Delhi District Court
State vs . Sanjay Etc. on 16 December, 2015
IN THE COURT OF MS. SWATI KATIYAR : MM05 (EAST) KKD DELHI
State Vs. Sanjay etc.
FIR No. : 295/2002
P.S. : Mayur Vihar
U/Sec. : 325/323/506/427/34 IPC
JUDGMENT :
a) Srl. No. of the case & Date of institution 385/15 & 24.12.2002
b) Date of commission of offence 25.10.2002
c) Name of the complainant Sh. V.P. Singh
d) Name of the accused 1. Sanjay (Absconder) S/o Daya Chand R/o Village Attapeer PS, Sector 20, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P.
2. Amit S/o Sh. Radhey Shayam R/o Village Boodhsani, PS Baleni, Distt. Baghpat, U.P.
3. Manoj Bihari @ Manoj Kumar (Absconder) S/o Sh. Maheshwar Prasad Singh R/o Sector22, Shivam Market, Noida.
e) Nature of offence complained of U/Sec.325/323/506/427/34 IPC f) Plea of the accused person Accused Amit pleaded not guilty g) Date reserved for order 03.12.2015 h) Final Order Acquitted i) Date of order 16.12.2015 FIR No. 295/2002 Page 1 of 7
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE CASE:
1. Accused Amit is facing trial in the present case for the offence punishable under Section 325/323/506/427/34 IPC on the allegations that on 25.10.2002 at about 7.15 p.m. near Chilla Check Post, NoidaDelhi Road, accused alongwith one Sanjay and Manoj Bihari (both since PO) in furtherance of their common intention voluntarily caused grievous hurt to Col. V.P. Singh Chauhan and also voluntarily caused hurt to one Rajesh Singh and criminally intimated Smt. Indu Singh with a threat to cause her death with intent to cause alarm and committed mischief by causing wrongful loss and damage to the window panes of car bearing No. UP16A6910 belonging to Col. V.P. Singh Chauhan.
2. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed on 24.12.2002, copies were supplied to accused and charge for offence punishable under Section 325/323/506/427/34 IPC was framed against the accused, to which, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. To prove its case, prosecution has examined eight witnesses.
4. PW1 is Col. V.P. Singh Chauhan, who has deposed that on 25.10.2002 at about 7.15 p.m., he alongwith his wife Smt. Indu was driving Honda City Car bearing No. UP16A6910 from Noida to New Delhi Railway Station, where his wife had to board the train to Chappra to see her mother. He deposed that ahead of Chilla Toll, one blue line bus bearing No. DL1P FIR No. 295/2002 Page 2 of 7 B3906 hit his car from the left side breaking rear view window and turned his bus to the right side over his car breaking front bumper of the left side of the car of complainant. He deposed that he asked the bus driver to stop, but he did not stop and made threatening gesture and used abusive language. PW1 deposed that after some distance, he over took the bus and made the bus driver to stop. PW1 stated that driver of the bus alongwith 23 of his helpers came down carrying iron rods and started threatening them. PW1 deposed that driver and helpers started beating complainant and his wife and one public person Rajesh who came forward to help the complainant was also beaten by them. He deposed that accused persons had broken rear window, both door windows of the car of complainant and due to the beatings given by accused persons, complainant suffered various injuries. He deposed that accused persons got inside the bus and tried to run away, but they were stopped by the complainant and other passengers. Thereafter, accused persons fled from the spot leaving the bus behind. PW1 deposed that he lodged his complainant Ex. PW1/A with the police. Police came at the spot and the car was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/B and he was taken to government hospital for medical examination. He deposed that after some days, accused persons were arrested vide arrest memo Mark PA, PB and PC and personally searched vide memos Ex. PW1/C to Ex. PW1/E. He deposed that the name of the driver came to be known as Manoj and other accused as Amit and Sanjay. He identified the damaged car as Ex. P1 and proved the FIR No. 295/2002 Page 3 of 7 photographs as mark P1 to P4.
5. PW2 is Smt. Indu Singh, i.e. wife of the complainant who has deposed on the same lines as PW1
6. PW3 is Duty Officer Retired ASI Vijay Pal, who proved on record copy of FIR Ex. PW3/A and endorsement on rukka Ex. PW3/B.
7. PW4 is Sh. Prithvi Raj i.e. Superdar of offending bus in question, who proved on record notice U/s. 133 MV Act as Ex. PW4/A, the reply U/s. 133 MV Act as PW4/B, superdarinama Ex. PW4/C and bus in question Ex. P1.
8. PW5 is Retired SI Kedar Nath, Mechanical Inspector, who conducted the mechanical inspection of bus bearing No. DL1PB3906 vide report dated PW5/A. He also mechanically inspected the car bearing No. UP16A6910 and proved his report Ex. PW5/B.
9. PW6 is HC Jitender Singh, who deposed that on 25.10.2002 on receiving of DD No. 32A, he alongwith SI Rajnikant reached at Noida Mod, where, they found one bus and one Honda City car in accidental condition and complainant met them. He deposed that IO recorded statement of complainant, on which, rukka was prepared and he was sent for registration of FIR to the PS. He deposed that he got the FIR registered and came back to the spot alongwith copy of FIR. He deposed that the offending bus was seized vide memo Ex. PW6/A and the car was seized vide memo Ex. PW1/B. FIR No. 295/2002 Page 4 of 7 The documents of bus were seized vide memo Ex. PW6/B and both the vehicles were taken to the police station. He deposed that he took the complainant to the LBS hospital for medical examination, where MLC of complainant was prepared and thereafter, PW6 came back to the PS and handed over MLC of complainant to the IO.
10. PW7 is Duty Officer Retired SI Om Pal Singh, who proved on record DD No. 32A, which is Ex. PW6/A.
11. PW8 is Dr. M.N. Singh, Radiologist LBS Hospital, who proved on record the Xray report of Sh. V.P. Singh Chauhan i.e. Ex. PW8/A.
12. No further witness was examined by the prosecution.
13. Statement of accused was recorded on 28.09.2015, wherein he denied the entire case of prosecution. He explained that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further explained that he was merely a helper in the bus and he had not caused hurt to the complainant as alleged neither he had damaged his vehicle. However, accused declined to lead any evidence in defence.
14. Final arguments were advanced at length by Ld. APP for the State and Sh. G.S. Singh Ld. Counsel for accused.
15. I have considered the submissions and perused the record carefully.
16. In the present case, to secure conviction of accused, FIR No. 295/2002 Page 5 of 7 prosecution was required to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused Amit alongwith coaccused Sanjay and Manoj (PO) had voluntarily caused grievous hurt to complainant, simple hurt to Rajesh Singh and criminally intimidated them and also damaged car of the complainant.
17. To prove its case, prosecution has examined complainant and his wife as PW1 and PW2. However, both of these witnesses have failed to specifically state the role of accused Amit in the alleged incident. The allegations are primarily against accused Manoj Bihari, who has been declared absconder vide order dated 11.09.2008. Another eyewitness to the incident i.e. Rajesh has failed to appear before the Court despite several efforts made to secure his presence. PW3 to PW8 are formal witnesses, who have not deposed much about the incident. The IOs of the case namely SI Rajnikant and HC Nasruddin Khan had conveniently stayed away from the Court proceedings and have failed to appear and to depose in favour of the prosecution. Resultantly, neither the endorsement on complaint, nor the site plan nor the photographs have been proved on record by the IOs. Further, the concerned doctor, who had prepared MLC of the complainant has also failed to appear before the Court. Thus, most of the material documents on record do not stand proved in evidence on behalf of the prosecution.
18. Hence, due to lack of evidence, it is held that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against accused Amit. Accordingly the accused Amit is acquitted of the offence punishable U/Sec. FIR No. 295/2002 Page 6 of 7 325/323/506/427/34 IPC.
19. File be consigned to Record Room, but be retained since accused Manoj Bihari and Sanjay are absconders.
(Announced in open
Court on 16.12.2015) (Swati Katiyar)
Metropolitan Magistrate
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
FIR No. 295/2002 Page 7 of 7