Delhi District Court
State vs . Ravinder @ Sonu Etc. Fir 55/09 ... on 21 December, 2018
State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
IN THE COURT OF SHRI MANISH YADUVANSHI
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE 05: WEST : DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF
Case No. 56237/16
FIR No. 55/09
PS Ranhola
U/s 302/397/394/411/120B/34 IPC
STATE
VERSUS
(1) RAVINDER @ SONU
S/O SH.NARESH KUMAR
R/O H.NO. 882, PANASIKHAN,
VILLAGE NAHARI, PS KUNDLI,
DISTT.SONIPAT, HARYANA.
(2) SURESH @ KALA
S/O SH.RANDHIR SINGH
R/O B69, DHICHAU CHOWK,
NAJAFGARH PARK, NAJAFGARH,
DELHI.
(3) PRAVEEN KUMAR
S/O SH.JAIPAL SINGH
R/O VILLAGE BIDLAN,
Result: Acquitted Page 1 of 49
State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
PS KHARKHODA, DISTT.SONIPAT,
HARYANA.
(4)AMOL TANAJI PATIL (SINCE DISCHARGED)
S/O TANAJI SHIVAJI PATIL
R/O BHARAT BHULLIAN REFINERY,
CHOTA HALWAI, HATTA, PS CITY SONIPAT,
HARYANA.
(5) DARSHAN SINGH (SINCE DISCHARGED ON 08.11.17)
S/O SH.SOHAN SINGH
R/O H.NO. 76, JAMALPURA,
SONIPAT, HARYANA
(6) NIKHIL (SINCE P.O.)
S/O SH. KARTAR SINGH
R/O RZ37A, B BLOCK,
GALI NO.5, PREM NAGAR,
NAJAFGARH, DELHI.
Date of Institution : 09.11.2011
Date of Reserving Judgment : 21.12.2018
Date of Judgment : 21.12.2018
JUDGMENT
1. The accused persons namely Ravinder @ Sonu and Suresh @ Kala Result: Acquitted Page 2 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) have been facing trial for the offence Punishable U/s 25 Arms Act as on 07.07.2011, on the road i.e. Pitampura to Shalimar Bagh, near Radha Krishan Mandir, CA Block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, they were found in possession of one Country made Katta and two live Cartridges.
2. Accused Amol Tanaji Patil (since discharged) and Praveen Kumar have been charged that on 27.12.2009 till the date of arrest, they entered into criminal conspiracy Under Section 120B, 201 for the offences U/s 411 and 394 IPC relating to the Sections 302,397 IPC and thereby committed an offence Punishable U/s 120B, 201 for the offences 411 and 394 relating to Section 302,397 IPC.
3. Accused Ravinder @ Sonu and Suresh @ Kala have been charged that on or before 27.12.2009, at about 05 PM, at NangloiNajafgarh Road, in front of Baprola School, they both agreed amongst themselves and coaccused Nikhil to commit an illegal Act i.e. voluntarily causing hurt and robbery while using the deadly Weapon (Country made Automatic Pistol) and committed robbery of gold Articles and cash, and thereby committed offence Punishable U/s 120B and 397/34 IPC.
Result: Acquitted Page 3 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) They are further Charged that at the time of offence, they committed murder of Roshan Lal by shooting him and thereby committed an offence Punishable U/s 302/34 IPC.
An Additional Charge for the offence Punishable U/s 411 IPC has also been framed against accused Ravinder @ Sonu as he got recovered from his house cash of Rs.1,35,000/ as per Recovery Memo Ex.PW21/H, which was part of robbed amount, belonging to Roshan Lal.
FACTS :
4. Facts leading to the Prosecution's case are as under :
4.1. On 27.12.2009, on receiving DD no. 28B regarding firing near School at Baprola Village, ASI Ramesh Chand alongwith HC Vinod Kumar reached near the School where one motorcycle make Discover bearing no. HR10J7036 was found stationed. Blood was also lying at the spot. No eye witness met at the spot and they came to know that injured was taken to Sanjay Gandhi Memorial hospital.
Thereafter, ASI Ramesh Chand while leaving HC Vinod to safe guard the spot, left for hospital where he obtained MLC No.17605 of Roshan Lal who had been declared "brought dead" on the MLC.
Result: Acquitted Page 4 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) There one Dhananjay Kumar, an eye witness, got recorded his statement to the effect that he is permanently resident in Village Gyankham PS Imam Ganj, Distt.Gaya, Bihar and was working under Roshan Lal (deceased) since last three years. On the day of incident, he alongwith Roshan Lal went to Uttam Nagar and Najafgarh for collecting payment and when they were returning back from Najafgarh towards the side of Nangloi, at about 05:00 PM, they reached near Baprola School, two boys aged about 2728 years stopped their Motorcycle make Discover bearing no. HR10J1736 in front of them and asked as to how improperly we were driving our vehicle. Roshan Lal stopped the Car. One of the boys took out the Key of Car and took out one Bag containing Cash and one Briefcase containing Jewellery from the Dickey of the Car and kept it on the back seat of Car of Roshan Lal. The Second boy made a gesture to Dhananjay Kumar to come out from the Car and he did. The boy who took out the Key of the Car had pulled outside Roshan Lal from the Driver seat and Roshan Lal raised alarm "Bachao Bachao". In the meanwhile, the boy who took out the Key of the Car and cash from the Dickey, fired gun shot on the head of Roshan Lal Result: Acquitted Page 5 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) due to which he fell down. This witness became perplexed. Thereafter, both the boys ran towards Dichau Road alongwith their Car.
4.2. Public persons collected there. Call was made to the PCR by some public persons, who reached the spot and took the injured to SGM Hospital. Rukka was prepared and case was registered U/s 394/397/302/34 IPC and 25/27/54/59 A.Act through HC Vinod Kumar. Thereafter, investigation was handedover to Insp.Brahm Prakash.
4.3 Crime team was called which inspected the spot. Chance Prints from the Motorcycle, Helmet and Car were taken by the Crime Team. The Blood Sample, Blood stained earth and Earth Control were taken into possession by the IO, after sealing the same vide relevant seizure memos. Motorcycle and Helmet were also taken into possession by the IO. The stolen Swift Car bearing no. DL9CN 3773 of the deceased was found stationed near Hirankudna Flyover, Service Road, Dichau. Crime team also inspected the said Car and Chance Prints were also lifted from the abovesaid Car by the Crime team, which were taken into possession by the IO.
Result: Acquitted Page 6 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) 4.4. Site Plan was prepared at the instance of Dhananjay Kumar. Postmortem on the body of deceased was got conducted by the IO wherein cause of death was opined that "Injury caused by projectile of Fire Arm". Search was conducted to apprehend the accused persons, however, they could not be apprehended. Exhibits were sent to the FSL. Thereafter, on transfer of IO, the investigation of this case was handedover to Insp.Tilak Chand.
4.5. On 07.07.2011, accused Ravinder @ Sonu S/o Naresh Kumar and Suresh Kumar @ Kala S/o Randhir Singh were arrested by Anti Auto Theft Squad, North West Distt in case FIR no. 248/2011, U/s 25 A.Act PS Shalimar Bagh, wherein they had disclosed about their involvement alongwith their one associate Nikhil S/o Kartar Singh in the commission of present offences. Thereafter, accused Ravinder @ Sonu got recovered cash of Rs.1,35,000/ form his house being part of robbed gold/cash. On 12.07.2011, after seeking permission of the Court, both the accused persons were arrested by the IO. Both the accused persons refused to take part in the TIP Proceedings. IO recorded their disclosure statements wherein they disclosed that after the commission of Result: Acquitted Page 7 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) offence, both the accused persons reached Haridwar. They got melted the gold from the workshop of one Praveen who is the son of maternal uncle of Suresh @ Kala and thereafter, they sold it through Praveen. Pointing out memos were prepared at the instance of both the accused persons.
4.6. On 13.07.2011, witness Dhananjay Kumar reached the PS where he identified accused Ravinder @ Kala. On 15.07.2011, at the instance of accused Suresh @ Kala, one person namely Amol Tanaji, who melted the gold, was arrested. From his possession, cash of Rs.1 lac was recovered which was given to him by the accused persons for melting the robbed gold. Thereafter, on 17.07.2011, at the instance of both the accused persons, Guest Entry Register of Hotel Dolphin, situated at Rishikesh Road, Haridwar, Uttrakhand was seized by the IO as both the accused persons alongwith Nikhil stayed there after committing the crime on the night of 27.12.2009.
4.7. On 18.07.2011, at the instance of accused Suresh @ Kala, his cousin Praveen (Son of his Maternal Uncle) was also arrested, who got recovered cash of Rs.1 lac which he was received after selling the gold. The said cash of Rs.1 lac was also taken into Result: Acquitted Page 8 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) possession by the IO vide Seizure memo. Specimen signatures of accused Ravinder @ Sonu were sent to FSL for comparison with the signatures of accused Ravinder @ Sonu in the Guest Entry Register of Dolphin Hotel. Chargesheet was filed.
CHARGE :
5. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. All the above mentioned Charges were framed against all the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. EVIDENCE :
6. To prove its case, the prosecution, in total, has examined 33 witnesses.
7. PW1 Sh.Krishan Lal Aggarwal, elder brother of the deceased. On 27.12.2009, he was informed by the family members of the deceased Roshan Lal about the incident and he went to SGM Hospital, where he identified the deadbody of deceased vide memo Ex.PW1/A. In the month of July, 2011, he went to PS Ranhola to make inquiries about the case where SHO Tilak Chand had apprehended two persons and he identified one of the accused as Suresh @ Kale as he had seen him in the shop of deceased 45 years ago. This witness Result: Acquitted Page 9 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) correctly identified the accused Suresh @ Kale in the Court.
8. PW2 Sh.Sudama Pd. has identified the Seizure memo of Record of Hotel Dolphin, Bhupatwala, Haridwar as Ex.PW2/A. He has also identified the Register as Ex.PW2/P.1 and entry no. 1665 dt. 27.12.2009 as Ex.PW2/P.2. He could not identify the accused persons before the Court.
9. PW3 SI Chhote Lal is a formal witness being the duty officer who recorded FIR of the present case upon receipt of rukka from HC Vinod.
10. PW4 Mr.Dhananjay Kumar was employed as a Servant at the Jewellery shop of Roshan Lal (since deceased). He was accompanying his employer Roshan Lal on 27.11.2007/2008 in the Swift Car which was driven by the deceased. The offence was committed in his presence and the witness supports the Prosecution's case giving description of two assailants out of whom one took the Keys of the Vehicle and opened the door of the Car. They took out a Bag and the Brief Case. In the meantime, the other boy shot on the Forehead of his employer. They then fled away with the Owner's Vehicle/Car and the Brief Case after leaving their Motorcycle on the Result: Acquitted Page 10 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) spot. The Bag was containing Rs.9 lacs in cash and 3 Kg. Gold. He then called the PCR, officials of which made inquiries from him alongwith local Police. He claimed that he could not identify the persons who had shot on his employer. He was therefore, cross examined extensively by the Prosecution but no fruitful result came in favour of the Prosecution regarding identification of the accused persons.
11. PW5 Piyush Aggarwal is Superdar of the Car in question and identified its Photographs and the Superdaginama as Ex.PW5/A.
12. PW6 Sh.Bhagwan Dass identified the deadbody of the deceased who was his younger brother.
13. PW7 Sh.Nitesh Jain claims that on 27.12.2009, one supplier of Jewellery Articles namely Roshan Lal had come to his shop in Najafgarh for supplying Jewellery Articles against payment of Rs.20,000/. He came to know that Roshan Lal had died on the next day. The witness was declared hostile and crossexamined by the Prosecution.
14. PW8 W/HC Deval could not produce the summoned record in view of its destruction and produced the relevant Orders Mark A,B Result: Acquitted Page 11 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) and C.
15. PW9 Kashmiri Lal Sharma the Manager of Hotel Dolphin. The Police had seized the Original Register of the Hotel Dolphin. He proved the relevant entry no. 1665 dt. 27.12.2009 to the effect that on that day, Suresh Kumar and his two friends namely Ravinder and Nikhil came to the Hotel on 27.12.2009 and stayed there till 28.12.2009. It is Ex.PW2/P.1. Copy of I/D Proof i.e. D/L of Suresh Kumar is Mark X. The witness could not identify the accused Suresh in the Court.
16. PW10 HC Anup Singh. Being DD Writer on 27.12.2009, he received and recorded information vide DD no. 28B which he handedover to ASI Ramesh. It is Ex.PW1/A.
17. PW11 Sh.Surender Verma is a Gold Smith by profession. His shop is in the name of Dharam jewellers in Najafgarh. He knew the deceased. He deposed that on 27.12.2009, Roshan Lal came to his shop for supplying some Jewellery against payment of Rs.3 lacs. He used to carry the gold Jewellery and Cash in a Thaila and Brief case.
18. PW12 HC Amit Kumar He is member of Mobile Crime Team being Finger Prints Proficient. He had examined one Motorcycle, Result: Acquitted Page 12 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) Helmet and a Swift Car. He lifted various Chance Prints and made over his report in this Regard.
19. PW13 Dr.Binay Kumar had examined the Victim on 27.12.2009 who was unconscious and his BP was not recordable. He was declared "brought dead". The MLC is Ex.PW13/A and the ECG Report is Ex.PW13/B.
20. PW14 Ct. Narinder Dahiya was called to deliver copies of FIR to the Ilaka MM and Sr.Police Officers on 27.12.2009, which he did.
21.PW15 HC Manoj Kumar received a Sealed Parcel from the MHC(M) on 13.04.2010 for depositing with FSL, Rohini vide RC No. Ex.PW15/A, its acknowledgement Ex.PW15/B as per the details of the exhibits as mentioned in the RC Ex.PW15/C.
22. PW16 HC Indraj MHC(M) on 27.12.2009. He deposed about the case property which were deposited with him and entered in Register no.19. He proved entry dt. 27.12.2009 as Ex.PW16/A; entry dt. 28.12.2009 as Ex.PW16/B; entry dt. 13.04.2010 as Ex.PW15/B and entry dt. 08.01.2010 as Ex.PW15/A.
23. PW17 SI Kuldeep Singh, Incharge Mobile Crime Team He inspected the spot of incident and prepared his report Ex.PW17/A. Result: Acquitted Page 13 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
24. PW18 HC Vinod Kumar. Being on emergency duty with ASI Ramesh Chand on 27.12.2009, they acted on DD no.28B and proceeded to the incident spot from where the IO went to SGM Hospital leaving the witness to guard the incident spot. Once back at 07:15 PM, IO gave this witness Tehrir for registration of the FIR which he got done. Crime team inspected the spot in his presence. Various samples were lifted and preserved. The witness could not depose complete facts and therefore, was crossexamined by the Prosecution wherein he admitted certain aspects of the Prosecution's case pertaining to the Motorcycle and the Swift Car.
25. PW19 Insp.Mahesh Kumar, Draughtsman inspected the incident Spot on 14.04.2010 and later prepared Scaled Site Plan Ex.PW19/A.
26. PW20 Sh.Virender Singh Solanki produced file of FIR no.
248/11 titled as State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu & others PS Shalimar Bagh U/s 25 A.Act which is on record.
27. PW21 Ct.Jagdish, being an AATS member, was in investigation of FIR no. 248/11. SI Ramesh Kumar received secret information about arrival of two boys in a Car. A Nakabandi was done. Vehicle bearing no. DL9C D0910 make Maruti was flagged down to stop Result: Acquitted Page 14 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) at 02:30 PM at the instance of Secret informer. Its occupants were named as Ravinder and Suresh (identified in the Court). Search of Ravinder @ Sonu led to recovery of one loaded 9 mm Pistol while search of Suresh led to recovery of 0.315 bore Countrymade Pistol. A case was registered. They made disclosure statement regarding their involvements in the present case and in pursuance thereof, the police team reached their house. From the house of accused Ravinder, one Carry bag containing three bundles of Notes of Rs.1,35,000/ was recovered and taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW21/H. The witness identified the Currency Notes in the Court.
28. PW22 HC Pawan Kumar as duty officer on 07.07.2011 in PS Shalimar Bagh, received rukka on the basis of which he registered the FIR no. 248/11 Ex.PW22/A.
29. PW23 Sh.Rajender Kumar, Ld.MM had conducted TIP Proceedings of accused Suresh @ Kala on 12.07.2011 in which he refused to participate in the Proceedings which are Ex.PW23/A. On the same day, accused Ravinder also refused to participate in the TIP proceedings which are Ex.PW23/C.
30. PW24 Ravinder Kumar Kain, Finger Prints Proficient who Result: Acquitted Page 15 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) furnished his report as Ex.PW24/B. His report is inconclusive.
31. PW25 SI Ved Prakash who is member of AATS, North West and he remained in the investigation of FIR no.248/11. He is witness to recovery of Pistols from accused Ravinder and Suresh and also recovery of Rs.1,35,000/ from the house of accused Ravinder. He identified the case property.
32. PW26 Satish Kumar is the owner of the Motorcycle bearing no.
HR10J7036 regarding which the FIR of theft was registered U/s 379 IPC on 25.12.2009 at PS Kundli, Sonepat being FIR no. 345/09. The Motorcycle is Ex.PW26/A.
33. PW27 Retired SI Ram Kumar was the Duty officer in PS Murthal on 28.02.2010. He had registered the FIR no. 42/10 U/s 307/506/34 IPC and 25/54 A.Act. He produced the FIR Register of PS Murthal containing this FIR which is Ex.PW27/A.
34. PW28 Dr.Manoj Dhingra who conducted Autopsy on the body of the deceased with Dr.J.V.Kiran in SGM Hospital. The report is Ex.PW28/A. According to him, cause of death is "Crenio Cerebal damage due to penetrating wound caused by projectile discharge from Fire Arm weapon capable of discharging of Projectile". All Result: Acquitted Page 16 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) injuries were antemortem and fresh in duration.
35. PW29 SI Ramesh Chand was assigned with DD no.28B regarding Gun shot fire at a person in Najafgarh Road, Baprole. With HC Vinod, he proceeded to the informed spot and conducted initial investigation. He then went to the hospital and obtained MLC and met eye witness Dhananjay. He recorded his statement Ex.PW4/A. He came back to the incident place where he conducted remaining investigation. Insp. Brahm Prakash had also reached the spot with staff. HC Vinod got the case registered and matter was further investigated by Insp.Brahm Prakash who called the crime team at the spot.
During investigation, IO received secret information that the robbed Car is lying abandoned near Nala, Dichau Kala, Hiran Kudna Mor. This Vehicle was recovered and inspected by members of Crime team. The witness identified the case property including the Helmet Ex.PW29/1.
36. PW30 ASI Mukesh Kumar joined the investigation with Insp.Tilak Chand on 12.07.2011 and Ct.Tanvir (since expired). They went to Tis Hazari Court where Suresh and Ravinder were present in Result: Acquitted Page 17 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) the Court in pursuance to Production Warrant. They made their disclosure statements and arrested after interrogation and due permission of the court. Suresh was arrested vide Memo Ex.PW 30/A while accused Ravinder @ Sonu was arrested vide Memo Ex.PW30/B. Accused Suresh made disclosure statement vide memo Ex.PW30/C while accused Ravinder made disclosure statement vide memo Ex.PW30/D. They were in muffled face. They were produced before the Ld.Link MM for TIP proceedings but they refused the same. They made Supplementary disclosure statements i.e. Ex.PW 30/E (that of accused Suresh) and Ex.PW30/F (that of accused Ravinder). They pointed out the place of incident and the places where they left the robbed Car.
Accused Suresh led them to the house of Nikhil where he was not found present. On the next day i.e. 13.07.2011, they went to PS Kharkhoda, Sonepat, Haryana with the accused persons and took a local police Constable to Village Bidhlan. Accused Suresh led to the house of his Mama (maternal Uncle) namely Jai Pal stated that robbed gold was melted in that house. Suresh stated that he with Praveen had melted the gold in the house of of Jaipal. Jaipal was Result: Acquitted Page 18 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) inquired about his son Praveen who was out of station. Accused Ravinder also pointed out to the place from where they have stolen the Motorcycle used in the commission of offence.
The witness again joined the investigation on 15.07.2011 when three days PC Remand of accused persons were granted. The went to Sonepat where accused Suresh led the team to the shop of Amol Tanaji stating him as the person who had purified the robbed Gold earlier melted by Suresh and Praveen. The said Amol Tanaji (since discharged) was also arrested in this case, who led to recovery to Rs.1 Lac from his house. According to the said accused Amol Tanaji, the amount of Rs.1 Lac was obtained after selling his share out of the robbed gold.
On 17.07.2011, accused Suresh and Ravinder were further interrogated and they led the team to Haridwar where they reported at PP Khadkhadi PS Kotwali, Haridwar. Accused led them to a place at Bhootwalan at Rishikesh road and took them to Hotel Dolphin. According to the accused persons Suresh and Ravinder, they alongwith Nikhil had stayed in this Hotel. Its Manager Kashmiri Lal, Sudama and Goswami were present in the Hotel Dolphin. The Guest Result: Acquitted Page 19 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) Register was seized.
On 18.07.2011, specimen signatures of accused Ravinder were obtained. The Police team then went to Kharkhoda, District Sonepat for searching Praveen. A Secret informer met the IO in Kharkhoda informing that Praveen is likely to come to his house in a few minutes. A trap was laid and Praveen was apprehended from his house at 07:00 PM (correctly identified). He was arrested vide memo Ex.PW30/Q; his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW30/R and his disclosure statement was recorded vide memo Ex.PW30/R1. Accused Praveen then got recovered Rs.1 lac from his house. It was taken into possession by the Police vide memo Ex.PW30/S. On 19.07.2011, the team again went to Sonepat with accused Praveen who got prepared Pointing out Memo of shop of Darshan Jewellers to whom alleged Articles were sold vide memo Ex.PW 30/T.
37. PW31/Retired Insp.Brahm Prakash was Inspector Investigation at the relevant time in PS Ranhola and investigated this case w.e.f. 28.12.2009. He received DD no.28B and on reaching the informed Result: Acquitted Page 20 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) place, met HC Vinod. Injured had been shifted and ASI Ramesh had already gone to SGM hospital. No eye witness could be found. Crime team reached the spot and inspected it under leadership of SI Kuldeep. In the meantime, ASI Ramesh returned with the complainant Dhananjay Singh. A Tehrir was prepared by ASI and case got registered through HC Vinod. This IO prepared Site Plan Ex.PW 31/A. At the instance of secret informer, abandoned Swift Car was recovered and photographed vide Photographs Mark PW31/1 to Mark PW31/3. From the place where it was abandoned, it was brought to the incident spot by a staff Member. It was seized vide memo Ex.PW4/B. Exhibits were lifted from the spot. Chance Prints were also lifted. Statements of witnesses were recorded and case property deposited in Police Malkhana intact.
Inquest documents Ex.PW31/B to Ex.PW31/E were prepared on 28.12.2009 and postmortem on deadbody was got conducted vide Autopsy report already exhibited as Ex.PW28/A. Sealed Pullandas and Sample seal of clothes of Victim in the hospital including blood sample of the Victim were seized vide memo Ex. PW31/F. Deadbody was handedover to the relatives and exhibits Result: Acquitted Page 21 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) deposited in the Malkhana from where Ct.Manoj Kumar took them in sealed condition on 13.04.2010 and deposited them in FSL, Rohini. On 27.11.2010, investigating Officer was transferred. The Motorcycle is already exhibited as Ex.PW26/A. The Helmet is Ex.PW29/A. Sample Earth control lifted from the spot is Ex.PW31/1. Blood stained Earth Control lifted from the spot is Ex.PW31/2. Blood stained gauze used to lift samples from the spot is Ex.PW31/3. Identity of the Car was not disputed.
38. PW32/Dr.Virender Singh, Asstt.Director, FSL had examined the specimen sheets (six in number) and filed his report as Ex.PW32/A. He had also examined the questioned entry Ex.PW2/P.2 in comparison with specimen Ex.PW32/A and filed his report as Ex.PW32/B.
39. PW33/Insp.Tilak Chand Bisht took over the investigation of the case on 10.01.2011. He inquired from the complainant and brother of the deceased on 20.01.2011 and interrogated Nitesh Jain and Surender Verma - Jewellers on 06.02.2011 and recorded their statements.
On 08.07.2011, SI Ramesh Kumar - team member AATS, Result: Acquitted Page 22 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) North West informed of arrest of accused Ravinder and Suresh in an Arms Act case in PS Shalimar Bagh who disclosed their involvements in the present case. IO obtained copy of FIR no. 248/11 (Ex.PW 22/A), disclosure statements of these accused persons (Ex.PW21/A and Ex.PW21/B respectively), other relevant documents including seizure memo of the Cash being Ex.PW21/C to Ex.PW21/H. On his application dt. 11.07.2011, the above accused were produced in the court of Ilaka MM on 12.07.2011 and after interrogation, post due permission of the Court, Suresh was arrested vide Ex.PW30/A, while accused Ravinder was arrested vide memo Ex.PW30/B. Their brief disclosure statements were recorded being Ex.PW30/C and Ex.PW30/D respectively. IO moved an application Ex.PW33/A for TIP of both the accused persons which they refused. PC Remand was obtained on the same date for three days. Accused Suresh made disclosure statement Ex.PW30/E while Ravinder Ex.PW30/F. Pointing out memos were prepared at the instance of accused persons. Accused Nikhil could not be traced.
On 13.07.2011, raiding team went to Bidhlan, Sonepat to the house of accused Suresh's maternal Uncle where robbed gold was Result: Acquitted Page 23 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) melted by accused Suresh's maternal cousin Praveen. Search was made for Gold Smith through whom Praveen and Suresh got the melted gold purified.
Accused Ravinder was taken to Nahari, Sonepat, where he pointed out to the place from where Motorcycle used in the commission of offence was stolen.
On return to PS, Dhananjay identified accused Ravinder while Dhananjay's brother identified accused Suresh. Their statements were recorded.
On 14.07.2011, police team again visited Sonepat in search of Praveen and the Jewellery shop concerned, both of which could not be traced.
On 15.07.2011, these accused persons made supplementary disclosure statements i.e. Ravinder's Ex.PW33/D and Suresh's Ex. PW33/E. Further police remand was sought and granted.
Police team again reached in Sonepat for the search of Praveen but he could not be found. However, this time Suresh identified the Jewellers' shop where melted got was purified vide memo Ex.PW30/M. Jeweller Amol Tanaji Patil (since discharged) was also identified, interrogated and arrested, who disclosed that he Result: Acquitted Page 24 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) received Rs.1 lac after selling 40 gms.of Gold which was his share for purifying the gold. It was recovered and taken into police possession vide memo Ex. PW30/O. Again on 16.07.2011, Police team reached Sonepat in search of accused Praveen who could not be traced.
On the next day, the police team proceeded to Haridwar, UP with accused where they pointed out to Hotel Dolphin stating that they with Nikhil stayed in the same. Inquiries were made and Guest Entry Register dt. 27.12.2009 revealed that accused Suresh and Ravinder had signed on it. It is Ex.P.1. Relevant entry is Ex.PW 2/P.2. Statements of Manager were recorded. Police team then went to Baraut, U.P. where the accused persons had thrown empty Suit Case, Paper Slips and empty Jewellery boxes but they could not be traced.
Accused Nikhil was searched in Najafgarh, Delhi on 18.07.2011 but could not be found. Suresh and Ravinder made further Disclosure statement Ex.PW33/F and Ex.PW33/E respectively. Ravinder's specimen signatures were obtained after permission from the Court.
Result: Acquitted Page 25 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) The IO again visited Bidhlan in search of accused Praveen in pursuance of secret information and this time, accused Praveen was apprehended while approaching towards his house and arrested vide memo Ex.PW30/Q. His disclosure statement is Ex. 30/R1. Praveen got recovered Rs.1 lac as his share in the form of currency notes comprised in two packets of demonetized G.C.Notes of Rs.500/ each which were seized vide memo Ex.PW30/S. During PC Remand, Praveen pointed out to the shop of Darshan Singh Gold Smith (since discharged on 08.11.2017 by this Court) where gold in pure form was sold vide memo Ex.PW30/T. This shop was closed. Darshan Singh was searched again on 20.07.2011. His house was located on 21.07.2011 in Sonepat pursuant to secret information, but Darshan was not present at the house.
Finger Prints of Suresh and Ravinder were sent to Finger Prints Bureau for comparison and the report is Ex.PW24/B. NBWs of accused Darshan Singh and Nikhil were also obtained but they could not be traced.
Witness identified the currency Notes which are Ex.P Result: Acquitted Page 26 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) 33/1.
40. On 27.11.2015, Ld.Chief PP dropped the witnesses listed at Srl.No. 23/HC Kulbhushan, Srl.No.25/Ct.Sohan Lal, Srl.No. 26/SI Ramesh Kumar as it would have been repetition of the facts which had already come in the testimonies of PW21 and PW25. He also dropped the witnesses listed at Srl.Nos. 30/ASI Devi Singh, Srl.No.31/HC Sukhbir Singh as the FIR no. 345/2009 dt. 25.12.2009 PS Kundli is not disputed by the Ld.Counsel for the accused persons Ravinder, Suresh and Praveen. Separate statements of accused persons and their Counsel have also been recorded in this regard.
41. On 08.11.2017, admission/denial conducted U/s 294 Cr.P.C., wherein the accused persons have admitted the FSL report Ex.CW 1/A and Ex.CW1/B and in view thereof, the ld.Prosecutor dropped the witness listed at Srl.No. 8/Ms.Seema Nain, SSO, FSL, Rohini, Delhi on 08.11.2017.
42. On 17.05.2018, Ld.Prosecutor also dropped the witness listed at Srl.No.34/ASI Satbir as his statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. was not recorded by the IO.
Result: Acquitted Page 27 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
43. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons in their statements U/s 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they denied all the allegations put to them. Accused Suresh states that he and accused Ravinder were detained on 04.07.2011 by the IO. In an order to justify the illegal detention and to create false evidence, he and accused Suresh were shown as arrested on 07.07.2011 by staff of AATS. He and coaccused Ravinder were shown to number of persons and their arrest was also published in the Media. Their Pictures were also published. The Police was already aware about the place of incident. He admits that he had gone to Haridwar to offer prayer and take holy bath. It was a blind murder and loot case and in an order to solve the same, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has been acquitted in FIR no. 248/11, PS Shalimar Bagh and no appeal has been filed by the State against their Acquittal. The Police has threatened him and his signatures were taken on blank papers which were later on converted in incriminating documents. It was a blind murder and loot case and in an order to solve the same, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is innocent. He has been acquitted in FIR No. 248/11, PS Shalimar Result: Acquitted Page 28 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) Bagh and no appeal has been filed by the State against this Acquittal. The Police has threatened him and his signatures were taken on blank papers which were later on converted into incriminating documents.
Accused Praveen stated that his name has been wrongly mentioned. He was called in the PS, where he was made to sit and his family members were asked to bring money. He refused and then he was falsely arrested. The Police went to his house and took Rs.2 lacs from his father and out of them, Rs.1 lac was shown as recovered. He is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He did not know any person by the name of Suresh and Ravinder. He never dealt in any stolen articles. He was not aware about the present case or the stolen articles, if any.
Accused Ravinder @ Sonu states the same facts as deposed by accused Suresh. He also admitted that he had gone to Haridwar to offer prayer and take holy bath.
44. Accused Ravinder @ Sonu and Suresh were not willing to produce any defence witness however, accused Praveen wanted to produce his father as Defence witness. But he could not produce his father due to illness and closed the Defence evidence on 18.07.2018.
45. On 17.09.2018, Supplementary/Additional statement of accused Result: Acquitted Page 29 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) Ravinder @ Sonu was also recorded U/s 313 Cr.P.C. (after framing Addition Charge U/s 411 IPC) wherein he also denied the allegations put to him and states that he had not made any disclosure statement. His signatures were obtained by the case IO on blank documents. The money Ex.PW25/P1 belonged to his father. He could not produce his father namely Sh.Naresh Kumar as Defence witness as he has already appeared as DW1 in FIR no. 248/11 PS Shalimar Bagh and the said testimony may be referred to as part of Judicial record. Presently, his father was not keeping good health. He has been acquitted in FIR no. 248/11, PS Shalimar Bagh and no appeal was filed by the State against acquittal. The Police has threatened him and his signatures were taken on blank papers which were later on converted into incriminating documents.
46. I have heard Ms.Nimmi Sisodia, Ld.Addl.P.P.for the State and Sh.K.Singhal, ld. Counsel for accused Ravinder @ Sonu and Suresh @ Kala and Sh.Vikram Singh, ld. Counsel for accused Praveen Kumar and perused the record carefully.
PROSECUTION ARGUMENTS :
47. Ms.Nimmi Sisodia, Ld.Prosecutor urges that though Dhananjay Result: Acquitted Page 30 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) has not been able to identify the accused Ravinder and Suresh as the persons who were present on the spot on the Motorcycle at the time of commission of robbery and murder of employer Roshan Lal but it is urged that the witness has supported that the incident took place in the manner complained of. It is submitted that the witness turned hostile only on the identification point and the Court may take to account that the same may be on account of fear. Reference is made to his statement Ex.PW4/A upon which he admitted his signatures at point A. It is submitted that the witness has not disowned his statement Ex.PW4/A but has resiled from his statement Mark PW 4/A dt. 13.07.2011 for extraneous considerations.
48. The Prosecution then points out that use of Swift Car by the deceased and PW4 is not in dispute. The identity of Swift Car is not disputed by the defence. The motorcycle was transferred to PS Kundli and registration of the FIR in this respect is also not disputed by all the three accused persons as per statement dt. 27.11.2015.
49. Prosecution points out that there is clear indication of presence of criminal conspiracy as PW1, elder brother of the deceased stated on oath that he saw Suresh @ Kala in the shop of his deceased brother Result: Acquitted Page 31 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) some 45 years ago (of his deposition dt. 16.08.2012). He had come alongwith one Pappu to the shop under the name & Style of Payal Jewellers. It is pointed out that the witness has claimed that the manner in which they were talking with his brother indicated that they were known to him and they may be taking gold and Silver Jewllery from him. The witness then proceeded to identify Suresh correctly. Witness also admitted that statement Ex.PW1/D.1 is his statement upon which he had signed.
50. The Prosecution submits that Sudama Prasad is employee of Hotel Dolphin who produced the Register Ex.PW2/P.1 indicating that the accused persons namely Ravinder, Suresh with Nikhil had stayed there on 27.12.2009, although he could not identify these persons as the accused.
51. Prosecution submits that PW7/Nitesh Jain testified that on 27.12.2009 deceased supplied him Jewellery articles worth Rs.20,000/ proving that he was carrying Jewellery at the time of murder.
52. Prosecution submits that PW9/Kashmiri Lal Sharma testified that M.P.Singh and Mahesh Verma were Managers in Hotel Dolphin.
Result: Acquitted Page 32 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) This witness had produced copy of relevant entry no. 1665 showing that Suresh Kumar came stayed in this hotel as Tourist alongwith his two friends Ravinder and Nikhil at 11:50 PM and stayed in the Hotel till 09:25 AM on 28.12.2009. The witness produced copy of I/D Proof of Suresh Kumar Mark X, though he could not identify the accused Suresh in the Court.
53. The Prosecution then submits that Surender Verma/PW11 runs a shop as Dharam Jewellers and he also testified that on 27.12.2009, deceased supplied him Silver Jewellery for Rs.3 lacs cash to him at about 03:15 PM, where he stayed for about 30 minutes.
54.The Prosecution then submits that original file of proceedings in FIR no. 248/11 was called for and all relevant documents regarding the arrest of Suresh @ Kala and Ravinder have been proven and the relevant witnesses have been called from AATS, North West and PS Shalimar Bagh who proved the fact that a sum of Rs.1,35,000/ was recovered from the house of accused Ravinder @ Sonu at his instance.
55.Prosecution submits that these accused persons refused to take part in the TIP as proven by PW23.
Result: Acquitted Page 33 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
56. Prosecution also contends that the facts pertaining to the arrest of third accused namely Praveen are also duly proven by the Prosecution. He led to recovery of Rs.1 lac which has been identified by witnesses as part of the conversion money from selling the gold. It is therefore prayed that case of the Prosecution stands proved. DEFENCE ARGUMENTS :
57. Defence on the other hand submits that Prosecution has not proven even a single Charge against any of the accused persons. It is submitted that as per own case of the Prosecution, the main accused Nikhil is still at large being PO. It is submitted that the case of the Prosecution regarding eye witness account has been absolutely demolished in testimony of PW4. It is submitted that the recovery of Rs.1,35,000/ from the accused Ravinder @ Sonu is not proven. In this context, it is also submitted that the Charge against the accused namely Ravinder @ Sonu and Suresh @ Kala U/s 25 A.Act is pertaining to allegation of mere possession of Arms and Ammunition which were allegedly recovered by the Police of PS Shalimar Bagh and qua which the accused persons have already faced trial in FIR no. 248/11 for such possession and in which case, these accused Result: Acquitted Page 34 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) persons have been acquitted. It is submitted that in view thereof, they cannot be tried for the same Charge in the present case. It is also submitted that Para 9 and 14 of the Judgment of the Ld.M.M. dt. 05.06.2014 is relevant in this context. It is submitted that by virtue of Section 40 and 43 of the Indian Evidence Act, the averment regarding recovery of Rs.1,35,000/ from the possession of accused Ravinder @ Sonu, is a relevant fact when the question before this Court was if it ought to take cognizance of such offence. It is submitted that being relevant fact i.e. 'the recovery' being fact in issue, it should be disbelieved as the ld.MM has disbelieved the case as put up by the AATS, North West, Shalimar Bagh. It is urged that the alleged disclosure in the present case is meaningless due to the fact that the AATS recorded a previous disclosure statement. It is submitted that accused Suresh was never present on the spot and as per Prosecution's case, he was following in another Car. Despite that, Prosecution made all attempts for his positive identification through PW4 who could never have seen him on the spot. It is submitted that PW4 has disowned his statement Mark PW4/A which is fatal to the Prosecution. Regarding accused Suresh, it is further submitted Result: Acquitted Page 35 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) that recovery of Rs.1 lac from him is utterly disbelievable as despite availability of police witness, none of them had joined in the investigation. Similar argument is made on behalf of accused Ravinder who, as per PW21, had made discovery of Rs.1,35,000/ from the first floor of his house while as per PW25, the recovery was made from the ground floor of the house. It is submitted that the house did not belong to the accused Ravinder alone. Admittedly, his family also resided there but none of his family members were joined in the investigation. It is also submitted that the alleged search and seizure conducted in the houses of Ravinder @ Sonu and Suresh is also hit by Section 100 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that in the absence of eye witness account, the chain of Circumstances against the accused persons is broken in view of subsequent discharge of accused Amol Tanaji Patil and Darshan.
FINDINGS :
58. The case commenced for the Prosecution with the statement of Ex.PW4/A. Two assailants waylaid the Victim and PW4 while riding the motorcycle. They robbed of him Rs.10 lacs cash and 3 Kg.Gold. When the victim started to shout for help, one of the Result: Acquitted Page 36 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) assailant shot the Victim on his head. The assailants, PW4 claimed, could be identified by him. PW23 has proven TIP proceedings of Suresh and Ravinder. Both of them have refused to take part in TIP proceedings. Prosecution's case against them is of being present at the time of the murder and robbery. Material witness for Prosecution is therefore PW4. He supports the Prosecution so far as the incident is concerned. He testifies in his examination in chief that he cannot identified the persons who fired shot on his employer and were involved in the incident. Witness was made to identify the three accused namely Suresh, Ravinder and Praveen Kumar in the Court but he stated that "I cannot identify those persons as I became perplexed at that time".
59. In the chief examination itself, the witness further stated "I was called after about two years of the murder in the Police Station.
Police informed me that they had called a 'Mullah' and I should visit the PS". No such 'Mullah' has been produced.
60. That the PW4 is concerned of the police atrocity is established by his statement that, "Police officials from PS Ranhola apprehended me from Karol Bagh and took me to some PS name I do not recollect where I was shown that Mullah. I informed the Police that I do not Result: Acquitted Page 37 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) recognize the said person by the name of Mullah".
61. The witness then states on Oath that, "I was confined in the PS of Raanhola for about 12 days. I was interrogated by the Police and I informed them whatever I knew about the incident. The brother of the deceased was saying that he will not leave me as my brother has been murdered".
62. Thus, he was declared a hostile witness. In the crossexamination by the Prosecution, he admitted that he was employed with Roshan Lal since last 03 years from the date of incident and that on the day of incident, his employer collected payments from some Parties at Najafgarh and Uttam Nagar. He admitted correct registration number of Swift Car but denied that he gave number of Motorcycle to the Police as HR10J7036. He could not say if the age of assailants was about 27 to 28 years. He could not say if they fled towards Dichau road. He clearly denied to have told the Police that he could identify the assailants. He denied that Police recovered the Swift Car in his presence. He could not remember if police also seized the Motorcycle. He could not recollect if he made statement to the police on 13.07.2011 Mark PW4/A. He then denied all its contents.
Result: Acquitted Page 38 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) So much is the extent of self conviction of the witness that when Ravinder @ Sonu was again shown to him, he stated that this accused was shown to him by the Police in the PS but he informed them that the person being shown to him is not involved in the incident.
63. He also admits that Suresh was shown to him in the PS but affirms that, "I had told the Police that I had not seen the accused Suresh at the place of incident". He denied to have told the Police that Ravinder fired shot on his employer after dragging him from the Car and then fled away with the Car, Cash and Jewellery. The Prosecution made third attempt so that the witness could identify Ravinder and Suresh in the Court but the witness again denied that these two were involved in the murder of his employer. In his cross examination by the defence, he categorically submitted that, "it is correct that Police tortured me several times".
64. The Charge against the accused persons of having committed murder of Roshan Lal therefore falls flat.
65. Regarding conspiracy U/s 120B IPC, the only piece of direct evidence brought on record is in the form of testimony of PW1. However, it would be clear from the said testimony read with his statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. that the time gap between the period, he Result: Acquitted Page 39 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) made statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. and the time when he saw accused Suresh @ Kala in the shop of his brother Roshan Lal, was 45 years prior to it. The witness was examined in the Court on 16.08.2012 and on this day also, he claims to have seen accused Suresh @ Kala in shop of his brother some 45 years ago. He is therefore, referring the year 2007/2008, whereas the incident took place on 27.12.2009. There is no immediate proximity in time between the two incidents. At best, PW1 is merely giving his opinion on Oath that the manner in which Suresh and Pappu were talking with his brother indicated that they were known to his brother. The witness himself is unsure if these persons ever took Gold or Silver Jewellery from him as in his own words, "......... they may be taking Gold and Silver Jewellery from him". In his crossexamination by defence, he admitted the suggestion of the defence in the following words, "it is in routine manner in our shop for visiting the customers. In some cases, it may be a special person".
66. Besides the above, none of the circumstances indicate that the accused persons ever conspired, met or had a prior concert regarding the incident. The known Jewellers of the deceased examined by the Result: Acquitted Page 40 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) Prosecution only establish that he sold them the Gold/Silver Jewellery on the day of incident which he used to keep in his Thaila. They could never prove that at the time of murder and robbery, the Victim had such large quantity of Cash and Jewellery as alleged.
67. The evidence regarding the fact that accused Ravinder and Suresh stayed in Hotel Dolphin alongwith Nikhil soon after the incident cannot alone be taken as such incriminating circumstance or piece of evidence regarding their conduct post incident, which will succeed the prosecution's case on all Charges. No evidence has come on record that the accused persons conspired the commission of offence U/s 201/302/394 or 397 IPC . Thus, I am of the view that the evidence produced in the Court do not prove presence of any criminal conspiracy amongst the accused persons.
68. There is force in submission of defence that accused Ravinder and Suresh have been already tried for keeping possession of Arms and Ammunitions and in which case they have already been tried and acquitted. The version of the Prosecution does not connect either of the accused with use of recovered Weapons in the incident in present case and hence, none of these accused persons were charged U/s 27 Result: Acquitted Page 41 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) A.Act. The prosecution has examined relevant witnesses from AATS, North West, Shalimar Bagh and same witnesses were examined in FIR No. 248/2011. The arrest in the said case is prior to arrest in this case i.e. 07.07.2011. The Ld.MM framed Charges against Ravinder and Suresh U/s 25 A.Act on 30.09.2011. Predecessor of this Court also framed Charges on same facts U/s 25 A.Act much subsequently on 09.12.2011. The trial of FIR no. 248/2011 concluded and the Judgment Precedes the present Judgment. Accused persons cannot be tried again for the said offence or else that will be Violation of Principle of avoidance of double Jeopardy. In view of the fact that they stand acquitted on same facts though in a different trial, the Charges against him U/s 25 A.Act become redundant. The analogy that applied to these accused persons by virtue of Judgment of Ld.MM dt. 05.06.2014 applies to the facts of this case also. The prosecution has not proceeded U/s 224 Cr.P.C and this charge can not be deleted having regard to Section 216 Cr.P.C. However, there is no dispute that there can not be double jeopardies. Hence, this Court, having regard to powers vested in it U/s 224 Cr.P.C stays the trial of said charge and by virtue of this order shall have Result: Acquitted Page 42 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) effect of acquittal qua charge U/s 25 of the Arms Act against both the accused persons.
69. So far as the offences U/s 394, 397 and 201 IPC is concerned, none of the Prosecution witness including PW4 has been able to establish presence of any of the accused on the spot or destruction of evidence by them.
70. So far as the Charge U/s 411 IPC against Ravinder @ Sonu is concerned, it has come on record that the Ld.MM did not proceed to invoke this Charge as PS Ranhola had already incorporation Section 411 IPC in the present FIR. This charge was explained to the accused on 17.09.2018. The recovery memo is Ex.PW21/H. This recovery was made by the Police team members of AATS, North West, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi although subsequent to a disclosure statement made by Ravinder @ Sonu who was allegedly arrested from CA Block, Radha Krishan Mandir, Delhi on 07.07.2011 at 02:30 PM. This team went on the way to Village Nahari for making recovery of Rs.1,35,000/. They did not inform the IO of this case despite the fact that Ravinder and Suresh had already made disclosure statement regarding their involvement in the present case. As per defence, the Result: Acquitted Page 43 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) police had taken Rs.2 lacs which they handedover to IO/Insp.Tilak Chand. However, the IO later asked for Rs.2 lacs more which they refused to give. Hence, the accused was framed in this case. It is claimed that the defence had examined Naresh Kumar as DW1 who is father of accused Ravinder and accused Suresh is elder brother of DW1's Son in law namely Vinod in the trial of FIR no.248/11, wherein DW1 has deposed about this fact. It is submitted that since the said file is part of record, the Court may read the said testimony on behalf of the accused persons. It is submitted that amount of Rs.1,35,000/ which is allegedly shown as recovered is not an actual recovery but the said amount was taken away from the house of accused Ravinder and later planted as recovery pursuant to alleged disclosure statement. In this context, attention of the Court is drawn to the relevant recovery memo Ex.PW21/H. It is dt. 07.07.2011. Ex.PW21/A is stated to be the disclosure statement of Ravinder @ Sonu. When it was recorded the date was 07.07.2011 and when the four page disclosure statement was concluded, the date is reflected as "07/08.07.11". It is submitted that the same would only happen when the date changed post 12 AM. This argument has force. The AATS Result: Acquitted Page 44 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) allegedly received a secret information by ASI Ramesh Kumar. The Car in which the accused were travelling, was apprehended at about 02:30 PM at the Nakabandi point. Rukka was sent at 05:10 PM. SI Ved Prakash reached the spot at 06:15 PM. After that the Police team went to Nahari Village. PW21 claims that the room from where recovery was effected was built on first floor of house of accused Ravinder from an Iron Almirah kept in the said room.
71. As per PW25, this Almirah was actually kept on the ground floor of the house and the currency notes were recovered from a Carry Bag of Saini Sweet Shop, Narela. These witnesses have attempted to identify the case property. PW25 clarifies that they reached Village Nahari at 10:00 PM and returned back to Delhi at about 11:00 PM. He admits that information about involvement of accused in this case was given to the concerned IO after completion of investigation and recovery proceedings in FIR no.248/11. It therefore, stand to reason that if Police team was back to the office of AATS st 11:00 PM, then how the disclosure statement recorded much prior in point of time would reflect the same as the intervening night of 07/08.07.2011?
Result: Acquitted Page 45 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
72. To add to it, it is a defence of accused Ravinder that the accused persons were in Police custody since 04.07.2011. it is submitted that on account of non payment of further money, the alleged recoveries were planted upon them. PW25 has been suggested that Rs.1,35,000/ was forcibly taken from the house of accused Ravinder and subsequently shown as recovery. Defence is probable.
73. It is pointed out that there is non compliance of Section 100 Cr.P.C. which is correct. The Police team which was so diligent in conducting the investigational work of IO of this case and took special Pains to effect the recovery after going all the way to Village Nahari in Sonipat did not take pains to join any of the family member of Ravinder @ Sonu to the recovery proceedings. They were not diligent enough in recording the date of disclosure statement Ex.PW 21/H correctly. PW23 and PW25 are utterly confused as to from which floor of the house, they made the recovery.
74. In any case, there is no connection between this recovery as part of the cash amount of Rs.10 lacs that was robbed in the present case. This amount, as per disclosure statement, is the left over the amount that came to share of Ravinder after the purified melted gold was Result: Acquitted Page 46 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) sold. However, the Prosecution did not make good use of the evidence in this regard particularly in view of the set backs which its seems to have suffered from orders of discharge of Amol Tanaji Patil and the Jeweller Darshan Singh. The Chain of evidence broke at that points of time and to add to it, the recovery witnesses have shown traits of non reliability. Further corroboration to the recovery proceedings is therefore missing.
75. So far as the accused Praveen is concerned, the only evidence against him is in the form of recovery of Rs.1 lac cash vide memo Ex.PW30/S. It is shown to have been effected from his house at Bidhlan from a box kept in his house. Even in this case, the Prosecution does not connect the amount as part amount of cash loot of Rs.10 lacs. As per disclosure statement of Praveen, this amount is the left over of the share that he received after the gold was melted and sold to Darshan. Darshan has been discharged. The Police witnesses committed same mistake which they did in the investigation while effecting recovery from house of Ravinder. To add to it, they did not give any identification mark to the Cash. The Part of the disclosure statement which describes the fact that the amount of Rs.1 lac was part of remaining cash which this accused Result: Acquitted Page 47 of 49 State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) received after selling the melted gold is inadmissible in evidence. Therefore, even if recovery of Rs.1 lac is believed, there is no evidence of its connection with the property stolen.
76.Thus, there is no direct evidence to say that accused Ravinder and Praveen Kumar retained possession of stolen articles or sale proceeds of stolen articles knowing or having reasons to believe the same to be stolen property.
CONCLUSION :
77. Consequently, case of the Prosecution against any of the accused is not proved beyond any reasonable doubts. All the accused persons namely Ravinder @ Sonu, Suresh @ Kala and Praveen Kumar are hereby acquitted for all the abovesaid Charges.
78. So far as PO Nikhil is concerned, proceedings will be re opened as and when he will be arrested.
79. As per previous directions, all the three accused persons have already been furnished PB/SB in the sum of Rs.10,000/ each with one Surety each in the like amount in view of Section 437A Cr.P.C.
Result: Acquitted Page 48 of 49State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016)
80. 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.
File be consigned to Record Room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN (MANISH YADUVANSHI)
COURT ON: 21.12.2018 ASJ05 (West), THC, Delhi.
Digitally
signed by
MANISH
MANISH YADUVANSHI
YADUVANSHI Date:
2018.12.26
15:20:39
+0530
Result: Acquitted Page 49 of 49
State Vs. Ravinder @ Sonu etc. FIR 55/09 (56237/2016) Result: Acquitted Page 50 of 49