Delhi District Court
State vs . Ajay & Ors on 3 July, 2019
IN THE COURT OF SH. ARUN GOEL
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE07, NORTH DISTRICT,
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
STATE VS. Ajay & Ors
JUDGEMENT
(a) The eFIR no. of the case : 03768/19
(b) Police Station : Narela Industrial Area
(c) The date of commission of offence : 31.01.2019
(d) The name of complainant : Sh. Saurabh Singhal
(e) The name of accused : Ajay
S/o Sh. Ashok
R/o House no. 161, Village
Qutubgarh, Delhi.
(2) Sunny Dabas @ Hunny
S/o Sh. Dharmander
R/o House no. 1251, Dada
Sadh Wali Gali, Village
Pooth Khurd, Delhi.
(e) The offence complained of :U/s 392/34 IPC
(f) The plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
and claimed trial.
(g) Date of Institution : 24.05.2009
(h) The date on which
judgment was reserved : 03.07.2019
(i) The final order : Acquitted
eFIR No.03768 /18 State Vs.Ajay & ors. 1 of 4
(j) The date of such order : 03.07.2019
(k) The Unique Identification Number : 2761
Brief statement of the reasons for the decision:
1. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.01.2019, at about 10:00 am, near C358, Narela Industrial Area, Delhi that accused persons robbed the complainant Saurabh Singhal of his car bearing no. DL8C AB3090 after putting him in the fear of causing injuries and thereafter, the investigation was done in this case and then chargesheet u/s 392/34 IPC was filed. Accused persons were summoned and documents were supplied to the accused persons in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.
2. Thereafter, charge was framed u/s 392/34 IPC was framed against the accused persons on 06.06.2019. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Matter was listed for prosecution evidence. Prosecution examined following witnesses :
4. Sh. Saurabh Singhal was examined as PW1. He stated that he is running a factory at C Block, 538, Narela Industrial Area. On 31.01.2019, at about 10:00 pm, he left his factory to go to his house. He walk towards his car (Toyata Fortuner bearing NO. DL8CAB3090) and entered in the car. Before he started his car one boy knocked on his eFIR No.03768 /18 State Vs.Ajay & ors. 2 of 4 car on driver side window. He rolled down his car's window and the boy started asking for a address. He tried to make him understand the way going towards the address he was asking for on which he requested the complainant to step down from the car and to tell him the address properly. The movement he steps down his car, that boy pushed him and started abusing him stating that " lala tu yha se bhag ja nahi to tujhe jaan se maar denge" he kept his one hand on his back pretendending that his carrying some weapon. Suddenly, one another boy came there and entered in his car and sit on the conductor side. The first boy was also get entered the car and started the same as his car keys were already in the car. They started the car and ran away from the spot. He ran towards his factory and he saw one blue colour balono car was also standing there and started following his car. Thereafter, he made call at 100 number. Police reached at the spot and his complaint was registered. He gave a written complaint to the police. He can not identify the accused persons if shown to me as it was dark at that time.
The witness had failed to identify the accused persons. Ld. APP sought permission to cross examine the said witness as he was found resiling from his earlier statement recorded by police but even in his cross examination he failed to identify the accused persons.
5. As the main witness of the prosecution had failed to identify the accused persons. The evidence of remaining witnesses who were formal in nature was dispensed with. Hence, PE was closed and eFIR No.03768 /18 State Vs.Ajay & ors. 3 of 4 statement of accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C. was also dispensed with as there was no incriminating evidence against the accused persons.
6. Thereafter the matter was fixed for final arguments. Accordingly, final arguments were advanced by both the parties.
7. In the present case of the prosecution, accused persons were charged with robbery against the complainant. Complainant Saurabh Singhal was the only eye witness present at the time of commission of offence. He was examined as a witness and he failed to identify the accused persons. He declared hostile by Ld. APP and was cross examined but even then he failed to identify the accused persons. There is no other evidence produce by the prosecution to establish the identity of the accused persons as a person who were responsible for the commission of the offence.
8. Hence in these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts. The accused Ajay and Sunny Dabas @ Hunny are accordingly acquitted for the offence u/s 392 /34 IPC.
Digitally signed by ARUN ARUN GOEL GOEL Date:
2019.07.04 Announced in the open court 14:57:45 +0530 today i.e. on 3rd day of July, 2019 (Arun Goel) MM07/North/Rohini/Delhi 03.07.2019 eFIR No.03768 /18 State Vs.Ajay & ors. 4 of 4