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 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

State vs . Veeru @ Chapta on 28 August, 2019

             IN THE COURT OF Ms. SHIVALI SHARMA
            CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE:EAST
                 KARKARDOOMA COURT: DELHI

D.D. No.       : 73B dated 09.01.2016
PS             : Kalyanpuri
u/S            : 53/116 D.P. Act.

                     STATE Vs. Veeru @ Chapta

JUDGMENT
A New No. of the case       14945/16
B Name of the               State
  complainant
C Name of the accused
  & his parentage and       Veeru @ Chapta s/o Late Sh. Tara
  address                   Chand r/o 6/354, Trilokpuri, Delhi.
D Offence       Complained 53/116 D.P. Act.
  of
E Date of commission of 09.01.2016
  offence.
F Date of Institution       09.01.2016
G Offence Charged           53/116 D.P. Act.
H Plea of the accused       Pleaded not guilty.
I Order Reserved on         28.08.2019
  Date of                   28.08.2019
  Pronouncement
K Final Order                Convicted u/s 53/116 D.P. Act.




D.D. No. 73B               State vs. Veeru @ Chapta       Page 1 of 6

BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION PROSECUTION'S CASE

1. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.01.16 at 8.15 pm, near park of 9 Block, Trilokpuri, within the jurisdiction of PS Kalyanpuri, accused Veeru @ Chapta was found present within the territorial limits of Delhi in violation of order of DCP, No. 218­35/Exterment Cell/East Distt dated 03.03.2015 issued by Sh. Surender Kumar, IPS, Addl. Deputy Commissioner of Police­I, East District, Delhi, against him for a period of 02 years w.e.f. 10.03.2015. Thereby he is alleged to have committed offence u/s 53/116 DP Act. CHARGE 2 On the basis of his arrest, D.D. No. 73B dated 09.01.2016 (Ex.

PW 2/A) was registered in the matter on 09.01.2016. 3 After investigation, final report/ Kalandara was filed on 09.01.2016.

4 On the basis of the allegations and after compliance of Sec.207 Cr.P.C., a notice for the offence punishable under section 53/116 DP Act was framed against accused Veeru @Chapta on and read out to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial on 11.01.2016.

PROSECUTION EVIDENCE 5 To bring home the guilt against the accused prosecution has examined 3 witnesses in all:

D.D. No. 73B State vs. Veeru @ Chapta Page 2 of 6

6 PW1 Ct. Vikrant, PW2 ASI Brijpal and PW3 Ct. Rajdeep Singh are the witnesses to the apprehension of the accused on 09.01.2016 from within the territorial limits of Delhi. Their depositions are in consonance with each other. PW 2 is also the IO of the present case.

7 They deposed that on 09.01.2016 they were on patrolling duty.

While on patrolling they reached at 9 Block Park Trilokpuri where they found accused Veeru @ Chapta against whom an order of externment dated 03.03.15 was already in operation. He was asked for his reason for presence in Delhi despite operation of externment order but he could not give any justifiable reason. He was accordingly arrested and personally searched vide memos Ex. PW 1/A and B. His medical was conducted and he was brought to PS. PW 2 lodged D.D. No. 73B u/s 53/116 DP Act regarding arrival (Ex. PW 1/C) and prepared the Kalandra Ex. PW 2/A and filed the same before the court. All the witnesses identified the accused as the person who was apprehended from the area of Delhi on 09.01.2016 despite operation of externment order. They have not been subjected to cross examination. Accordingly, their testimony regarding the apprehension of accused from within the territory of Delhi on 09.01.16 has remained unrebutted and uncontroverted.

8 In addition to the above evidence accused admitted u/s 294 D.D. No. 73B State vs. Veeru @ Chapta Page 3 of 6 Cr.P.C. the externment order bearing no.218­35/Externment Cell/East Distt dated 03.03.15 passed against him which is Ex. AD­1 and accordingly examination of relevant witnesses was dispensed with.

STATEMENT OF ACCUSED 9 Statement of accused u/s 313 Cr. PC was recorded on 26.08.2019 where in the entire incriminating evidence produced on record was put to him. He denied all the allegations and stated that he had been falsely implicated in this case. He stated that he had come to Delhi to look after his ailing wife and his minor children as there was no one to look after them.

DEFENCE EVIDENCE OF ACCUSED 10 Accused did not examine any witness in his defence . 11 Final argument have been heard. Record carefully perused.

Judicial Resolutions 12 It is a settled proposition of criminal law that prosecution is supposed to prove its case on the judicial file by leading cogent, convincing reliable and trustworthy evidence beyond reasonable doubts. The case of prosecution has to fall or stand on its own legs and it cannot drive any benefit from the weakness if any, in the defence of the accused. It is not for the accused to disprove the case of the prosecution and onus to prove the case against D.D. No. 73B State vs. Veeru @ Chapta Page 4 of 6 the accused beyond reasonable doubts never shifts and it always remains on the prosecution. Further, benefit of doubt in the prosecution story always goes to the accused and it entitles the accused to acquittal.

13 Section 53 of Delhi Police Act, 1978 (D.P. Act) provides procedure on failure of a person to leave the area and his entry therein after removal pursuant to a direction issued u/s 47 and 48 of the Act. Section 116 of DP Act provides penalty against a person entering the area from which he has been directed to remove himself without proper permission. 14 In the present case, there are three witnesses examined by the prosecution i.e. PW1 Ct. Vikrant, PW2 ASI Brijpal and PW3 Ct. Rajdeep Singh who have specifically deposed about the apprehension of accused Veeru @ Chapta on 09.01.16 from within the territorial limit of Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Kalyanpuri and within the territorial limits of the State of Delhi. These witnesses have not been subject to cross examination and there is no reason for doubting their uncontroverted testimonies. The externment order has also been duly proved as Ex. AD/1 and has not been disputed by the accused. 15 In these circumstances, considering the over all evidence on record I have no hesitation in holding that prosecution has duly proved its case against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt. The fact that accused was found present within the D.D. No. 73B State vs. Veeru @ Chapta Page 5 of 6 territorial limits of Delhi on 09.01.16 in contravention of the externment order Ex. AD/1 stands duly proved on record without any reasonable doubt. Accused Veeru @ Chapta is accordingly liable for conviction u/s 53/116 DP Act.

16 Accordingly, accused Veeru @ Chapta is convicted for offence punishable u/s 53/116 DP Act.

17 Be heard on the point of sentence separately.


                                                           Digitally signed by
                                                           SHIVALI SHARMA
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT               SHIVALI          Location: East District
                                                           Karkardooma Courts
ON 28.08.2019                             SHARMA           Delhi
                                                           Date: 2019.08.28
                                                           16:40:47 +0530
                                          (SHIVALI SHARMA)
                                   CMM (EAST)/KKD/ 28.08.2019

Certified that this judgment contains 6 pages and each page bears my signatures.

(SHIVALI SHARMA) CMM (EAST)/KKD/ 28.08.2019 D.D. No. 73B State vs. Veeru @ Chapta Page 6 of 6