Delhi District Court
State vs 1. Satish @ Pellu on 28 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SH. SUDESH KUMARI,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE05 SHAHDARA,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
SESSIONS CASE No. 106/17 (I.D. No. 940/16)
FIR No. 922/15
P.S. Farsh Bazar
U/s 394/397/411/34 IPC
State Versus 1. Satish @ Pellu
S/o Sh. Dharambir Singh,
R/o H. No. 5/23, Gajju Katra,
Farsh Bazar, Shahdara,
Delhi32. (At present in JC)
2. Mohd. Sobhi
S/o Sh. Yaseen
R/o B431, New Sanjay Amar Colony,
Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara,
Delhi32
Date of institution : 01072016
Date of arguments : 28042018
Date of Judgment : 28042018
J U D G M E N T
The accused Satish @ Pellu has been sent up for trial by the
prosecution on the allegations that on 15112015 at about 6.30 p.m. at
Gali no. 1, Mahavir Block, Bhola Nath Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi within the
jurisdiction of PS Farsh Bazar accused Satish @ Pellu robbed the Mobile
Phone Make Lenova A6000 from the possession of the complainant Ashish
by using knife, a deadly weapon, and while committing robbery caused
State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 1 of 9
simple injury on the person of the complainant Ashish and coaccused
Mohd Sobhi has been sent up for trail on the allegation that on
20112015 at NSA Colony, Delhi the accused Mohd. Sobhi was
apprehended by SI Vijay Kumar and at that time accused Mohd. Sobhi was
found in possession of Mobile Phone Make Lenova A6000 belonging to
the complainant Ashish which the accused dishonestly received and
retained knowing the same or having reason to believe the same to be a
stolen property robbed from the possession of the complainant Ashish.
The case of the prosecution is that on receipt of DD No. 15A SI
Avdhesh Kumar alongwith Ct. Bhupender reached at the spot i.e. Gali no.
1, Bhola Nath Nagar where they came to know that the injured had
already been taken to Headgewar Hospital for treatment upon which SI
Avdhesh Kumar alongwith Ct. Bhupender reached at Hedgewar Hospital
and obtained the MLC No. 3734/15 of complainant Ashish S/o Narender
Sharma R/o 4/1699, Gali no.1, Bhola Nath Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi upon
which the Doctor has kept the nature of injury under observationSharp
and declared the patient fit for statement. The complainant Ashish was
found under treatment in Hedgewar Hospital and he made his statement
to IO SI Avdhesh Kumar to the effect that he resides at the above
said address alongwith his family and he is Student of CA. On 1511
2015 in the evening, he was going in the market to get his mobile
recharged and at about 6.30 p.m. when he turned in the gali where his
house is situated, one person came from behind having knife and by
putting the complainant under threat took out the mobile phone make
Lenova A6000 having IMEI No. 86808702383917 Airtel Sim No.
9717147595 from the pocket of the lower of the complainant and when
the complainant resisted the same and caught hold the knife, the
State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 2 of 9
complainant received injuries on the fingers of his left hand and the said
person ran towards Pandav Road after committing the robbery. The
complainant gave the age of the said person 3035 years to the police
and has also given the description of the culprit and stated to the police
that he can identify the accused. Upon the statement and MLC of the
injured a case was got registered at PS Farsh Bazar vide FIR no
0922/15 U/s 394 IPC and the matter was further investigated and during
the investigation, the site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared,
statement of the witnesses were recorded and after discussion with the
senior officer Section 397 IPC was also added and further investigation
of the present matter was assigned to SI Vijay Kumar.
On 20112015 SI Ami Chand gave information to SI Vijay Kumar
that in case FIR No. 932/15 U/s 25/54/59 Arms Act accused Satish @
Pellu has been arrested and during his disclosure statement, he has made
the disclosure regarding the commission of the present offence and stated
that the knife recovered was used in the commission of the said offence.
Upon which, SI vijay obtained the related documents from SI Ami Chand
and recorded the statement and arrested the accused Satish @ Pellu in the
present matter and during the investigation accused Satish @ Pellu admitted
that he committed the present offence and told the police that he has
sold the robbed mobile phone to one Mohd. Sobhi to whom he can get
arrested and on the instance of the accused Satish @ Pellu accused
Mohd. Sobhi S/o Mohd. Yaseen R/o B431, New Sanjay Amar Colony,
Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara was arrested and the said Mobile Phone Lenova
A6000 was recovered from the wearing pant of accused Mohd. Sobhi.
Accused Satish @ Pellu and Mohd. Sobhi were produced in the court in
muffled face and they were remanded to JC and TIP of accused Satish
State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 3 of 9
@ Pellu was got conducted in which the complainant identified the
accused Satish @ Pellu. The copy of the TIP of the proceedings were
obtained by the IO and statement of the witnesses were recorded,
opinion regarding nature of injury on the person of the complainant
Ashish was obtained on the MLC No. 3734/15 and the nature of the
injuries were opined as Simple and after completion of the investigation
chargesheet U/s 394/397/411 IPC/34 IPC was filed against the accused
persons for trial of the accused persons before the Ld. Ld. Metropolitan
Magistrate, who after compliance of the provisions of U/s 207 Cr.P.C.
committed the case to the court of Session, offence U/s 397 IPC
exclusively being triable by the court of Session, which in turn was
assigned to this court for trail of the accused persons.
After hearing the arguments on charge and perusal of the file, a
charge U/s 394/397/34 IPC was framed against the accused Satish @
Pellu to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trail and a
separate charge U/s 411 IPC was framed against the accused Mohd.
Sobhi to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Thereafter, the matter was adjourned for prosecution evidence.
In order to establish its case against the accused persons, prosecution
examined nine prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, prosecution evidence
was closed vide order dated 28042018 as the Ld. Amicus Curiae
had submitted that accused Mohd. Sobhi is ready to confess his guilt
so far offence U/s 411 IPC is concerned and no offence U/s
394/397/34IPC is made out against the accused Satish @ Pellu as the complainant has not identified the accused Satish @ Pellu.
Statement of the accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C. was dispensed with and statement of accused Mohd. Sobhi was recorded in which accused State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 4 of 9 Mohd. Sobhi confessed his guilt so far offence U/s 411 IPC is concerned. Accused Mohd. Sobhi voluntarily admitted that on 20112015 at NSA colony, Delhi he was found in possession of a Mobile Phone make Lenovo a stolen property belonging to the complainant and has further stated that he has confessed his guilty voluntarily.
File perused. Submission of the Ld. Amicus Curiae for the accused persons as well as Ld. Addl. PP for the State considered.
In the present matter prosecution in order to establish its case against the accused persons has examined nine prosecution witnesses.
PW1 is Ashish Gaur, the complainant, he has supported the incident of robbery of his mobile phone on 15112015 at about 6.30 p.m. when he was going to get the same recharged but so far the identity of the accused is concerned, the complainant has failed to identify the accused in the court and has stated that he can try to identify the accused though he is not recollecting his face and further after looking around in the court he stated that he is unable to recollect the face of that person. It has been submitted by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State that the complainant has identified the accused in the TIP proceedings and now the complainant deliberately not identifying the accused but the complainant during his examination has stated that once he was called at Tihar Jail for identifying the robber and he had identified one robber and told the Ld. M.M. that the person looks like the robber. This version of the complainant suggests that the complainant was not sure about the identity of the accused even during the TIP as he has stated that he stated to the Ld. M.M. that the person looks like a robber and has not stated that the person to whom he had identified was the robber. He State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 5 of 9 was crossexamined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State on the point of identity of the accused and the ld. Addl. PP for the State put a question to the witness as under: Question I put it to you that the accused Satish @ Pellu S/o Dharmbir who is standing in the dock is the person who was identified by you on 02122015 during judicial TIP? to which the complainant replied that he does not remember and has denied the suggestion of the Ld. Addl. PP for the State that he after carefully seeing all the inmates and accused during the TIP proceedings, he identified the accused and pointed out the accused to the Ld. M.M. or that today he has deposed falsely that he told the Ld. M.M. that accused looks like the person who snatched the mobile phone. The PW1 the complainant has also denied the suggestion that due to fear of the accused he is not identifying him. All this suggests that the identity of the accused in the present matter becomes doubtful and consequently the accused becomes entitled to benefit of doubt.
PW2 is ASI Jitender Singh Duty Officer who recorded DD No. 15A and informed about the same to SI Avdesh through phone and the copy of the said DD is Ex. PW2/A and he also got recorded the FIR 922/15 U/s 394 IPC PS Farsh Bazar through computer operator copy of which is Ex. PW2/B and he has also proved his endorsement Ex. PW2/C on the rukka.
PW3 is Smt. Madhu mother of the complainant Ashish who took his son to Hedgewar Hospital when he came back to his house while shouting and bleeding from his right hand.
PW4 is Ct. Amit who joined the investigation of the present matter alongwith SI Vijay Kumar and participated in the investigation of the State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 6 of 9 case.
PW5 is HC Bhupender who on receipt of call reached at the spot alongwith SI Avdhesh Kuamr where they came to know that the injured had been taken to Hedgewar Hospital and thereafter they reached Hedgewar Hospital where the injured Ashish Sharma was found admitted, whose statement was recorded and rukka was prepared which was handed over to him for registration of the case and he got the case registered at PS Farsh Bazar and came back to Hedgewar Hospital and handed over the copy of the FIR and original tehrir to the IO. Thereafter IO alongwith injured reached at the spot and prepared the site plan at the instance of the complainant.
PW6 is Ct. Satender who participated in the investigation of the case alonwith SI Vijay Kumar and in whose presence the robbed mobile was recovered from the possession of accused Mohd. Sobhi.
PW7 is Ct. Pawan Kumar who on 16112015 had gone to the house of the complainant alognwith IO SI Avdhesh Kumar where complainant met and given the bill of the mobile phone lenovo to the IO which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PW1/B and the bill is Ex. PW1/C. PW8 is Ct. Anup Kumar who on 15112015 was posted in CPCR PHQ ITO and was running channel no. 108 of 100 number and he recorded the call in form no. 1080458 received at about 6.34 p.m. He has proved the PCR form Ex. PW8/A. PW9 is SI Ami Chand IO of the case of case FIR no. 932/15 PS Farsh Bazar.
State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 7 of 9Examination of the accused Satish @ Pellu U/s 313 Cr.P.C. was dispensed with vide order dated 28042018 as the complainant failed to identify the accused and has stated in the court that he can try to identify the accused though he is not recollecting his face and further after looking around in the court he stated that he is unable to recollect the face of that person. So far TIP proceedings are concerned, the complainant during his examination has stated that once he was called at Tihar Jail for identifying the robber and he had identified one robber and told the Ld. M.M. that the person looks like the robber. This version of the complainant suggests that the complainant was not sure about the identity of the accused even during the TIP as he has stated that he stated to the Ld. M.M. that the person looks like a robber and has not stated that the person to whom he had identified was the robber. The complainant was crossexamined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State on the point of identity of the accused but despite crossexamination by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State the identity of the accused could not be proved as the complainant PW1 has denied the suggestion of the Ld. Addl. PP for the State that he after carefully seeing all the inmates and accused during the TIP proceedings, identified the accused and pointed out the accused to the Ld. M.M. or that today he has deposed falsely that he told the Ld. M.M. that accused looks like the person who snatched the mobile phone. Further the complainant PW1 has also denied the suggestion of the Ld. Addl. PP for the State that due to fear of the accused he is not identifying the accused. All this suggests that the identity of the accused Satish @ Pellu in the present matter becomes doubtful and consequently the accused Satish @ Pellu becomes entitled to benefit of doubt.
State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 8 of 9In view of the above discussion accused Satish @ Pellu is acquitted of the offence U/s 394/397/34 IPC with which he was charged.
Release warrant be issued directing the Superintendent Jail to release the accused Satish @ Pellu in the present case.
So far accused Mohd. Sobhi is concerned, he has voluntarily confessed his guilt so far offence U/s 411 IPC is concerned. He has stated that he voluntarily admits that on 20112015 at NSA Colony, Delhi he was found in possession of a Mobile Phone make Lenovo, a stolen property belonging to the complainant, he voluntarily confessed his guilt. No other case is pending against him, he may be released on the basis of period already undergone.
Accordingly, keeping in view the statement of the accused Mohd Sobhi, accused Mohd Sobhi is held guilty of the offence U/s 411 IPC, with which he was charged and is convicted accordingly.
Let the convict Mohd. Sobhi be heard on the point of sentence today i.e. 28042018.
Digitally signed by SUDESH (SUDESH KUMARI)
SUDESH Location:
KUMAR
delhi ASJ05 Shahdara
KUMAR Karkardooma Courts/Delhi
Date: 2018.04.28
16:19:41 +0530
28042018
Announced in the open court
Dated 28042018
State vs. Satish @ Pellu & Anr. FIR no. 922/15 PS Farsh Bazar Page 9 of 9