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 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

State vs . Pawan Kumar on 1 February, 2014

                                                      1

       IN THE COURT OF MR. PRITAM SINGH, ADDITIONAL CHIEF 
      METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE/ SOUTH EAST DISTRICT/ SAKET
                                                             
                 COURT COMPLEX, NEW DELHI.      

Unique Identification no. 02403R0508242003
Case no. RBT­396/1 dated 18.04.2013
FIR No. 45/99
PS­New Friends Colony 
State  Vs.  Pawan Kumar  



JUDGEMENT
         S. No. of Case                   :       RBT­396/1 dated 18.04.2013
         Date of Commission               :       22.1.1999
         of offence
         Name of Complainant              :      Shri N.K. Surana
         Name and address                 :   1. Pawan Kumar S/o late Sh. Rati Ram,
         of accused                              R/o 167, Saraj Jullena,  New Delhi

                                              2. Sanjay Kumar S/o Ratan Lal,
                                                 R/o 145, Saraj Jullena,  New Delhi

         Offence Complained               :       U/s. 379/411 IPC
         Plea of accused                  :       Not guilty
         Arguments heard                  :       31.01.2014
         Date of judgment                 :       01.02.2014 
         Final order                      :       Acquitted

1. In brief, the case of prosecution is that on 22.1.1999, a Stereo of Phillips was stolen from Maruti Car bearing registration No. DL­6C A­7378 of the complainant near H. No. 119B, Pocket A, DDA Flats, Sukhdev Vihar and later on FIR No. 45/99, P.S. NFC State Vs Pawan etc. 1 of 5 2 the said stereo was recovered from possession of accused Sanjay Kumar from his house.

2. Charge­sheet was filed in the court against both the accused persons and they were supplied complete set of documents. Thereafter, vide order dated 01.3.2002, charge for offence u/s 379/411 IPC was framed against accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. In order to prove charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined six witnesses. Shri N.K.Surana was examined as PW­1, HC Ram Prasad was examined as PW­2, Ct. Ranbir Singh was examined as PW­3, HC Surender Singh was examined as PW­4, ASI Annu was examined as PW­5 and retired SI Ghanshyam was examined as PW­6. The following documents were exhibited in the prosecution evidence :­

(i) Complaint ­ Ex.PW1/A

(ii) Copy of seizure memo of stereo ­ Mark Z1

(iii) Pointing out memo ­ Ex.PW3/A

(iv) Disclosure statement of accused Pawan ­ Ex.PW4/A

(v) Disclosure statement of accused Sanjay ­ Ex.PW4/B

(vi) Copy of FIR ­ Ex.PW5/A

(vii) Endorsement on Rukka ­ Ex.PW5/B

(viii) Endorsement on complaint ­ Ex.PW6/A

(ix) Site plan ­ Ex.PW6/B

(x) Arrest memo of accused Pawan ­ Ex.PW6/C &

(xi) Arrest memo of accused Sanjay ­ Ex.PW6/D

4. The statement of accused persons u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 22.1.2014, wherein they denied the deposition of witnesses against them being FIR No. 45/99, P.S. NFC State Vs Pawan etc. 2 of 5 3 false & interested witnesses. Accused persons did not lead any defence evidence.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused and considered carefully.

6. PW­1 who is the complainant deposed that he had parked his Maruti car bearing registration No. DL 6CA 7378 in front of his house No. 119 B, Pkt. A, Sukhdev Vihar at about 7:00pm but in the morning he found his Philips stereo stolen from the car. He made some inquiries and later on informed the police. He made complaint to police, Ex. PW 1/A. He further deposed that on the next day he was informed by the police officials that his stereo had been recovered and he was told that he could get back his stereo from the court on superdari. PW 1 further deposed that he had not applied for supeprdari.

7. PW­2 deposed that on 29.1.1999 he was posted as constable in PS New Friends Colony. On that day he alongwith Ct. Ranbir, IO SI Ashish Dalal went to PS Sriniwaspuri where four persons namely Jai Pal, Pawan, Manas Pradhan and Sanjay were under arrest. All the accused persons were produced in the court at Patiala House Courts. One day police custody remand of the accused persons was obtained. Accused Pawan was interrogated and one stereo was recovered at his instance. One stereo was recovered at the instance of accused Sanjay and one stereo was recovered at the instance of accused Manas. This witness further deposed that he was not aware to which case the recovered stereo belonged.

8. The deposition of PW 3 and PW 4 is almost similar to the deposition FIR No. 45/99, P.S. NFC State Vs Pawan etc. 3 of 5 4 of PW 2 and other witnesses are police witnesses and formal in nature.

9. I have heard Ld. APP for the state as well as Ld. Defence counsels for accused persons.

10. In the present case, there is no eye witness of the alleged theft of the stereo from the car bearing registration No. DL 6C A 7378. PW 1 did not depose anything against the accused persons regarding the theft of the stereo in question. So far as the alleged recovery of the stereo in question is concerned, PW 1 has deposed that on the next date he was informed by the police officials that the stereo was recovered and he could get the same back from the court on superdari but he had not applied for superdari. PW 1 who is the complainant in this case made a complaint regarding the theft of his stereo on 23.1.1999 and on the next date i.e 24.1.1999 the said stereo was recovered by the police and he was told to get the same released on superdari. However, PW 2,3 and 4 who are recovery witnesses, as per the prosecution story deposed that the alleged stereo was recovered on 29.1.1999 at the instance of accused Sanjay from his house. This is very glaring contradiction in the deposition of prosecution witnesses. If the stereo was recovered on 24.1.1999, how the same stereo can be recovered on 29.1.1999 from the house of accused Sanjay. Not only this, the stereo in question was never produced in the court. Even the photographs of the stereo in question have not been placed on record. Non production of the stereo in question further raises serious doubt in the prosecution story.

11. In view of the above discussions, I am of the considered view that the FIR No. 45/99, P.S. NFC State Vs Pawan etc. 4 of 5 5 prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused persons for offence u/s 379/411 IPC beyond reasonable doubts. It is well settled law that benefit of doubt always goes in favour of the accused. Therefore, accused Pawan and Sanjay are acquitted from the charges of offence u/s 379/411 IPC.

        Announced in Open Court                  (PRITAM SINGH )
        Dated: 01.02.2014             Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate 
                                     South East District/Saket Court Complex, 
                                                        New Delhi




FIR No. 45/99, P.S. NFC               State Vs Pawan  etc.                     5 of 5
                                                    6

         FIR No. 45/99
         PS New Friends Colony



         01.2.2014

         Present:         Ld. APP for the state.

Both accused on bail with their respective counsels. Vide separate judgment announced in the open court today, both the accused persons namely Pawan and Sanjay are acquitted from the charges U/s 379/411 IPC. Their personal bonds and surety bonds are extended till the next date of hearing. They are directed to furnish bail bonds U/s 437 A Cr.P.C on 07.2.2014.

(PRITAM SINGH ) Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate South East District/Saket Court Complex, New Delhi FIR No. 45/99, P.S. NFC State Vs Pawan etc. 6 of 5