Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 12, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

State vs . Keshav Kakad on 6 June, 2017

                                       1

        IN THE COURT OF SH. NARINDER KUMAR SPECIAL
JUDGDE, NDPS­02 (CENTRAL) TIS HAZARI COURTS:DELHI

Case No. 27727/16
SC No. 22/16                                                    
FIR No. 834/15
PS Prasad Nagar
u/s 302/304/387/324/506/436 IPC
In the matter of:­

State

Versus

Keshav Kakad
S/o Sh.Narayan Dass Kakad 
R/o H.No. 16/1154­E, Tank Road,
Gali No.­2, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
                                                                      .....Accused 

Date of institution : 25.02.2016
Date of Judgment  : 06.06.2017

                                 JUDGMENT

Keshav   Kakad   (accused)   has   been   facing   trial   for offences u/s 302304387324506 and 436 IPC.

Accusation   levelled   against   the   accused   is   that   on State vs. Keshav Kakad 2 27.10.2015,   at   about   6:20   p.m,   he   set   on   fire   Rakesh   and Smt.Mathura Devi, on the upper floor of house No.16/945, 47 BK­ E, Bapa Nagar, Delhi.

Another   allegation   levelled   against   him   is   that   he committed  the  offence for extortion  by putting aforesaid Rakesh Kumar and his brothers Suresh and Anand Kumar in fear of death and thereby, induced them to deliver money.

Accused is also alleged to have caused hurt to Anand Kumar   and   Suresh   Kumar   and   also   have   criminally   intimidated them.

By setting on fire shop of Anand Kumar, Rakesh and Suresh Kumar, using explosive substance i.e. petrol, accused is also alleged to have caused mischief. 

2.  Case   of  the   prosecution  is  that   on  27.10.15 at  about 6:24   pm,   police   of   Police   Station   Prasad   Nagar   received information   that   the   shop   of   informant   had   been   set   on   fire. Informant so informed from mobile phone no.8373959684. On the basis   of   this   information   communicated   by   the   PCR,   DD   entry no.28 A was recorded. SI Abhishek reached the spot and found that fire brigade had arrived at the place where shops were on fire.Four State vs. Keshav Kakad 3 persons injured there were shifted to hospital.

From   DD   No.40A,   the   SI   came   to   know   that   three vicitims   Rakesh,   Suresh  Kumar   and  Anand  Kumar  had  been   got admitted   at   BLK   Hospital.     Leaving   other   staff   at   the   shop,   SI reached the hospital in the company of SI Rakesh and collected MLCs of the injured persons from there. None of the injured was in a position to make statement.  

The   SI   again   received   another   DD   No.43­A   which revealed that Smt.Mathura Devi, another victim had been brought to   RML   hospital   and   declared   dead.     So,   he   accompanied   by Ct.Rakesh reached RML hospital and from there collected MLC of Smt.Mathura Devi.

From RML Hospital, the SI reached the spot.   No eye witness was available there. So, he appended rukka to DD No.28­A and got this case registered.

3. During investigation, crime team was called to the spot which inspected it and prepared its report.   The SI also prepared rough site plan of the place of occurrence.

Case of the prosecution is that on the night intervening 27­28.10.2015, SI Brij Pal went to BLK hospital and made enquiries State vs. Keshav Kakad 4 from Suresh and Anand wherein they are alleged to have orally levelled allegations against the accused. SI Brij Pal did not record their statements.

On reaching mortunary, SI Abhishek collected the dead body   of   Smt.Mathura   Devi   and   got   the   dead   body   subjected   to autopsy at Maulana Azad Medical College.

After that SI Abhishek accompanied by team of CFSL visited the spot.  During spot inspection, he seized material objects from there, including one country made pistol, in burnt condition. It was seized vide memo Ex.PW16/D. Thereafter, SI Abhishek visited RML hospital where PW Rakesh   was   lying   admitted   after   referral   from   BLK   hospital.   He recorded statements of Suresh and Anand Kumar whereas Rakesh was unfit to make statement.

Case   of   the   prosecution   is   that   Gopal   Upadhyay, another injured was got admitted at LHMC hospital.  SI Abhishek reached the hospital and recorded his statement too.

On   30.10.15,   SI   Abhishek   searched   for   the   accused. During search, secret informer told him that said accused was in Andheri Mumbai West along with his girl friend. SI Abhishek again accompanied by Ct.Krishan Pal on same day reached at 16/947, E­ State vs. Keshav Kakad 5 Block, Tank Road where owner of the property Sh.Kishosre Kumar met them and produced DVR of the CCTV camera along with one pendrive containing footage of incident of fire which took place at 16/945­947,  Tankl Road, Bapa Nagar, Delhi.   The  SI seized the said DVR and pendrive.

On 31.10.15, the SI came to know that accused was at Sankalp   Siddhi   Cooperative   Society,   Versoa,   Andheri   West Mumbai.  He apprised the SHO about it and left for Mumbai. SI Abhishek took help of local police official from Crime Branch Unit­ 8,   Mumbai   and   reached   Sankalp   Siddhi   Cooperative   Society, Versoa, Andheri West Mumbai where accused was found present. SI   Abhishek   brought   the   accused   from   the   society   to   the   office Crime Branch Unit­8. The SI made enquiries from the accused and arrested   him   and   got   subjected   him   to   personal   search.   Then, accused was produced before Ilaqa Magistrate and his custody was obtained by way of transit remand for 4 days and that is how, he was brought to Delhi and produced before concerned Metropolitan Magistrate.

   Rakesh injured died. Consequent upon his death, the offence was converted to Section 302 IPC and investigation was assigned   to   Inspector   Pushp   Lata.   During   investigation   above State vs. Keshav Kakad 6 referred   to,   DVR   is   said   to   have   been   sent   to   FSL   for   analysis. Report was then collected from FSL.

4. On   compeletion   of   investigation,   challan   was   put   in court. After complaince with provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C, case came to be committed to Court of Session.

5.  Prima   facie   case   having   been   made   out,   charge   for offences   u/s   302,   304,   387,   324,   506   &   436   IPC   was   framed against   the   accused   on   10.03.2016.     Since   the   accused   pleaded "not guilty" and claimed trial, prosecution was called upon to lead evidence.     In   order   to  prove   its  case,   prosecution   has  examined only following witnesses: ­ PW1 : HC Udayyan Rana PW2 : Dr.Pradeep Kulal R. PW3 : Dr.Mohit Chauhan PW4 : Dr.Monika Tanwar PW5 : Dr.Kamlesh Kumar PW6 : Dr.Harprit Singh PW7 : Dr.Rajesh Kumar Saha PW8 : ASI Bhuwan Chand PW9 : Sh. Roop Singh State vs. Keshav Kakad 7 PW10: Police Naik Parvin Bhiwa Agawane PW11: Police Naik Ravindra Hanumant Mane PW12: Sh. Anand Kumar PW13: Sh. Suresh Kumar PW14: Sh. Parveen Kumar PW15: Sh.Gopal Upadhayay PW16: SI Abhishek Kumar PW17: Sh.Prayank Nayak, Metropolitan Magistrate

6.  Arguments heard. File perused.

7.  As   noticed   above,   occurrence   is   alleged   to   have taken place on 27.10.15, at about 6:20 pm on the ground floor of H.No.16/945,47, BK­E, Bapa Nagar, Delhi.  Police came into action on recording of DD No.28A dted 27.10.15, recorded at 6:24   pm   on   the   basis   of   information   received   from   Duty Officer by way of PCR call that the shop of the caller was on fire.   The caller provided the aforesaid number of the shop. This DD entry came to be assigned to SI Abhishek Kumar and thereupon, the SI accompanied by Ct.Rakesh reached the spot.

According   to   PW16   SI   Abhishek   Kumar   on   having State vs. Keshav Kakad 8 reached the spot, he found that aforesaid shops were on fire at the given place on Tank Road and fire brigade had reached there.   Vide DD No.40A, he came to know that three victims Rakesh, Suresh and Anand Kumar had been got admitted in BLK Hospital.   He left Ct.Rakesh at the hospital and himself reached the hospital and from there collected their MLCs.  But none   of   these   three   victims   was   in   a   position   to   make statement   and   rather  Anand   Kumar   and   Suresh   were   found busy   in   medical   treatment   of   their   elder   brother   Rakesh Kumar.

SI Abhishek then received DD No.43­A and came to know   that   Smt.Mathura   Devi­another   injured   had   been brought dead at RML hospital. So he rushed to RML hospital and   collected   MLC   of   Smt.Mathura   Devi.   Thereafter,   he returned to the spot. No eye witness was found present there. So, he appended rukka Ex.PW16/A to DD No.28­A and got this case registered.

From  the   above  evidence,   it transpires  that  up  to the   registration   of  the   case   on   27.10.15,   no   one   raised   any accusing finger against any person what to say of involvement State vs. Keshav Kakad 9 of the accused.

8. Case of the prosecution is that crime team reached the spot, inspected it and prepared report.

9. PW15 Gopal Upadhyay had also suffered injuries in the   incident   and   he   was   got   admitted   at   LHMC   hospital. Having come to know of his admission at the said hospital, SI Abhishek reached the hospital and collected his MLC.  

According   to   PW15,   he   was   living   on   rent   in   a portion of 4th floor of house at Tank Road during the relevant period,   but   he   could   not   tell   the   complete   address   of   that house.     According   to  him,  on  27.10.15   at 6:30  pm,   he   was preparing meals, he saw heavy smoke and rushed downstairs while raising alarm.  Having fallen in the staircase, he became unconscious.     When   he   regained   consciousness,   he   found himself at Lady Harding Hospital.  Smoke occurred due to fire set on the lower floor but PW15 displayed ignorance as to how the fire broke or was set on.  So, PW15 has also not deposed anything against the accused. 

10.   As   per   prosecution   version,   main   stay   of State vs. Keshav Kakad 10 prosecution   was   on   the   statements   of   Anand   Kumar   and Suresh   Kumar,   who   were   running   shop   no.16/947,   Street NO.2, on Tank Road. Rakesh (since deceased) was their elder brother.  He too used to run business at the same shop.  PW12 According to PW12 Anand Kumar, on 27.10.15, he and his brother PW13 Suresh Kumar and Rakesh Kumar (since deceased) were present at the said shop. At about 5:45 pm, he and Suresh Kumar went downstairs and entered the basement to attend a customer. After about 10­15 minutes, they heard noise as if some blast had taken place. So both of them came upstairs and saw one generator on fire.   They also saw their brother Rakesh also on fire.   Some portion of the shop was also on fire.  

According to PW12, he and his brother Suresh put a cloth   and   poured   water   on   their   brother   Rakesh.     In   this process, they suffered burns.   They removed their brother to BLK hospital. The doctors of the said hospital referred  their brother to Safdarjung hospital.  Thereafter, he was referred to RML hospital.  At RML hospital, he remained under treatment State vs. Keshav Kakad 11 for about one week and ultimately, died on 3.11.15.

PW12 denied to have given any information to the police at any point of time. He stated about arrival of police at BLK   hospital   to   see   their   brother   Rakesh,   but   displayed ignorance as to who had informed the police.   He denied to have made any such statement before the police.

Case of the prosecution is that this witness was got examined u/s 164 Cr.P.C vide statement Ex.PW12/A. Prosecution has examined PW17 Sh.Prayank Singh, Metropolitan Magistrate,  who recorded   statements  of Anand Kumar and his brother Suresh.

According to PW12, he made statement before the Magistrate at the instance of police and stated whatever, he was   told   by   the   police.   He   disputed   the   correctness   of   the statement on the ground that it contained the version given by him as he was told by the police to state. 

  Finding that PW12 was not making statement in consonance with statement made before the police, Ld. Addl. PP   sought   permission   from   the   Court   and   put   leading questions   to   the   witnesses,   but   nothing   useful   to   the State vs. Keshav Kakad 12 prosecution could be elicited from him. 

The witness denied that the accused used to collect money from them forcibly by way of rangdhari or to that he had  so  stated  before  the  police.     He   further  denied   that  on 27.10.15 at about 6:00 pm, accused had come to him and his brother Rakesh at their shop or demanded money forcibly or that  he   refused  to  give   money  to the  accused,  or  called   his brother Suresh and apprised him of the demand. He further denied   that   the   accused   again   demanded   money   extending threats to them or that he pushed them and entered the shop or   then   poured   petrol   on   his   brother   Rakesh   and   set   him (Rakesh) and the shop on fire or that then he ran away from the spot.  He further denied that his brother Rakesh died in the hospital due to said burn injuries.   He further denied that he was suppressing true facts intentionally or deliberately or that he had arrived at compromise with the accused or that that is why he has not intentionally identifying him. PW13  PW13   Suresh   Kumar,   another   brother   of   Rakesh Kumar (since deceased) has also not raised any accusing finger State vs. Keshav Kakad 13 against the accused.  He too was put leading questions by Ld. Addl. PP after seeking permission from the court but nothing useful to the prosecution could be elicited from him. Ld. Addl. PP then confronted the witness with his statement Ex.PW13/A made before Metropolitan Magistrate u/s 164 Cr.P.C but the witness explained that the statement was not correct as he was in depression at the time, he made the same and also because it contained the version told  to him by the  police  for being stated.   He   even   displayed   ignorance   about   the   accused.   He further displayed ignorance as to how fire broke out in their shop.   He denied to have seen any person setting his brother and shop on fire.

When the witness was put leading questions by Ld. Addl. PP, he denied the suggestion to have made statement Ex.PW13/A   before   Metropolitan   magistrate   voluntarily.     He displayed ignorance about the police official, who had asked him to make statement in a particular manner but denied the suggestion that no such police officer had asked him to make any such statement.

PW13 further denied that the accused had actually State vs. Keshav Kakad 14 set his brother on fire which led to his death and that their shop also got burnt in the incident.

The fact remains that neither PW12 nor PW13 have stated before this court any fact regarding involvement of the accused.

PW14 Then,   there   is   statement   of   PW14   Sh.Parveen Kumar,   who   was   running   a   shop   while   dealing   in   CCTV camera and DVR repair work.  According to him, on 30.11.15, SI Abhishek called him to Police Station Pratap Nagar.  There, he copied CCTV footage contained in a DVR and pasted it in a pen drive.  He further stated to have delivered the pen drive to SI Abhishek with certificate u/s 65B of Evidence Act.

SI Abhishek Kumar has deposed to have visited the place of occurrence on 30.10.15 and contacted Kishore Kumar, owner   of   the   property.   As   stated   by   the   SI,   Kishore   Kumar produced before him DVR of CCTV camera with a pen drive containing   footage   of   incident   of   fire   which   occurred   on 27.10.15 at shop no.16/945­47.   He further deposed to have seized the DVR and pen drive vide memo Ex.PW16/E. State vs. Keshav Kakad 15 It may be mentioned here that Kishore Kumar said to be owner of the said property was not cited as a witness. He   has   also   not   been   examined   in   court   as   prosecution witness.  Certificate u/s 65 B of Evidence Act was to be given by Kishore Kumar, who is said to have been maintaining DVR. No such certificate was collected from him.   Furthermore, no certificate u/s 65 B of Evidence Act has been filed regarding copying of the CCTV footage from DVR and pasting it in pen drive.   Surprisingly,   no   such   pen   drive   has   been   proved   or produced   on   record.     When   statement   of   SI   Abhishek   was being recorded on 27.4.15, MHC(M) Rajbir Munshi stated that pen drive was not available in the malkhana.   Fact remains that no such pen drive has been produced before the court.

In view of the above discussion, statement of PW14 Parveen Kumar in respect of CCTV footage is also of no avail to the prosecution so as to be put to the accused by way of incriminating material in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C.

11. The   remaining   evidence   led   by   the   prosecution includes medical evidence and the evidence regarding arrest of State vs. Keshav Kakad 16 the accused from Mumbai. When the material witnesses PW12 and   PW13   have   not   raised   any   accusing   finger   against   the accused and the piece of electronic evidence is inadmissible for want of certificate u/s 65B of Evidence Act, Court finds that there is no incriminating material to be put to the accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. Therefore, recording thereof is dispensed with.

12. When   prosecution   has   not   brought   any incriminating material on record to be put to the accused u/s 313   Cr.p.C,   the   accused   is   hereby   acquitted   of   the   charge framed against him in this case.

13. Case property be disposed of on expiry of period for appeal/revision,   if   none   is   preferred   or   subject   to   decision thereof. File be consigned to record room. Announced in the open Court on 6th day of June  2017                   (Narinder Kumar)         Special Judge NDPS - 02 (Central)           Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi State vs. Keshav Kakad