Delhi District Court
State vs Vinod Ors on 4 April, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. KUMAR RAJAT,
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-07, SHAHDARA DISTRICT,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
In the matter of :
CNR No. DLSH01-000464-2022
SC No. 20/2022
FIR No. 245/2020
PS Jagat Puri
U/s : 392/397/411/34 IPC
STATE
VS.
VINOD,
S/o Sh. Rajbir,
R/o A-517, Gali No. 6,
New Sanjay Amar Colony,
Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara,
Delhi.
......Accused
Date of Institution of case 20.01.2022
Date of case reserved for 22.03.2025
Judgment
Judgment Pronounced on 04.04.2025
Decision Acquitted u/s 392/397/411/34 IPC
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
1. As per the case of prosecution, on 09.10.2020, DD No. 95A was received and the IO reached the spot at Wine Shop, near Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar, Delhi-51 and two accused State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 1 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:01:11 +0530 persons Wasim @ Abdullah Rehman and Vinod were produced by Ct. Rajesh Kumar and Ct. Sunil along with recovered Rs. 3,000/- and paper cutter and stated that they had robbed the complainant Deepak Verma.
Complainant Deepak Verma alleged that he was working as an operator in the printing press at Krishna Nagar, Delhi-51 and at about 8.15 PM, he along with the factory owner Indu Bhushan Tripathi had gone to liquor shop near Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar on a scooty and he had gone to take liquor by parking scooty and when he took out the money from his pocket and counting it, then one person snatched the money and when he resisted, he hit on his chest with knife like thing due to which he frightened and started running towards Gole Chakkar and that person provided the snatched money to other person standing nearby and his owner had put scooty in front of that person and complainant caught him and raised the alarm due to which police officials came there on motorcycle and he pointed towards the accused persons that they had robbed him and the other person was also caught and the said articles were recovered.
2. On the said complaint of the complainant, the FIR was registered vide FIR No. 245/2020 dated 09.10.2020 in PS Jagat Puri u/s 392/397/411/34 IPC. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused Waseem @ Abdul Rehman u/s 392/397/34 IPC and accused Vinod u/s 411/34 IPC and after filing of charge sheet, cognizance of offences was taken against the accused persons.
State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 2 of 21
Digitally
signed by
KUMAR
KUMAR RAJAT
RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04
16:01:19
+0530
CHARGE
3. Charge for the offences punishable u/s
392/397/411/34 IPC was framed against accused Vinod @ Bidi and Wasim @ Abdul Rehman by Ld. Predecessor on 12.12.2022. Accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Accused Wasim @ Abdul Rehman expired on 12.09.2023 and case against him has been abated.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
4. Prosecution examined 5 witnesses in its favour to prove the case.
5. PW1 Retd. SI Mahipal deposed that on 09.10.2020, he was posted as SI at PS Jagat Puri. On that day, he was working as duty officer from 04:00 pm to 12:00 midnight. At around 11:15 pm, ASI Shiv Kumar produced a rukka for registration of FIR and he put his endorsement, Ex.PW1/A on rukka. PW1 registered the FIR No. 245/2020 u/s 392/397/411/34 IPC, Ex.PW1/B (OSR) and the certificate u/s 65B IEA is Ex.PW1/C. On 09.10.2020, during his duty hours at about 21:06:36 hours, an intimation with respect to apprehension of two pickpockets at wine shop Krishna Nagar, near Anandpur Trust was received in the PS which was entered in GD No. 95A, Ex.PW1/D.
6. PW2 Deepak Verma deposed that on 09.10.2020, at about 8.15-8.30 PM, he was returning to his home along with Indu Bhushan Tripathi (his owner) on his scooty. When they reached near liquor shop near Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar to collect liquor from there, PW2 deboarded the scooty and started walking towards liquor shop/Theka. PW2 took out money from State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 3 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:01:25 +0530 his pocket and started counting the same, then one person came and snatched abovesaid money from his hand.
7. PW2 further deposed that that person handed over the money to the other person accompanying him. PW2 raised alarm and his owner Indu Bhushan Tripathi reached there and he caught hold of the person, who snatched his money and other one managed to escape from there. In the meantime, two police officials also reached there, his owner disclosed the matter to them and then, those two police officials chased the above said other person and caught him. Thereafter, they all i.e. his owner, above said two persons and PW2 were taken to the PS.
8. PW2 further deposed that the person, who snatched money was having a paper cutter with him and the same was recovered from him. His statement/complaint dated 09.10.2020 was recorded, Ex.PW2/A. PW2 had correctly identified accused Vinod and other accused (Waseem) (who snatched money from PW2) and gave the money and then accused Vinod fled away from there and then, apprehended by the above said two police officials. PW2 had correctly identified accused Vinod in the court.
9. PW2 further deposed that the name of the person from whom paper cutter was recovered, came to be known as accused Wasim @ Abdul (abated) and accused Vinod was the other person and from his search, Rs. 3,000/- (6 notes of Rs. 500/-) were recovered from his possession. IO prepared the sketch of above said paper cutter vide sketch memo, Ex.PW2/B. IO/ASI Shiv Kumar put the paper cutter in a plastic container and State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 4 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:01:32 +0530 wrapped the same with the doctor tape and then sealed the same with the seal of 'SKS' and then seized it vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/C.
10. PW2 further deposed that IO seized above said recovered Rs. 3,000/- vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/D. Accused Vinod and co-accused Wasim @ Abdul were arrested vide arrest memos, dt. 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/E and Ex.PW2/F, their personal search were also conducted vide memos, dt. 09.10.2020 Ex.PW2/G and Ex.PW2/H respectively. IO prepared the site plan at the instance of PW2, dt. 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/I. PW2 had correctly identified one paper cutter (yellow colour), Ex.P1, which was recovered from accused Wasim vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/C. PW2 had correctly identified 6 currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/- each having numbers i.e. 2CL074349, 9HN549326, IVR858121, OEQ121911, 4VR361814 and 8UU164272), Ex.P2 (colly).
11. PW3 Indu Bhushan Tripathi deposed that on 09.10.2020, he along with his worker Deepak Verma was returning from their shop after closing the same on his scooty and at about 08:15 pm, PW3 stopped his scooty near Liquor Shop situated in front of Anand Trust, Krishna Nagar, Delhi. Deepak Verma deboarded the scooty and started moving towards above said wine shop and raised alarm saying that "mere paise nikal liye". Then, he came to PW3 and disclosed that he was robbed. Two police officials came along with two persons and one of them took one of those two persons on his motorcycle and the other one sat on his scooty and then they all were taken to PS State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 5 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:01:39 +0530 Jagat Puri. PW3 had correctly identified said paper cutter (yellow colour), Ex.P1 and said 6 currency notes, Ex.P2(colly).
12. PW4 HC Sunil deposed that on 09.10.2020, he was posted as Constable at PS Jagat Puri and on that day, he along with Ct. Rajesh was on patrolling duty on motorcycle and at about 08:40-08:45 pm, they reached near Wine Shop, Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar, Delhi where they met complainant Deepak Verma, who produced one other person and complainant disclosed that above said person had committed robbery with him and he was apprehended. On interrogation the name of that person came to be known as accused Wasim (abated) and one other public person namely Indu Bhushan Tripathi was also present with the complainant. Complainant also pointed out towards one another person, who was running with his robbed money. PW4 along with Ct. Rajesh apprehended accused Vinod.
13. PW4 further deposed that on search of accused Wasim, one paper cutter was found from his possession and on search of accused Vinod, Rs. 3,000/- were found from his possession. On seeing it, complainant Deepak identified the money, which was robbed from him and handed over to accused Vinod by co-accused Wasim. PW4 gave information at the PS. After sometime, IO/ASI Shiv Kumar Solanki came at the spot and they handed over accused persons along with recovered paper cutter and money. Accused persons were taken to the PS Jagat Puri due to the low visibility/light at the spot along with the complainant and one other public person namely Indu Bhushan Tripathi. In the PS, IO prepared the sketch of the paper cutter State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 6 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:01:46 +0530 vide sketch memo dt. 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/B and seized paper cutter vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/C after putting it in a transparent plastic box and sealing it with the seal of 'SKS'. IO also seized recovered currency notes i.e. 6 notes of denomination of Rs. 500/-, after wrapping it in a white envelope, vide seizure memo, dt. 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/D and IO prepared the rukka and got registered the FIR through DO.
14. PW4 further deposed that IO arrested accused Vinod and co-accused Wasim vide arrest memos dt. 10.10.2020, Ex.PW2/E and Ex.PW2/F, their personal search were conducted vide memos, Ex.PW2/G and Ex.PW2/H and their disclosure statements, Ex.PW4/A and Ex.PW4/B were recorded respectively. PW4 had correctly identified one paper cutter (yellow colour), Ex.P1 which was recovered from accused Wasim vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/C and correctly identified 6 currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/- each having numbers i.e. 2CL074349, 9HN549326, IVR858121, OEQ121911, 4VR361 814 and 8UU164272), Ex.P2 (colly), which were recovered from accused Vinod and seized it vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/D. PW4 had correctly identified accused Vinod in the court.
15. PW5 ASI Shiv Kumar Solanki deposed that on 09.10.2020, he was posted as ASI at PS Jagat Puri and on that day, on receiving DD No. 95A, Ex.PW1/D, PW5 reached at the spot i.e. Wine Shop, Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar, Delhi where he met Ct. Sunil and Ct. Rajesh, who produced complainant Deepak Verma, two other persons namely accused Wasim State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 7 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:01:54 +0530 (abated) and Vinod along with recovered Rs. 3,000/- and paper cutter to PW5. One other public person namely Indu Bhushan Tripathi was also present there. PW5 recorded the statement of complainant Deepak Verma, Ex.PW2/A. Accused persons were taken to the PS Jagat Puri due to the low visibility/light at the spot along with the complainant and one other public person namely Indu Bhushan Tripathi. In the PS, PW5 prepared the sketch of the paper cutter recovered from accused Wasim vide sketch memo dt. 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/B and seized paper cutter vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/C after putting it in a transparent plastic box and sealing it with the seal of 'SKS'.
16. PW5 further deposed that the total length of the paper cutter was found to be 22.3 cm, blade length was found to be 8 cm, width of blade was found to be 2 cm. PW5 also seized the recovered currency notes i.e. 6 notes of denomination of Rs.
500/-, from accused Vinod after wrapping it in a white envelope, vide seizure memo, dt. 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/D. PW5 prepared the rukka, Ex.PW5/A and got registered the FIR through DO. PW5 prepared the site plan, Ex.PW2/I at the instance of complainant. Thereafter, PW5 returned to the PS and arrested accused Vinod and co-accused Wasim vide arrest memos dt. 10.10.2020, Ex.PW2/E and Ex.PW2/F, their personal search were conducted vide memos, Ex.PW2/G and Ex.PW2/H and their disclosure statements were recorded vide statements dt. 10.10.2020, Ex.PW4/A and Ex.PW4/B.
17. PW5 further deposed that he deposited the case property in the malkhana and correctly identified one paper cutter State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 8 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT Date:
RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:01 +0530 (yellow colour), Ex.P1, which was recovered from co-accused Wasim vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/C and also correctly identified 6 currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/- each having numbers i.e. 2CL074349, 9HN549326, IVR858121, OEQ121911, 4VR361814 and 8UU164272), Ex.P2 (colly) as being the same currency notes, which were recovered from accused Vinod and seized it vide seizure memo, Ex.PW2/D. STATEMENT OF ACCUSED U/S 313 Cr.P.C.(351 BNSS)
18. Statement of the accused Vinod was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. (351 BNSS) on 11.03.2025 and he denied the incriminating evidence put to him and stated that all the witnesses are interested witnesses and he was falsely implicated by the police officials in the present case without any fault on his part and he is innocent and praying for acquittal as he was falsely implicated in the present case.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE, ANALYSIS OF WITNESSES AND FINDING ARGUMENTS OF LD. COUNSEL FOR ACCUSED
19. Ld. Counsel for the accused argued that he has been falsely implicated by the complainant in connivance with the police and he was lifted from his home and he had not committed any robbery and false recovery has been planted upon him by the police. There are contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses. The entire story has been fabricated by the complainant and he has no role in the commission of crime and he has no criminal history. It is also submitted that main material State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 9 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:02:09 +0530 witnesses Deepak Verma and Indu Bhushan Tripathi have not supported the case of prosecution and PW Deepak Verma had turned hostile in his cross-examination and as such his whole testimony cannot be relied upon as it is not corroborated by any other witness. False disclosure statement of the accused was recorded by the IO and site plan was not prepared at the instance of complainant Deepak Verma. It is also submitted that accused was not present at the spot on the alleged date, time and place.
ARGUMENTS OF LD. ADDL. PP FOR THE STATE
20. Ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that accused Vinod and Waseem had committed robbery with complainant and Rs. 3,000/- and paper cutter were recovered from their possession respectively and accused Vinod was correctly identified by the complainant/PW2 and other police officials as the person to whom the robbed money was given by co-accused Waseem. The police officials as well as the recovery of Rs. 3,000/-, have corroborated the version of complainant, who has deposed against accused in examination in chief and prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt that accused had committed robbery and as such, he is liable for the offences u/s 392/397/411 IPC.
21. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the records.
22. The prosecution has examined 5 witnesses including PW2 complainant/victim and one witness was dropped.
23. The charges against accused is u/s 392/397/411 IPC.
State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 10 of 21Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:16 +0530 390 IPC. Robbery:-
In all robbery there is either theft or extortion. When extortion is robbery:- Extortion is "robbery" if the offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, Induces the person so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.
Explanation.-- The offender is said to be present if he is sufficiently near to put the other person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint. The robbery is punishable u/s 392 IPC.
397 IPC. Robbery, or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt:-
"If, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years".
411 IPC. Dishonestly receiving stolen property:-
Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
24. As per the initial complaint, complainant Deepak Verma alleged that he was working as an operator in the printing press at Krishna Nagar, Delhi-51 and at about 8.15 PM, he along State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 11 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT Date:
RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:24 +0530 with the factory owner Indu Bhushan Tripathi had gone to liquor shop near Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar on a scooty and he had gone to take liquor by parking scooty and when he took out the money from his pocket and counting it, then one person snatched the money and when he resisted, he hit on his chest with knife like thing due to which he frightened and started running towards Gole Chakkar and that person provided the snatched money to other person standing nearby and his owner had put scooty in front of that person and complainant caught him and raised the alarm due to which police officials came there on motorcycle and he pointed towards the accused persons that they had robbed him and the other person was also caught and the said articles were recovered.
25. Complainant Deepak Verma was examined as PW2 and he is complainant/eye witness of the case as well as the victim and he proved his above complaint dated 09.10.2020, Ex.PW2/A and in his deposition before the Court, PW2 deposed the same date and place of occurrence as mentioned in Ex.PW2/A and further deposed the same time of offence as 8.15 PM and that when he reached. In his examination-in-chief, he correctly identified accused Vinod and also correctly identified the paper cutter, Ex.P1 and currency notes, Ex.P2, which were seized by IO in his presence and stated that robbed money was given to Vinod by co-accused Waseem and Vinod was apprehended by police officials.
26. In this cross-examination, PW2 stated that the place of incident was very crowded and it was dark at that time and there State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 12 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:31 +0530 was no street light near the spot and he could not understand, who committed robbery with him being very crowded and also he was not able to see the face of the person, who robbed him. PW2 also stated that he could not understand the questions of Ld. APP in his examination-in-chief on 02.08.2024 and that he had identified accused Vinod as assailant at the instance of IO, who met him outside the Court and showed the photograph of Vinod and that he is not the person, who had robbed him on 09.10.2020 and no recovery was effected from his possession. PW2 admitted that he had not mentioned any serial number of currency notes in Ex.PW2/A and he identified the currency notes, Ex.P2 at the instance of police official, who met him outside and directed him to identify paper cutter and currency notes. PW2 clarified that his version in his cross-examination is the correct version.
27. Since, PW2 turned hostile in his cross-examination, he was re-examined by Ld. APP and PW2 denied that he deposed falsely that spot was very crowded and there was no light near the spot and he was not able to see the face of accused and that he could not understand, who committed robbery with him due to crowd. PW2 also denied that he did not see the faces of accused Vinod and Wasim and deposed falsely that he could not understand the questions of Ld. APP in examination-in-chief and replied in affirmative without understanding the questions. PW2 also denied that he had falsely stated that he had identified accused Vinod in his examination-in-chief at the instance of IO, who met outside and showed him photograph of accused Vinod and also denied that he falsely deposed that Vinod had not robbed State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 13 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:38 +0530 him and nothing was recovered from his possession or that he identified the currency notes and paper cutter at the instance of IO. PW2 reiterated that what was stated by him in his cross- examination is the correct version.
28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rai Sandeep @ Deepu Vs. State of NCT of Delhi, AIR 2012 SC 3157, held the concept of sterling witness and observed in para-22 as under:-
"22. In our considered opinion, the "sterling witness "should be of a very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The Court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency of the statement right from the starting point till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and ultimately before the Court. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as the sequence of it. Such a version should have co-relation with each and every one of other supporting material such as the recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version should consistently match with the version of every other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any missing link in the chain State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 14 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:45 +0530 of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such a witness can be called as a "sterling witness"
whose version can be accepted by the Court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and material objects should match the said version in material particulars in order to enable the Court trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged".
29. In the present case PW2 has supported the prosecution in his examination in chief, but turned hostile in the cross- examination and clarified that his version in cross is correct one wherein he has exonerated the accused Vinod as he could not see his face and did not identify him as assailant, who robbed him and stated that he identified accused Vinod and said currency notes and paper cutter at the instance of IO, who met him outside the Court on the day of his examination in chief. Thus, due to change in the versions of PW2, he cannot be said to be a witness of "sterling quality".
PW2 has denied the contents of his complaint, Ex.PW2/A in his cross-examination and thus, it is doubtful and consequently, the contents of FIR, Ex.PW1/B is also doubtful.
30. In Lallu Vs. State, (2003) 2 SCC 401, it was held that oral testimony may be classified into three categories (i) wholly reliable, (ii) wholly unreliable and (iii) neither wholly reliable State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 15 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:02:52 +0530 nor wholly unreliable. In the third category of cases, the Court has to be circumspect and has to look for corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony.
From the testimony of PW2 Vinod, it is apparent that he is not a witness of sterling quality and as such his evidence falls under the category (iii) as mentioned in Lallu (Supra) and corroboration is required.
31. PW3 Indu Bhushan Tripathi has also deposed that on 09.10.2020, he along with PW2 Deepak Verma was returning from his shop at B-32, East Azad Nagar, Krishna Nagar, Delhi on scooty and at 8.15 PM, the scooty was stopped and PW2 went to take liquor from the nearby shop and raised alarm that his money was robbed and he intimated him about the same and police officials came with two persons and one went to PS Jagat Puri with police and another with them on their scooty. PW3 correctly identified the paper cutter, Ex.P1 and currency notes, Ex.P2. PW3 also failed to identify accused Vinod as one of the said accused.
32. PW3 also turned hostile and he was cross-examined by Ld. APP, wherein he denied that he saw that Deepak Verma was counting notes and accused Wasim snatched the same from him and put paper cutter on his chest and also denied that accused Wasim handed over robbed money to accused Vinod and Deepak Verma apprehended accused Vinod and raised alarm and when police officials came on motorcycle, PW2 Deepak Verma pointed towards accused Vinod, who was apprehended by police and recovered Rs. 3,000/- of Deepak Verma. PW3 also denied State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 16 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:02:59 +0530 that paper cutter was recovered from co-accused Wasim in his presence and seized by the IO and volunteered that police officials had come with the paper cutter and money, but they were not recovered from the possession of accused in his presence and police officials took his signature on blank papers.
33. PW3 also denied that accused persons were arrested or personally searched in his presence or that he deposed falsely that nothing was recovered from accused Vinod or that he did not deliberately identified accused Vinod. PW3 also denied the contents of his statement, u/s 161 Cr.P.C., Ex.PW3/A. Thus, even PW3 has not supported the case of prosecution at all and has not corroborated any fact stated by PW2 in his examination in chief and both public witnesses i.e. PW2 and PW3 have not deposed any fact against the accused Vinod and co-accused Wasim has already expired and case against him has been abated.
34. PW4 is HC Sunil, who conducted investigation with PW5 IO. PW4 deposed that on 09.10.2020 at about 8.45 PM, complainant Deepak Verma produced the person, who committed robbery with him near Wine Shop, Anandpur Trust, Krishna Nagar, Delhi, whose name was Wasim and co-accused Vinod was caught by Ct. Rajesh and paper cutter was recovered from accused Wasim and Rs. 3,000/- were recovered from accused Vinod, which were identified by complainant and IO came at the spot and accused persons were taken to PS Jagat Puri due to low visibility/light. PW5 prepared the sketch of said paper cutter, Ex.PW2/B and seized the same vide memo, Ex.PW2/C along with currency notes vide memo, Ex.PW2/D. PW5 arrested State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 17 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:03:05 +0530 accused Vinod and Wasim, conducted their personal search and recorded their disclosure statements, Ex.PW4/A and Ex.PW4/B.
35. PW5 has also deposed on same lines as that of PW4 and both PW4 and PW5 correctly identified accused Vinod and paper cutter, Ex.P1 and currency notes, Ex.P2, but since public witnesses/eye witnesses have not identified either accused or these articles, the recovery of these articles and commission of crime by accused Vinod becomes doubtful. PW4 has stated that there was low visibility at the spot, which is also deposed by PW2. PW4 & PW5 in their cross-examination admitted that the spot was very busy area and no public person was called to join the investigation. PW4 in his cross-examination stated that it was dark at the spot and there was no street light, which corroborates the version of PW2 that he could not see the face of assailants due to dark and no street light.
DEFENCE OF THE ACCUSED
36. Accused Vinod stated in his statement u/s 351 BNSS that all the witnesses are interested witnesses and he was falsely implicated by the police officials in the present case without any fault on his part and he is innocent and praying for acquittal as he was falsely implicated in the present case.
The prosecution has not laid the foundational facts required for the offences charged for the accused to rebut the same and thus, the defence of the accused is not that important considering the testimonies of prosecution witnesses as discussed above.
State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 18 of 21Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:03:13 +0530
37. As per the case of prosecution, the paper cutter was used by accused Wasim at the time of robbery and it is settled law that Section 397 IPC is attracted only against the person, who used the deadly weapon at the time of committing robbery and that weapon was not used by accused Vinod and as such he cannot be held liable for the offence u/s 397 IPC.
In case titled as Ram Ratan Vs. State of MP, 2021 SCC Online SC 1279, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Section 397 IPC would be attracted against an accused, who had used the deadly weapons and not against the offender, who had not used any deadly weapon.
38. In Kailash Gour and Ors. Vs. State of Assam reported in MANU/SC/1505/2011, Apex Court has observed that an accused is presumed to be innocent till he is proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is a principle that cannot be sacrificed on the altar or inefficiency, inadequacy or inept handling of the investigation by the police.
39. In Subramanya Vs. State of Karnataka, dt. 13.10.2022, in Crl. Appeal No. 242/2022, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that it is settled principle of law that when two views are possible from the prosecution evidence, the one which is favourable to the accused shall have to be taken and the benefit of doubt shall have to be given to the accused.
40. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has time and again held that onus and duty to prove the case against the accused is upon the prosecution and prosecution must establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt. It is also a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that if there is a reasonable doubt with regard to the accused, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt resulting in State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 19 of 21 Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:03:19 +0530 acquittal of the accused. Reference may be made to the Judgments titled as 'Nallapati Sivaiah Vs. Sub Divisional Officer, Guntur', reported as VIII (2007) SLT 454 (SC) in this respect. Reference may also be made to the Judgment titled as 'Raj Kumar Singh @ Raju @ Batya Vs. State of Rajasthan', reported as (2013) 5 SCC 722, wherein it was held that the large distance between 'may be' true and 'must be' true, must be covered by way of clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence produced by the prosecution, before an accused is condemned as a convict, and the basic and golden rule must be applied and the Court must ensure that miscarriage of justice is avoided and if the facts and circumstances of a case so demand, then the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.
41. The evidence led by prosecution is not reliable, cogent and has lot of infirmities as there are lot of material variations, omissions, inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimonies of all the public witnesses led by the prosecution and thus, prosecution could not prove all the ingredients of Section 392/397/411/34 IPC against accused beyond reasonable doubt.
CONCLUSION
42. In the totality of the circumstances brought on record by way of evidence, it is observed that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused Vinod qua offence punishable u/s 392/397/411/34 IPC, thus, a benefit of doubt is given to the accused on the basis of above- noted principles and facts established on record.
State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 20 of 21Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR Date:
RAJAT RAJAT 2025.04.04 16:03:26 +0530
43. Consequently, the accused Vinod is acquitted of the offence u/s 392/397/411/34 IPC.
Bail bonds cancelled. Surety stands discharged. The Bond u/s 481 BNSS in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one Surety of like amount furnished by the accused today, shall remain in force for a period of six months.
File be consigned to Record Room after necessary compliance.
PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT Digitally signed by KUMAR KUMAR RAJAT ON THIS 04th DAY OF APRIL 2025. RAJAT Date:
2025.04.04 16:03:32 +0530 (KUMAR RAJAT) ASJ-07, Shahdara, KKD Delhi/04.04.2025 State Vs Vinod FIR No. 245/2020 PS Jagat Puri Page 21 of 21