Delhi District Court
State vs Imran on 8 July, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. AAYUSHI SAXENA,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-05,
SHAHDARA DISTRICT, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
Cr. Case No. -: 87521/2016
CNR No. -: DLSH020067792016
E-FIR No. -: 21783/2016
Police Station -: Jagatpuri
Section(s) -: Section 379/34 IPC
In the matter of: Digitally
signed by
AAYUSHI
AAYUSHI SAXENA
STATE SAXENA Date:
(Represented by Sh. Bhuvnesh Sharma, 2025.07.08
16:12:40
Ld. APP for the State) +0530
VERSUS
1) Imran,
S/o Sh. Jafar
R/o C-29, Gali no. 11,
New Govind Pura, Delhi
2) Salman
S/o Sh. Wahid
R/o H No. 95, Fatak wali gali,
Kureji Khas, Delhi-51.
...... Accused
Sh. Chander
Bhushan,
1. Name of Complainant :
S/o Sh. Ram Naresh
Sharma.
1) Imran,
S/o Sh. Jafar,
R/o C-29, Gali
2. Name of Accused : No.11, New Govind
Pura, Delhi.
2) Salman,
S/o Sh. Wahid,
State Vs. Imran and Anr.
e-FIR No. 21783/2016
PS Jagatpuri Pgae No. 1 of 5
R/o House no.95,
Phatak Wali Gali,
3. Offence complained of or proved : Section 379/34 IPC
4. Plea of Accused : Not Guilty
5. Date of commission of offence : 19.07.2016
6. Date of filing of case : 08.10.2016
7. Date of pronouncement : 08.07.2025
Both the accused
8. Final Order : persons have been
acquitted.
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
FACTUAL MATRIX -
1. The story of the prosecution is that on 19.07.2016 at about 08:30 AM, at House No.13, Rashid Market, Delhi, both the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, committed theft of motorcycle bearing no. DL-5SBZ-6847 from the possession of the complainant Ram Naresh Sharma. On the complaint of the complainant, FIR was registered. After completing the formalities, investigation was carried out. On culmination of the same, the Police Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., against the accused was filed in the Court.
2. Vide order dated 08.10.2016, cognizance in the present matter was taken by Ld. Predecessor of this Court and since the accused persons had been produced from JC on that day, copy of charge sheet was supplied to them as per State Vs. Imran and Anr.
e-FIR No. 21783/2016 PS Jagatpuri Pgae No. 2 of 5section 207 Cr.P.C. on that very date.
3. On finding a prima facie case against accused persons, charge under Section 379/34 IPC was framed against them by Ld. Predecessor of this Court on 02.05.2017 to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. On 07.05.2025, the accused persons had admitted E- FIR No. 21783/2016 which was exhibited as Ex.P1 and DD No. 38A dated 25.07.2017 which was exhibited as Ex.P2.
PROSECUTION'S EVIDENCE
5. Summons were issued to Prosecution witness Sh. Chander Bhushan (Complainant), through IO/SHO and DCP concerned, but the same were repeatedly received back as unserved and hence, he was dropped from the list of witnesses vide order dated 07.05.2025. Also summons were issued to IO Subhash Pandey but the same were received with the report that he had expired. Hence he was also dropped from the list of witnesses vide order dated 08.07.2025.
6. In these circumstances, as the complainant has not appeared in the court to depose about his case and there is no other public witness, who might have witnessed the alleged State Vs. Imran and Anr.
e-FIR No. 21783/2016 PS Jagatpuri Pgae No. 3 of 5incident, the prosecution evidence stands closed, declining the request of Ld. Additional Public Prosecutor for leading further evidence, as it shall be futile to record the testimonies of other witnesses, who are formal or official in nature. The precious Court time should not be wasted in recording the evidence of formal or official witnesses when the complainant has not appeared in the Court to depose in the present case. The statement under section 313 of the Cr.P.C of accused persons are dispensed with as there is nothing incriminating against them.
7. I have heard arguments at length. I have also given my conscious thought and prolonged consideration to the material on record, relevant provisions of law and the precedents on the point.
8. At this juncture, it is pertinent to refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sh. Satish Mehra vs Delhi Administration & Anr on 31 July, 1996, wherein it has been categorically held that:
"But when the Judge is fairly certain that there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction the valuable time of the Court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the conclusion on a future date. We are under heavy pressure of work-load. If the Sessions Judge is almost certain that the trial would only be an exercise in futility or a sheer waste of time it is advisable to truncate or ship the proceedings at the stage of Section 227 of the Code itself."e-FIR No. 21783/2016 PS Jagatpuri Pgae No. 4 of 5
DECISION
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, with the prosecution failing to prove its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, both the accused persons namely Imran S/o Sh. Jafar and Salman S/o Sh. Wahid stand acquitted for the offence under Section 379/34 IPC.
10. The bail bonds, if any, furnished by the accused persons at the time of commencement of trial stand cancelled. Surety, if any, stands discharged.
11. Documents, if any, shall be returned to its rightful owner as per rules. Endorsement, if any, stands cancelled. Case property, if any, shall be disposed of as per rules after expiration of period to assail this judgment and in case of appeal, as per the directions of Ld. Appellate Court.
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT TODAY i.e. 08.07.2025. Digitally signed by AAYUSHI AAYUSHI SAXENA SAXENA Date:
2025.07.08 16:12:47 (Aayushi Saxena) +0530 JMFC-05/ SHD, Karkardooma Courts/Delhi/08.07.2025 Present judgment consists of 5 pages and each page bears my initials. Digitally signed by AAYUSHI AAYUSHI SAXENA SAXENA Date:
2025.07.08 (Aayushi Saxena) 16:12:51 +0530 JMFC-05/SHD, Karkardooma Courts/Delhi/08.07.2025 State Vs. Imran and Anr.e-FIR No. 21783/2016 PS Jagatpuri Pgae No. 5 of 5