Delhi District Court
Fir No. 446/01, Ps Timarpur, State vs Chander Prakash @ Sonu on 13 October, 2014
1
IN THE COURT OF SH.R.K. PANDEY, METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
: 02 (CENTRAL) TIS HAZARI COURTS, NEW DELHI
FIR No. 446/01
PS: Timar Pur
U/s 27 Arms Act & section 324/34 IPC
State v. Chander Prakash @ Sonu & Ors
JUDGMENT
1. Sl No. of the case : 02401R0153232001
2. Date of Commission of the offence: 28.08.01
3. The name of the informant : Sh Vikas
4. The name & address of accused : (1) Chander Prakash @ Sonu
s/o Sh. Kripal Singh
r/o 2541, Gali No. 66, Sant
Nagar, Delhi.
5. Date of institution of FIR : 28.08.01
6. Date of receipt of this case in
this court : 23.10.01
7. The plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty.
8. Date of reserving the case for order: 13.10.2014
9. Date of Decision : 13.10.2014.
10.Final order : Acquitted.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE :
FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu
2
1. Prosecution case in brief is that on 28.08.01 at about 12 noon at road near gali no. 67, Sant Nagar, Burari Delhi accused possessed and used sharp edged Ustra measuring 26:3 cm with a blade of length 11:3 cm and width 2:3 cm in order to cause simple hurt upon the person of injured Vikas & Vishal and accused alongwith co accused Razzak Ahmad (since expired) caused simple hurt on the person of injured Vikas & Vishal with sharp edged Ustra. After filing of challan, accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu was charged for offence u/s 27 Arms Act 1959 and accused Razzak Ahmad (since expired) and accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu jointly charged u/s 324/34 IPC to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial. During the trial , accused Razzak Ahmad expired and proceedings against him stand abated. In support of its case, prosecution has examined six witnesses including the complainant/informant.
2. PW 1 ASI Mohan Pratap deposed that on 28.08.01 he was posted at PS Timar Pur as duty officer from 8 am to 4 pm & on that day he registered FIR of present case EXPW 1/A on the basis of Rukka sent by IO of the case.
3. PW 2 Vikas deposed that on 28.08.01, he went to fetch water FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 3 from water tanker at 25 feet road and there he saw that accused Sonu was present & Sonu put his hand on both outlet taps of water tanker and when deponent asked him that he may be allowed to fetch water from one of two taps , accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu started abusing him and at that deponent sit down at some distance & accused Sonu had given both outlet of water taps to some another person & accused Sonu also slapped on the left ear of the deponent & when deponent attempted to prevent the Sonu from doing so, coaccused Razak came there & asked the Sonu to caught hold to the deponent & he caught hold to the deponent & Sonu taken out one razor from his pocket & gave cut wound on upper back & on left arm & at that time brother of the deponent namely Vishal came there & intervene to save the deponent to which brother of deponent also received injuries & public persons from the locality including mother of the deponent gathered there & accused Sonu & coaccused left the place of incident. PW2 further deposed that mother of the deponent called the police at 100 number & deponent was taken to Trauma Centre for his medical treatment & police recorded his statement EXPW 2/A. FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 4
4. PW3 Vishal deposed that in the month of September 2011, at about 12 noon at 25 feet road, his brother went to fetch water from tanker and there a quarrel took place with the accused Sonu & accused Razak & accused Sonu caught hold to the brother of the deponent and accused Sonu taken out one Ustra & gave blow of it on his brother & when deponent intervene he saved his brother . PW3 further deposed that he called the police at 100 number & police came and taken the brother of the deponent to the hospital & police also made inquiry from the deponent. PW3 further deposed that both the accused persons were arrested.
5. PW4 Dr Deepak Kr. Singh deposed that on 28.08.01 he was posted as CMO at Shushurat Trauma Centre & he examined injured Vishal & Vikas . PW4 further deposed that he gave detailed report on MLC EXPW 4/A and MLC EXPW 4/B regarding nature of injuries upon the person on both the injured.
6. PW5 HC Naresh Kr deposed that on 28.08.01 he was posted at PP Burari , PS TImar Pur as Ct. & on that day DD No. 16 was received by ASI Madan Lal and thereafter deponent accompanied ASI Madan Lal to gali no. 66, 25 feet road, Sant Nagar Burari where they came to know that injured persons had already been FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 5 taken to Trauma Centre . PW5 further deposed that no eye witness of the incident was found present at spot & deponent accompanied the IO to Trauma Centre & at Trauma Centre one Vikas was found to be admitted. PW2 further deposed that IO collected MLC of the injured Vikas & recorded his statement & IO prepared Tehrir and handed over the same to deponent for registration of FIR & deponent went to the PS & got the case registered. PW5 further deposed that after registration of case , deponent again returned at the place of incident where IO alongwith injured Vikas & his brother Vishal were present & deponent had handed over copy of FIR & original Tehrir to the IO & thereafter deponent alongwith IO and injured went in search of the accused Razak & Sonu & both were arrested and arrest memo EXPW 5/A & 5/B were prepared. PW5 further deposed that personal search of both the accused were conducted and personal search memo EXPW 5/C & EXPW 5/D were prepared. PW5 further deposed that both the accused persons made their disclosure statement & both of them led to the place of incident & pointing out memo was prepared. PW5 further deposed that accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu led them to the wall of house no. 2518, gali no 66 & from there he took out one FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 6 razor from the bricks & stated that injuries were caused by the said razor. PW5 further deposed that razor were put in pullanda and was sealed with the seal of ML.
7. PW 6 SI Madan Lal deposed that on 28.08.01 he was posted at PP Burari and on that day on receipt of DD No. 16 , deponent alongwith Ct. Naresh went to 25 feet road, Sant Nagar, Burari from where they received information that injured have already been shifted to Trauma Centre. PW6 further deposed that they left the spot & visited at Trauma Centre from where MLC of Vishal & Vikas were obtained & statement of complainant Vikas was recorded & on the basis of the same deponent prepared Tehir EXPW 6/A & handed over the same to Ct. Naresh for registration for FIR. PW6 further deposed that he alongwith Ct. Naresh returned at PP Burari & in the meantime injured Vishal & Vikas came at PP Burari & informed about presence of accused persons near Sodan Builders . PW6 further deposed that he alongwith Ct. Naresh & Vikas left for Sodan Builders & on identification of complainant Vikas , both the accused persons were apprehended and their disclosure statements were recorded. PW6 further deposed that blade/ustra was recovered at the instance of accused Chander FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 7 Prakash @ Sonu & same was measured and sketch EXPW 6/B was prepared & was sealed with the seal of ML. PW6 further deposed that both the accused persons were arrested and their respective arrest memo were prepared. PW6 further deposed that on production of pullanda of cloth of injured by duty Ct. of Trauma Centre, the same was seized & memo EXPW 6/C was prepared. PW6 further deposed that at the instance of complainant , site plan EXPW 6/D was prepared.
8. After recording the statement of prosecution witnesses, PE was closed and statement of both the accused persons were recorded u/s 281 Cr.P.C and all the incriminating evidence were explained to both the accused to which both the accused denied but opted not to lead any defence evidence. Accordingly, matter was fixed for final arguments. Vide order dt. 20.04.13 proceedings against accused Razak Ahmad were dropped after his death verification.
9. Final arguments heard.
10. It is argued on behalf of the state by Ld. APP for the state that prosecution has proved its case, hence accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu is liable to be convicted.
FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 8
11. It is argued on behalf of the accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu by Ld. Defence counsel that case property is planted one upon the accused . It is further argued by Ld. Defence counsel that there is contradiction in statement of witnesses PW2 and PW3 and no public witnesses were joined in the investigation by the police. It is further argued that police official who took personal search of the accused persons after their apprehension did not offered their own personal search prior to personal search of the accused persons. It is further argued that recovery of case property from possession of accused persons is doubtful. It is further argued that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts against the accused, hence benefit of doubt be given to accused and accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu is liable to be acquitted.
12. Heard. Perused the record.
13. As per the case of prosecution, on 28.08.01 at about 12 noon at road near gali no. 67, Sant Nagar, Burari Delhi accused possessed and used sharp edged Ustra measuring 26:3 cm with a blade of length 11:3 cm and width 2:3 cm in order to cause simple hurt upon the person of injured Vikas & Vishal and accused alongwith co accused Razak Ahmad (since expired) caused FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 9 simple hurt on the person of injured Vikash & Vishal with sharp edged Ustra.
14. As per prosecution story, both the witnesses PW 2 & 3 received injures during the incident. However, witness PW3 Vishal has not stated anything about the fact that he has received any injury . Witness PW2 Vikas has not stated anything about the case property i.e. weapon of offence neither he has identified the same during the trial of the case. As per averment of the witness PW2, many public persons were there . However, police have not joined any other public persons not gave any explanation regarding the same. On perusal of document EXPW 2/B it reveals that recovery memo bears signatures of witness Vikas . However, witness Vikas has not stated anything about the fact that weapon of offence was recovered in his presence. In above discussion creates doubts on prosecution story regarding the incident & regarding the recovery of weapon of offence from the possession & instance of accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu & it is settled principle of law that benefit of doubt is always given to the accused. Hence, court is of the considered view that prosecution story regarding the allegation against the accused for offence U/s 27 Arms Act & section 324/34 FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu 10 IPC is not proved beyond reasonable doubts. Hence, accused Chander Prakash @ Sonu s/o Sh. Kripal Singh stand acquitted from the offence u/s 27 Arms Act & section 324/34 IPC. Bail bond and surety bond discharged.
15. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (RAVINDRA KUMAR PANDEY) on 13.10.2014. MM02 (Central)Tis Hazari Court DELHI FIR No. 446/01, PS Timarpur, State v/s Chander Prakash @ Sonu