized all the abovesaid articles vide memo Ex.PW3/J after sealing the same with the seal of VPS. This witness has identified the case property i.e.two silver coins, three silver glasses as Ex. P.1 to Ex.P.4, iron Aari, two screw drivers,one iron rod,one plaas, one paper cutter in a raxin bag as Ex.P.5(colly.).
9. PW4 Ct.Prem Chand has deposed that on 02.07.2006, he joined the investigation with ASI Vijay Pal. On that day, accused Sonu Chopra was taken out from the Janak Puri lock up for investigation and he alongwith Sonu Chopra and ASI Vijay Pal, reached Nawada Metro Station as ASI Vijay Pal received secret information that two other persons involved in the case with Sonu Chopra were sitting in the Car parking of Nawada Metro Station. He has further stated that on reached there, secret informer pointed out towards two boys seated adjacent to Nawada Metro Station Car parking as being those two boys SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 9/33 involved in this case. He has further stated that Ct.Satyawan and ASI Vijay Pal attempted to apprehend those two boys and one of those boys namely Kapil Sharma came himself to the IO and other boy tried to run away but his foot got entangled in the railing and Ct.Satyawan apprehended him. Thereafter, accused Sonu Chopra, Kapil Sharma and Nazim were brought to PS. He further deposed that thereafter, all the three accused persons were taken the police party to the house where they had committed the theft. The disclosure statement of accused Kapil Sharma was recorded by ASI Vijay Pal. On the disclosure statement made by accused Nazim, articles i.e.silver glass and a silver coin, had been recovered from the house of accused Nazim on that day itself. This witness has identified his signatures at point A on Ex.PW3/J and at point B on Ex. PW3/H. This witness has identified one of the silver glass and one of the silver coins marked as PW4/1 and one of the silver coin marked as PW4/2.
This witness was crossexamined by the Ld.APP for the State wherein he has admitted that at the pointing out of the accused Nazim and on his disclosure, a black SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 10/33 plastic bag containing instruments for breaking locks were recovered. In the crossexamination done by Ld.APP for the State,this witness has also identified silver glass Ex.PW4/3 and silver coin Ex.PW4/4 as being recovered from the house of accused Kapil Sharma. He has also identified one raxin bag Ex.PW4/6, which was containing an iron rod with a curve end on one side, a screw driver, one Aari for breaking open a lock, a cutter, a screw driver and a plier for opening nuts and bolts, which were recovered from the house of accused Nazim as Ex.PW4/5 (1 to 6). In the crossexamination done by Ld.APP for the State, this witness has correctly identified all the three accused persons.
10.PW5 Sh.Bhupesh Kumar has deposed that on 19.07.2006, the TIP proceedings of the case property was fixed by him vide order Ex. PW5/A. He has further stated that as he was on leave on 19.07.2006, he again fixed the TIP proceedings for 29.07.2006 vide order Ex. PW5/B. This witness has proved the TIP proceedings as Ex.PW5/C conducted by him and identified his signatures at point X. He has further stated that the witness Suresh Kumar Singhal correctly identified the SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 11/33 case property and the certificate to that effect bearing his signatures thereon at point X1 is at Ex. PW5/D. He has certified the proceedings to contain a true and correct account of the proceedings conducted by him and identified his signatures at point X2 on Ex.PW5/E. He has further stated that copy of the said TIP proceedings was also directed by him to be given to the IO vide his signatures at point X3 on Ex.PW5/F. He has further stated that the application filed by the IO seeking supply of copy was also allowed by him vide his order at point X to X1 with his signatures at point Y on Ex.PW5/G.
11.PW6 Ct.Devender Singh has deposed that on the intervening night of 29/30.06.2006, he was on duty with SI Vijay Pal, who was entrusted with DD no.70B and he had accompanied him in relation to an information of theft at Mohan Garden at B107, Mohan Garden. When they reached at B107, Mohan Garden, they found that locks of the house had been broken and there was fire in the rear rooms of the house. In the meantime, Fire Brigade also reached the spot. Sh.Suresh Kumar Singhal, owner of the house checked the house and stated that some of his articles had been stolen and his statement SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 12/33 was recorded by the IO. He has further stated that Suresh Singhal also expressed his suspicion on a boy living in the neighbourhood named Sonu. Crime team was called at the spot. ASI Vijay Pal Singh wrote the rukka and handedover the same to him for registration of the FIR. After registration of the FIR, he came back to the spot.
This witness has further stated that on 30.06.2006, IO took him at 04:00 PM in search of accused Sonu Chopra and they found Sonu at Peepal Chowk,Mohan Garden at 06:00 Pm. On the pointing out of Suresh Singhal, they apprehended Sonu. He has further stated that accused Sonu made disclosure statement which is proved as Ex. PW1/D and he had signed the same at point A. He has further stated that cash of Rs.6,000/, a silver glass and one silver anklet were recovered from the house of accused Sonu on his pointing out which were seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/F. This witness has also proved the arrest memo of accused Sonu as Ex. PW1/C. This witness has identified the case property i.e. silver glass as Ex. PW6/1, silver anklets as Ex. P.4 and Rs.6,000/ as Ex. P.3 (colly.).
12.PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh has deposed that on 29.06.2006, SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 13/33 at 11:58 PM, DD No. 70B was received in PS regarding theft and fire incident at B107, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar. The same was assigned to him for action in the matter. Accordingly, he along with Ct. Devender reached H. No. B107, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar and saw back portion of H. No. B107, Mohan Garden was under fire. The Fire Brigade officials were present and they were extinguishing the fire. No casualty was there. In the meantime, Suresh Singhal, the landlord came there and gave his statement suspecting Sonu responsible for the incident. This witness was proved the statement of injured as Ex.PW1/A. He has further stated that thereafter, he prepared rukka, which is proved as Ex.PW7/A and gave it to Ct. Devender for registration of the case. He summoned Crime Team at the spot. Ct. Devender left the spot with rukka at 2:20 AM. Crime Team had reached the spot. Ct. Devender reached the spot with original rukka and carbon copy of FIR, which is proved as Ex.PW2/A and handed over the same to him. He prepared site plan of the spot at the instance of complainant Suresh Singhal, which is proved as Ex.PW1/DA. He has further stated that he made efforts SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 14/33 to trace the named accused Sonu. He was not found present at his residence 80/116, Mohan Garden. The household articles lying therein were in burnt condition. He has further stated that he observed that two broken locks were lying on the back side of the house and the same were sealed by him with the seal of 'VPS' and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. This witness has further stated that on 30.06.2006, at about 4:00 PM, he along with Ct. Devender reached the house of complainant and associated him in the investigation. Thereafter, they proceeded for Peepal chowk, Uttam Nagar, in search of accused Sonu, who was seen present at the Peepal Chowk and at the instance of the complainant, he was apprehended and interrogated by him. This witness has proved the Arrest memo Ex.PW1/C, personal search memo Ex.PW7/B and disclosure statement of accused Sonu Chopra as Ex.PW1/D and stated that accused Sonu Chopra named his coaccused Nazim @ Bhura and Kapil Sharma in his disclosure statement. He has further stated that accused Sonu further disclosed that Rs. 6000/, one silver glass and pair of pajaib were kept by him at his SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 15/33 home. Accordingly, police party led by accused Sonu went to his house 80/116, Peepal Chowk, Mohan Garden, where accused Sonu produced Rs. 6000/, one silver glass and pair of pajeb. The complainant identified the silver glass and pair of pajaib. Thereafter, he sealed all the abovesaid articles with the seal of VPS and seized vide Seizure memo Ex.PW1/F. He prepared site plan of place of recovery of articles which is proved as Ex.PW7/C. Thereafter, they proceeded for search of other accused persons in the locality. The house number of coaccused persons were not disclosed by accused Sonu.
This witness has further stated that on 01.07.2006, he produced accused Sonu before the court and obtained his two days police custody remand. On 02.07.2006, in pursuance of secret information, he along with accused Sonu, Ct. Satywan and Ct. Prem Chand along with informer proceeded for Nawada Metro Station. Accused persons Nazim @ Bhura and Kapil Sharma were seen seated in the parking of Metro Station at the instance of informer and accused Sonu. Both were apprehended and he interrogated them and arrested in this case.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 16/33This witness has proved the Arrest memo Ex.PW3/B, personal search memo Ex. PW3/D and disclosure statement vide memo Ex. PW3/F of accused Nazim. He has also proved the arrest memo Ex. PW1/A, personal search memo Ex.PW1/C and disclosure statement memo Ex.PW1/E of accused Kapil Sharma. Thereafter, both the accused persons led the police party to the spot and pointed out the place of occurrence and pointing out memo is proved as Ex.PW1/G, which was prepared at the instance of Kapil Sharma and pointing out memo Ex.PW3/G prepared at the instance of accused Nazim. Complainant Suresh Singhal was found present. Thereafter, accused Nazim led the police party to his house no. 38/39 Bhagwati Garden, Uttam Nagar, where accused Nazim got recovered a black colour raxin bag containing therein one iron cutter, two screwdrivers, one plash, one silver glass and one silver coin. He seized the recovered articles vide seizure memo Ex. PW2/J after sealing them in a cloth parcel with the seal of VPS. Thereafter, accused Kapil led the police party to his house RZ A28, Bhagwati Garden, Uttam Nagar and got recovered one silver glass and one silver coin which was SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 17/33 lying in the bed. He sealed the abovesaaid articles with the seal of VPS and took the same in possession vide Ex. PW3/H. This witness has further stated that on 29.07.2006, he got conducted TIP of seized property i.e. silver glasses, silver coins, silver pajeb and obtained copy of TIP proceedings of case property. Complainant had correctly identified coins and glasses and silver pajaib.
This witness has proved the two locks as Ex. P.1 & Ex.P.2, seizure memos of silver glasses and coins Mark P4/1 and P4/2, pair of Pajeb and currency notes Ex. PW7/P1 (colly.), iron saw, one bent iron, two screwdrivers, cutter and plaas as Ex. P.5 (colly.).
13.Thereafter, statements of accused persons U/s 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein they have stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. However, all the accused persons did not adduce any defence evidence.
14.I have heard Ld.Chief. P.P.for the State, Sh.S.K.Sood, ld.Counsel for the accused Nazim and Kapil and Sh.Anil Singh, ld. Counsel for accused Sonu Chopra and have perused the record carefully.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 18/3315.It is contended by Sh.S.K.Sood, ld. Counsel for accused Nazim and Kapil that complainant has not given the details of the articles which were stolen from his house. No bill or receipt was given to the IO to show that any articles were stolen from his house. As per the prosecution version, Mr.Satish Sharma had informed the complainant but the IO has not recorded the statement of Mr.Satish Sharma. No statement of any Fire Brigade official is recorded during investigation. No registration number of the Fire Brigade vehicle was mentioned in the proceedings of investigation. IO has not lifted chance prints. Nor photographs of the spot/house of the complainant were taken. As per the prosecution version, accused Sonu Chopra was kept in the lock up of PS Janak Puri instead of lock up of PS Uttam Nagar. No record of PS Janak Puri is produced in the court to show that accused Sonu Chopra was kept in the lock up of PS Janak Puri. No investigation was conducted at the spot. There is a cutting in the personal search memo of the accused persons. It is also contended that there is no evidence on record to show that the accused persons had committed mischief by setting the H.No. B107, Mohan Garden, SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 19/33 Uttam Nagar, Delhi on fire. It is prayed that accused persons be acquitted.
16.Sh.Anil Singh, ld. Counsel for accused Sonu Chopra also argued on the similar lines.
17.On the other hand, it is contended by the Ld.Addl. P.P.for the State that accused Sonu Chopra was arrested on 30.06.2006 in the evening time and stolen articles were recovered from his house. It is also contended that stolen articles were recovered from the house of other co accused persons Nazim and Kapil. There is enough material on record to convict the accused persons U/s 457/380/201/436/34 IPC.
18.Now I am dealing with the contention of the accused persons one by one.
19.First contention of the ld. Counsel for the accused persons is that no details of the stolen articles is mentioned by the complainant in his statement Ex.PW1/A. It is correct that complainant has not mentioned the specific details of the stolen articles in his complaint but he has stated that when he entered the house, he found that cash amount of Rs.3.50 lacs, gold and silver SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 20/33 jewellery were missing and the details, he will tell after inquiring from his wife. The complainant has made statement to the police at 02:20 AM and it is an admitted fact that at the time of incident, the complainant was not present at his house and he had gone to attend the marriage of his niece. As per the prosecution case, when the complainant reached at his house, he saw that the locks on the back side door of the house were broken and back side of the house was under fire. I am of the view that if the details of the stolen articles were not given by the complainant, it is of no help to the accused persons. Thus, this contention of ld.defence counsel carries no force.
20.It is vehemently contended by the ld. Counsel for the accused persons that it is an admitted fact by the prosecution that the intimation was given by Mr.Satish Sharma to the complainant, who is neighbour of the complainant, but he has not been joined in the investigation.
As per the deposition of PW1 complainant Sh.Suresh Singhal, one neighbour of the complainant Mr.Sharma informed him about the incident and thereafter, he SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 21/33 reached at the spot. If the statement of Mr.Sharma who is neighbour of complainant is not recorded by the IO, then it of no help to the accused persons when the accused persons are not able to shatter the testimony of PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal about giving information to him by Mr.Sharma. Thus, this contention of ld.defence counsel carries no force.
21.It is also contended by the ld. Counsel for the accused persons that IO has not taken into possession the locks and thus, it belies the case of the prosecution that locks were broken by the accused persons.
In the present case, IO has recovered both the broken locks in presence of the complainant and PW6 Ct.Devender from the spot. PW6 Ct.Devender and PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh proved the seizure memo of broken locks, one of Harrison and other of Panther as Ex. PW1/B. PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal, PW6 Ct. Devender and PW7 IO/SI Vijay Pal Singh deposed that the broken locks were taken into possession. Moreover, during the testimony of PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal, he had identified the locks, one of Harrison and other of Panther as Ex.P.1 & Ex.P.2. Thus, this contention of ld.defence counsel SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 22/33 carries no force.
22.It is further contended by the ld.defence counsel that no chance prints were taken by the IO and thus, it belies the case of the prosecution that any incident of theft and fire had been committed by the accused persons.
I fail to appreciate this contention of the ld.defence counsel as admittedly after committing theft of the articles, the house of complainant was set on fire so that the chance prints on the Almirah be not detected. It is not the case of the prosecution that any chance prints of accused persons were found present at the spot. I am of the view that no chance prints were available at the house as the back portion of the house was set under fire. Thus, this contention of ld.defence counsel carries no force.
23.Ld.defence counsel has also contended that photographs of the site were not taken by the IO and no statement of the Fire Brigade persons were recorded. Thus, it is not proved that house of the complainant was set on fire.
I fail to appreciate this contention of ld.defence counsel as PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal has categorically stated that when he reached his house, he saw his house SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 23/33 on fire and Fire Brigade had already reached there.
PW6 Ct. Devender Singh has also stated that he alongwith SI Vijay Pal Singh reached at the spot i.e.B107, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi and found locks of the house were broken and there was fire in the rear rooms of the house. In the meantime, fire brigade also reached at the spot.
Similar statement was given by PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh. From the testimonies of PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal, PW6 Ct.Devender and PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh, it is proved that fire brigade persons were present and no suggestion was given to any of the abovesaid witnesses i.e. PW1, PW6 and PW7 that Fire Brigade officials were not present at the spot and they were not extinguished the fire.
24.It is further contended by the ld. Defence counsel that in the personal search memo of accused Nazim, the date is mentioned as 30.06.2006. Thus, it shows that accused Nazim was arrested on 30.06.2006 itself.
PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh has appeared in the witness box and he has categorically stated that date is mistakenly written as 30.06.2006 in the Arrest Memo of SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 24/33 accused Nazim. Thus, even if by mentioning the date of arrest memo of accused Nazim as 30.06.2006, it does not belie the case of the prosecution, when the testimonies of PW3 HC Satyawan, PW4 Ct.Prem Chand and PW7 SI Vijay Pal singh regarding arrest of accused Nazim on 02.07.2007 are not shattered in any manner.
25.It is also contended by the ld.defence counsel that accused Sonu Chopra was arrested on 30.06.2006 and he was kept in lock up of PS Janak Puri and the accused Sonu was not kept in the lock up of PS Uttam Nagar. Thus, it belies the case of the prosecution.
PW3 HC Satyawan, PW4 Ct.Prem Chand and PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh admitted that accused Sonu was kept in the lock up of PS Janak Puri. PW3 HC Satyawan in crossexamination categorically stated that there was no lock up in the PS Uttam Nagar and thus accused Sonu was kept in the lock up of PS Janak Puri and he gave this answer on a specific Court quarry. Thus, PW3 HC Satyawan has categorically stated that there was no lock up in the PS Uttam Nagar and therefore, accused Sonu Chopra was kept in the lock up of PS Janak Puri and thus, this fact has already been explained by PW3 HC SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 25/33 Satyawan. Thus, this contention carries no force.
26.PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal has deposed in his statement that on the night of 29.06.2006, he had gone to attend the marriage of his niece which was being held in a Farm House at G.T.Karnal Road. He has further stated that at about 11:00/11:15 PM, he received a telephone call from his neighbour Sh.Satish Sharma, who informed him on telephone that smoke was coming out from his house. He told him to visit his house and to find out the cause for smoke as it would take him two hours for reaching home. He has further stated that Sh.Sharma went to the back side of his house and when he pushed the door, he found the same broken. He saw his house on fire. He has further stated that he reached his house and fire brigade had already reached by that time. The complainant raised suspicious on the accused Sonu Chopra.
Intimation was given by Sh.Satish Sharma to the complainant at about 11:15 PM and the complainant reached at the spot from G.T.Karnal road and atleast two hours must have been taken by the complainant to reach his house and statement of the complainant was recorded at 02:20 AM. Thus, immediately after reaching at the SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 26/33 spot, the statement of the complainant was recorded wherein he raised his suspicion on accused Sonu Chopra. Accused Sonu Chopra was arrested in the evening of 30.06.2006 and he gave disclosure statement. In pursuance to his disclosure statement, cash of Rs.6,000/ which was lying in a box of his room, one silver glass and pair of Pajeb were got recovered by accused Sonu Chopra. The said recovery was effected in presence of the complainant and Ct. Devender by the IO/SI Vijay Pal Singh.
Similar statement was given by PW7 IO/SI Vijay Pal Singh that cash of Rs.6,000/, one silver glass and one pair of Pajeb were recovered from the house of accused Sonu Chopra.
27.Accused Sonu Chopra during interrogation, gave the names of coaccused Nazim and Kapil. On 02.07.2007, accused Kapil and Nazim were arrested by the police and PW3 HC Satyawan, PW4 Ct.Prem Chand and PW7 IO/SI Vijay Pal Singh have deposed about the arrest of accused Kapil and Nazim.
Accused Nazim got recovered one black colour raxin bag from his house in which one iron cutter, two SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 27/33 screwdriver, one plaas, one silver glass and one silver coin were lying. The word "T100" was mentioned on the silver glass and one the silver coin, one one side there is a sign of "OM" and on the other side, there is the carving of Lord Ganesh and Goddess Lakshmi.
Accused Kapil got recovered one silver glass and one silver coin with the words OM on one side and the emblem of Lord Ganesha and Goddess Lakshmi on the other side.
The complainant identified all the silver articles i.e.glass, coins and Pajeb and this fact is proved by PW5 Sh.Bhupesh Kumar, Ld.Presiding Officer, Labour Court and he proved the TIP proceedings of the case property. From the TIP proceedings, it is clear that silver glasses, coins, Pajeb and cash were stolen from the house of the complainant and the accused persons got recovered above mentioned articles and lateron, the complainant identified these articles. The accused persons have not given any explanation as to how they were in possession of these articles. PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal has categorically stated that accused Sonu got recovered Rs. 6,000/cash, silver glasses, two silver coins and one pair SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 28/33 of silver Pajeb. PW3 HC Satyawan, PW4 Ct.Prerm Chand and PW6 Ct.Devender Singh have also proved that accused Nazim got recovered one black colour raxin bag from his house in which one iron cutter, two screwdriver, one plaas, one silver glass and one silver coin were lying. They have also proved that accused Kapil got recovered one silver glass and one silver coin from his house. This shows that the abovesaid articles were stolen from the house of complainant after breaking the locks of his house.
The testimonies of PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal, PW3 HC Satyawan, PW4 Ct.Prem Chand and PW6 Ct.Devender Singh regarding recovery of Rs.6,000/, silver glass and coins and one pair of Pajeb are not shattered in any manner. Thus, it is proved that theft has been committed at the house of complainant and stolen articles were got recovered by the accused persons.
28.Moreover, the testimony of PW1 Sh.Suresh Kumar Singhal, PW6 Ct.Devender Singh and PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh regarding arrest of accused Sonu on 30.06.2006 and recovery from his house is not shattered in any manner. Similarly, the recovery from the houses of SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 29/33 accused Nazim and Kapil and their arrest are not shattered in any manner. The testimonies of PW3 HC Satyawan, PW4 Ct. Prem Chand and PW7 SI Vijay Pal Singh corroborates with each other. Thus, it can be safely held that the stolen articles were recovered from the house of accused persons.
29.PW1 Sh.Suresh Kumar Singhal is a truthful witness and he has given minute details of the incident. He has given the minute details about receiving of the information from Mr.Sharma. After receiving information from Mr.Sharma, he reached at the spot and raised suspicious on accused Sonu Chopra. Nothing fruitful was extracted from his crossexamination. He stood firm during his crossexamination about his joining the investigation and arrest of accused Sonu Chopra at Peepal Wala Chowk. He has categorically stated in his crossexamination that the articles recovered from the accused Sonu Chopra, were recovered from his house. In crossexamination, he has stated that police had brought the two accused persons namely Nazim and Kapil Sharma to his house two days after the FIR. In the crossexamination, he has also stated that the two locks i.e.one of Harrison and SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 30/33 other of Panther were found broken and the articles which were stolen, were within the Almirah. He has also stated that the police had seized and sealed the articles recovered from the house of accused Sonu Chopra in his presence.
30.PW1 Sh.Suresh Singhal in the crossexamination has rightly stated that he was not present at the time of recovery from accused persons Nazim and Kapil. The testimony of PW1 Sh.Suresh Kumar Singhal is not shattered in any manner.
31.The accused persons have given no motive as to why the complainant will falsely implicate them in the present case and will exonerate the real culprits. PW1 has stated that accused Sonu Chopra was working as an electrician in the locality and he has raised suspicion on the accused Sonu Chopra.
32.Taking into consideration that accused Sonu Chopra was arrested on 30.06.2006 and cash of Rs.6,000/, silver glasses, two silver coins and one pair of Pajeb were recovered from his house. In pursuance of his disclosure statement, accused Nazim and Kapil were arrested on 02.07.2006. Accused Nazim got recovered from his house SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 31/33 one black colour raxin bag containing one iron cutter, two screwdrivers, one plaas, one silver glass and one silver coin. Accused Kapil got recovered one silver glass and one silver coin from his house. I am of the view that it can be easily inferred that accused persons had committed lurking house tress in the night time in order to commit theft and accused persons had committed mis chief by setting the house no. B107, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi on fire.
33.Moreover, chain of the circumstances is complete which shows that accused persons after committing theft of the articles from the house of complainant with the intention to cause evidence of theft to disappear, put the house of the complainant on fire.
34.Moreover, no defence evidence has been adduced by the accused persons. Accused Sonu has nowhere stated that he was not present near the house of the complainant on the night of 29/30.6.2006. In the statement U/s 313 Cr.P.C., accused persons have stated that they have been falsely implicated in the present case.
35.In view of above discussion, I am of the considered view that the prosecution has proved its case beyond SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 32/33 reasonable doubt. Accordingly, all the accused persons namely Sonu Chopra, Nazim and Kapil are hereby held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 457/380/201/436/34 IPC.
36.Further it is ordered that the case property of this case, if any, be disposed of/destroyed after expiry of period of filing appeal, if any.
They be heard on the Quantum of Sentence.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN (NARESH KR. MALHOTRA) COURT ON: 04.05.2016 ASJ05 (West), THC, Delhi.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 33/33IN THE COURT OF SH. NARESH KUMAR MALHOTRA, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE05, WEST, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF SESSIONS CASE NO.81/15 & OLD SC No. 29/11 ID No. 02401R0264862009 FIR No. 562/06 P.S Uttam Nagar U/S 457/380/436/201/411/34 IPC STATE VERSUS (1) Nazim @ Bhura S/o Sh.Sabir R/o PO Gokul Pur, PS Karel, Distt.Main Puri, U.P. (2) Kapil S/o Sh.Om Prakash Sharma R/o RZA28, Bhagwati Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi.
(3) Sonu Chopra S/o Sh.Om Prakash R/o 80/116, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi.
07.05.2016 :
ORDER ON SENTENCE :
Present : Ms.Madhu Arora, Ld. Substitute Addl. P.P.for the State.
All the Convicts are produced from J.C. SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 34/33 Contd....2.SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 35/33
: 2 :
Sh.S.K.Sood, ld. Counsel for convict Nazim and Kapil Sharma.
Sh.Anil Singh, ld. Counsel for convict Sonu Chopra.
Arguments on the point of Sentence have been advanced. It is contended by Sh.S.K.Sood, ld. Counsel for the convicts Nazim and Kapil Sharma that both the convicts are of young age. They are unmarried and having an old parents. There is noone to look after them. They have already remained in J.C. for about 1½ months. They are not previously convicted. There is no other case registered against them. It is prayed that lenient view be taken.
It is contended by Sh.Anil Singh, ld. Counsel for the convict Sonu Chopra that he is of young age. He has remarried and having one girl child aged about 56 years old from his earlier marriage. His parents have already been expired. There is noone to lookafter his second wife and girl child. He has already remained in J.C. for about 1½ months. He is not previously convicted. There is no other case registered against him. It is prayed that lenient view be taken.
On the other hand, it is contended by ld. Substitute Addl.PP for the State that the prosecution has proved its case and it is prayed that no lenient view be taken.
In the present case, accused persons have committed house tresspass after breaking the locks of the backside of the house of complainant during night time and committed theft of Rs.3.50 lacs and silver articles. Thereafter, they set the house of the complainant on fire, SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 36/33 so that evidence at the house of the complainant be destroyed. In these circumstances, I deem it appropriate, if all Contd....3.SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 37/33
: 3 :
the convicts namely Nazim, Kapil Sharma and Sonu Chopra are sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years each and fine of Rs.2,000/ each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days each U/s 457/34 IPC.
Further, I sentenced all the convicts namely Nazim, Kapil Sharma and Sonu Chopra to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years each and fine of Rs.2,000/ each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days each U/s 380/34 IPC.
Further, I sentenced all the convicts namely Nazim, Kapil Sharma and Sonu Chopra to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years each and fine of Rs.1,000/ each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 10 days each U/s 201/34 IPC.
Further, I sentenced all the convicts namely Nazim, Kapil Sharma and Sonu Chopra to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for four years each and fine of Rs.2,000/ each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days each U/s 436/34 IPC.
Further it is ordered that all the accused persons shall pay an amount of Rs.20,000/ (Rs.6,500/ to be paid by convict Nazim, Rs.6,500/ to be paid by convict Kapil Sharma and Rs. 7,000/ to be paid by convict Sonu Chopra) as compensation to the complainant as an amount of Rs.3.50 lacs and silver articles were stolen from his house and backside of his house was put on fire.SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 38/33
Further it is ordered that in default of payment of compensation amount, they shall further undergo SI for three months each.
Fine not paid by all the convicts.
Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. be given to all the convicts.
Contd....4.SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 39/33
: 4 :
All the sentences shall run concurrently. Copy of the Judgment and Order on Sentence be given to all the convicts free of cost.
File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN (NARESH KR. MALHOTRA) COURT ON: 07.05.2016 ASJ05 (West), THC, Delhi.SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 40/33
FOR TRIAL WARRANT OF COMMITMENT ON A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT BY A SESSIONS JUDGE (SECTION 383 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE) IN THE COURT OF SH. NARESH KUMAR MALHOTRA: ASJ05 :
WEST DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI SESSIONS CASE NO.81/15 & OLD SC No. 29/11 ID No. 02401R0264862009 FIR No. 562/06 P.S Uttam Nagar U/S 457/380/436/201/411/34 IPC To The Jail Superintendent Tihar, Delhi.
In the abovesaid case, accused Sonu Chopra S/o Sh.Om Prakash R/o 80/116, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi is held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 457/380/201/436/34 IPC.
Accordingly, Convict Sonu Chopra is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 457/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Sonu Chopra is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 380/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Sonu Chopra is sentenced to undergo SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 41/33 Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 10 days U/s 201/34 IPC.
Contd...2.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 42/33: 2 :
Further, Convict Sonu Chopra is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for four years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 436/34 IPC.
Further it is ordered that Convict Sonu Chopra shall pay an amount of Rs.7,000/ as compensation to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation amount, he shall further undergo SI for three months each.
Fine not paid by the convict.
All the sentences shall run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. be given to the convict. This is to authorize and require you, the said Superintendent, to receive the said convict into your custody in the said jail together with this warrant to undergo the sentence as awarded by this Court.
Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this 07th day of May, 2016.
Note : Fine not paid. (Naresh Kumar
Malhotra)
ASJ05/West/THC/Delhi/07.05.2016
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 43/33
FOR TRIAL
WARRANT OF COMMITMENT ON A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT BY A SESSIONS JUDGE (SECTION 383 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE) IN THE COURT OF SH. NARESH KUMAR MALHOTRA: ASJ05 :
WEST DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI SESSIONS CASE NO.81/15 & OLD SC No. 29/11 ID No. 02401R0264862009 FIR No. 562/06 P.S Uttam Nagar U/S 457/380/436/201/411/34 IPC To The Jail Superintendent Tihar, Delhi.
In the abovesaid case, accused Kapil Sharma S/o Sh.Om Prakash Sharma R/o RZA28, Bhagwati Garden, Uttam Nagar, Delhi is held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 457/380/201/436/34 IPC.
Accordingly, Convict Kapil Sharma is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 457/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Kapil Sharma is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 380/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Kapil Sharma is sentenced to undergo SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 44/33 Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 10 days U/s 201/34 IPC.
Contd...2.
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 45/33: 2 :
Further, Convict Kapil Sharma is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for four years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 436/34 IPC.
Further it is ordered that Convict Kapil Sharma shall pay an amount of Rs.6,500/ as compensation to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation amount, he shall further undergo SI for three months each.
Fine not paid by the convict.
All the sentences shall run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. be given to the convict. This is to authorize and require you, the said Superintendent, to receive the said convict into your custody in the said jail together with this warrant to undergo the sentence as awarded by this Court.
Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this 07th day of May, 2016.
Note : Fine not paid. (Naresh Kumar
Malhotra)
ASJ05/West/THC/Delhi/07.05.2016
SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 46/33
FOR TRIAL
WARRANT OF COMMITMENT ON A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT BY A SESSIONS JUDGE (SECTION 383 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE) IN THE COURT OF SH. NARESH KUMAR MALHOTRA: ASJ05 :
WEST DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI SESSIONS CASE NO.81/15 & OLD SC No. 29/11 ID No. 02401R0264862009 FIR No. 562/06 P.S Uttam Nagar U/S 457/380/436/201/411/34 IPC To The Jail Superintendent Tihar, Delhi.
In the abovesaid case, accused Nazim @ Bhura S/o Sh.Sabir R/o PO Gokul Pur, PS Karel, Distt.Main Puri, U.P. is held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable U/s 457/380/201/436/34 IPC.
Accordingly, Convict Nazim is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 457/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Nazim is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 380/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Nazim is sentenced to undergo SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 47/33 Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 10 days U/s 201/34 IPC.
Further, Convict Nazim is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Contd...2.SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 48/33
: 2 :
Imprisonment for four years and fine of Rs.2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days U/s 436/34 IPC.
Further it is ordered that Convict Nazim shall pay an amount of Rs.6,500/ as compensation to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation amount, he shall further undergo SI for three months each.
Fine not paid by the convict.
All the sentences shall run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. be given to the convict. This is to authorize and require you, the said Superintendent, to receive the said convict into your custody in the said jail together with this warrant to undergo the sentence as awarded by this Court.
Given under my hand and the seal of the Court on this 07th day of May, 2016.
Note : Fine not paid. (Naresh Kumar Malhotra) ASJ05/West/THC/Delhi/07.05.2016 SC No.81/15 FIR NO.562/06 State Vs.Nazim etc. Page No. 49/33