Delhi District Court
State vs Vikas on 22 April, 2026
Page 1 of 21
IN THE COURT OF ASHISH KUMAR MEENA
JMFC-01, SAKET COURT (SOUTH) NEW DELHI.
FIR NO.: 396/2020
U/S: 33/52(2)/58 DELHI EXCISE ACT
PS: FATEHPUR BERI
STATE
VS.
(1). VIKAS, S/O SH. MAHAVIR SINGH,
R/o H. No.36, Main Market, Sultanpur,
Fatehpur Beri, New Delhi.
(2). PRINCE, S/O SH. BHAGWAN DASS,
R/o H. No.10, Main Market, Sultanpur,
Fatehpur Beri, New Delhi.
..... ACCUSED PERSONS
1. Sr. No. of the case : 5386/2021
2. The date of offence : 13.10.2020
3. The name of the complainant : HC Manoj Kumar
4. The plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
5. The date of order : 22.04.2026
6. The final order : Acquitted
JUDGMENT
1. Briefly stated, Vikas ("Accused no.1") and Prince ("Accused no.2") are facing trial for the allegations that on 13.10.2020, at about 07:10 PM, at near Farm No.04, Mandi Border Check Post, Mandi, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2026.04.22
FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 16:04:11
+0530
Page 2 of 21
PS-Fatehpur Beri, were found carrying 48 quarter bottles of illicit liquor with the label of "Double Blue Delux Blended Whiskey, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ML" in vehicle bearing registration no. DL-3CAH-1655 ("Offending vehicle"), without any licence or permit or pass, thereby both accused have committed an offence punishable u/s 33/52/58 Delhi Excise Act.
2. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet U/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the IO. Consequently, accused persons were summoned after taking cognizance of offence. The accused persons were charged u/s 33/52(2)/58 of the Delhi Excise Act and accordingly, the charges were framed against the accused persons to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to substantiate the allegations, prosecution examined total four witnesses. PW-1 HC Manoj Dhariwal (Complainant) has deposed that on 13.10.2020, he, alongwith Ct. Manish and Ct. Sandeep, was on beat patrolling duty at Dera Mandi Road. At about 06:30 p.m., a secret informer met him and informed that a person in a white-colored Maruti Alto car would bring illicit liquor from Gurugram, Haryana via Mandi Jonapur and supply it in Delhi. The informer further stated that the person would arrive shortly from the side of Gurugram and that, if an immediate raid were conducted, the vehicle along with the illicit liquor could be apprehended red-handed. He informed the SHO concerned about the information, who directed him to take immediate necessary action and form a raiding party. Thereafter, he briefed his staff and constituted a raiding party including his staff and the secret informer. At about 06:50 p.m., they reached Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 2026.04.22 16:04:16 +0530 Page 3 of 21 Farm No. 4, Mandi Border Check Post. He briefed his team, put up barricades, and began checking vehicles coming from the side of Gurugram. He requested four to five public persons/passersby to join the investigation by informing them about the secret information, but none agreed, citing valid reasons. Due to paucity of time, no notice could be served, and they left without disclosing their names and identities. At about 07:10 p.m., a car was seen approaching from the side of Haryana at high speed. The secret informer pointed out the vehicle and confirmed that it was the same car, after which he left the spot. The police team became alert and closed the barricade. The witness signaled the driver to stop the car by waving his hand. The driver stopped the car at a distance of about 10-15 meters from the barricade and attempted to reverse it. Meanwhile, the police team rushed towards the car, surrounded it, and asked the driver to park it on the side of the road. Ct. Manish apprehended the driver, while Ct. Sandeep apprehended the co-passenger. Upon inquiry, the driver disclosed his name as Vikas, son of Mahavir Singh, resident of Sultanpur, and the co-passenger disclosed his name as Prince, son of Bhagwan Singh, resident of Sultanpur. Both persons were taken to the nearby police booth. He checked the car bearing registration number DL-3CAH-1655 and found six carton boxes (gatta petis) in the boot and one carton box at the footrest of the front seat. The driver failed to provide any satisfactory explanation regarding the cartons. Upon checking, six cartons were found to contain 50 quarter bottles each of illicit liquor labeled "ADS Asli Santra Masaledar Deshi Sharab, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ml." One bottle was taken as a sample from one carton, and the remaining 49 bottles were kept in the same Digitally carton. Two cartons each were placed in white plastic sacks, ASHISH signed by ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 2026.04.22 16:04:24 +0530 Page 4 of 21 making a total of three sacks for six cartons. The carton found at the front footrest contained 48 quarter bottles of illicit liquor labeled "Double Blue Deluxe Blended Whiskey, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ml". One bottle was taken as a sample, and the remaining 47 bottles were kept in the same carton. This carton was placed in a separate plastic sack. All four plastic sacks were tied with white cloth and sealed with the seal of "MK." The sample bottles were also sealed in the same manner. The sacks were marked as Serial Nos. 1 to 4, and the samples as S1 and S2. Form M-29 was filled at the spot. After use, the seal was handed over to Ct. Manish. The recovered illicit liquor and sample bottles were taken into custody vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/A. The offending vehicle was also taken into custody vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. He prepared a rukka and handed it over to Ct. Sandeep for registration of FIR vide Ex.PW1/C. Ct. Sandeep went to the police station and got the FIR registered. After registration of FIR, Ct. Sandeep returned to the spot alongwith HC Dinesh, to whom further investigation was assigned. He handed over the accused persons, case property, and relevant documents to HC Dinesh, who prepared the site plan vide Ex.PW1/D. Thereafter, HC Dinesh issued notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. to both accused persons and bound them down. He recorded the disclosure statements of accused Vikas and Prince vide Ex.PW1/E and Ex.PW1/F respectively. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer, alongwith the police team, brought the case property to the police station, where it was deposited in the Malkhana. The Investigating Officer also recorded the statement of the witness under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The witness was duly cross-examined by the accused persons.
Digitally
signed by
ASHISH
ASHISH KUMAR
KUMAR MEENA
Date:
MEENA 2026.04.22
FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 16:04:28
+0530
Page 5 of 21
4. PW-2 HC Sandeep has deposed that on 13.10.2020, he alongwith Ct. Manish and HC Manoj, was on beat patrolling duty at Dera Mandi Road. At about 06:30 p.m., a secret informer met HC Manoj and informed him that a person in a white-coloured Maruti Alto car would bring illicit liquor from Gurugram, Haryana via Mandi Jonapur and supply it in Delhi. The informer further stated that the person would arrive shortly from the side of Gurugram and that, if an immediate raid were conducted, the vehicle along with the illicit liquor could be apprehended red-
handed. HC Manoj informed the SHO concerned about the information, who directed him to take immediate necessary action and form a raiding party. Thereafter, HC Manoj briefed the staff and prepared a raiding party including him, Ct. Manish, and the secret informer. At about 06:50 p.m., they reached Farm No. 4, Mandi Border Check Post. HC Manoj briefed them, barricades were put in place, and vehicle checking commenced for vehicles coming from the side of Gurugram. HC Manoj requested four to five public persons/passersby to join the investigation by informing them about the secret information, but none agreed, citing valid reasons. Due to paucity of time, no notice could be served, and they left without disclosing their names and identities. At about 07:10 p.m., a car was seen approaching from the side of Haryana at high speed. The secret informer pointed out the vehicle and confirmed that it was the same car, after which he left the spot. The police team became alert and closed the barricade. HC Manoj signaled the driver to stop the car by waving his hand. The driver stopped the car at a distance of about 10-15 meters from the barricade and attempted to reverse it. Meanwhile, the police team rushed towards the car, surrounded Digitally signed by it, and asked the driver to park it on the side of the road. Ct. ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 16:04:32 +0530 Page 6 of 21 Manish apprehended the driver, while he apprehended the co- passenger. Upon inquiry by HC Manoj, the driver disclosed his name as Vikas, son of Mahavir Singh, resident of Sultanpur, and the co-passenger disclosed his name as Prince, son of Bhagwan Singh, resident of Sultanpur. Both persons were taken to the nearby police booth. HC Manoj checked the car bearing registration number DL-3CAH-1655 and found six carton boxes (gatta petis) in the boot and one carton box at the footrest of the front seat. The driver failed to provide any satisfactory explanation regarding the cartons. HC Manoj, along with the police staff, took out all the cartons from the car. Upon checking, six cartons were found to contain 50 quarter bottles each of illicit liquor labeled "ADS Asli Santra Masaledar Deshi Sharab, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ml." One bottle was taken as a sample from one carton, and the remaining 49 bottles were kept in the same carton. Two cartons each were placed in white plastic sacks, making a total of three sacks for six cartons. The carton found at the front footrest contained 48 quarter bottles of illicit liquor labeled "Double Blue Deluxe Blended Whiskey, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ml." One bottle was taken as a sample, and the remaining 47 bottles were kept in the same carton. This carton was placed in a separate plastic sack. All four plastic sacks were tied with white cloth and sealed with the seal of "MK." The sample bottles were also sealed in the same manner. The sacks were marked as Serial Nos. 1 to 4, and the samples as S1 and S2. Form M-29 was filled at the spot. After use, the seal was handed over to Ct. Manish. The recovered illicit liquor along with sample bottles was taken into custody vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/A. The offending vehicle was taken into custody vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/B. HC Manoj prepared a rukka and handed it over to Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:04:36 +0530 Page 7 of 21 him for registration of FIR. He went to the police station and got the FIR registered. After registration of FIR, he returned to the spot along with the original rukka and a copy of the FIR and handed them over to HC Dinesh, to whom further investigation was assigned. HC Dinesh prepared the site plan at the instance of HC Manoj. Thereafter, HC Dinesh issued notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. to both accused persons and bound them down. He inquired from accused Vikas and Prince and recorded their disclosure statements. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer, alongwith the police team, brought the case property to the police station, where it was deposited in the Malkhana. The Investigating Officer also recorded his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The witness was duly cross-examined by the accused persons.
5. PW-3 HC Manish has deposed that on 13.10.2020, he alongwith HC Manoj Dhariwal and Ct. Sandeep, was on beat patrolling duty at Dera Mandi Road. At about 06:30 p.m., a secret informer met HC Manoj Dhariwal and informed him that a person in a white-coloured Maruti Alto car would bring illicit liquor from Gurugram, Haryana via Mandi Jonapur and supply it in Delhi. The informer further stated that the person would arrive shortly from the side of Gurugram and that, if an immediate raid were conducted, the vehicle alongwith the illicit liquor could be apprehended red-handed. HC Manoj Dhariwal informed the SHO concerned about the information, who directed him to take immediate necessary action and form a raiding party. Thereafter, HC Manoj Dhariwal briefed the team and prepared a raiding party including them and the secret informer. At about 06:50 p.m., they reached Farm No. 4, Mandi Border Check Post. HC Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2026.04.22
FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 16:04:40
+0530
Page 8 of 21
Manoj Dhariwal briefed the team, barricades were put in place, and vehicle checking commenced for vehicles coming from the side of Gurugram. HC Manoj Dhariwal requested four to five public persons/passersby to join the investigation by informing them about the secret information, but none agreed, citing valid reasons. Due to paucity of time, no notice could be served, and they left without disclosing their names and identities. At about 07:10 p.m., a car was seen approaching from the side of Haryana at high speed. The secret informer pointed out the vehicle and confirmed that it was the same car, after which he left the spot.
The police team became alert and closed the barricade. HC Manoj Dhariwal signaled the driver to stop the car by waving his hand. The driver stopped the car at a distance of about 10-15 meters from the barricade and attempted to reverse it. Meanwhile, the police team rushed towards the car, surrounded it, and asked the driver to park it on the side of the road. He apprehended the driver, while Ct. Sandeep apprehended the co- passenger. Upon inquiry by HC Manoj Dhariwal, the driver disclosed his name as Vikas, son of Mahavir Singh, resident of Sultanpur, and the co-passenger disclosed his name as Prince, son of Bhagwan Singh, resident of Sultanpur. Both persons were taken to the nearby police booth. HC Manoj Dhariwal checked the car bearing registration number DL-3CAH-1655 and found six carton boxes (gatta petis) in the boot and one carton box at the footrest of the front seat. The driver failed to provide any satisfactory explanation regarding the cartons. HC Manoj Dhariwal took out all the cartons from the car and, upon checking, found that six cartons contained 50 quarter bottles each of illicit liquor labeled "ADS Asli Santra Masaledar Deshi Digitally Sharab, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ml." One bottle was taken ASHISH signed by ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA MEENA Date:
FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 2026.04.22 16:04:44 +0530 Page 9 of 21 as a sample from one carton, and the remaining 49 bottles were kept in the same carton. Two cartons each were placed in white plastic sacks, making a total of three sacks for six cartons. The carton found at the front footrest contained 48 quarter bottles of illicit liquor labeled "Double Blue Deluxe Blended Whiskey, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ml." One bottle was taken as a sample, and the remaining 47 bottles were kept in the same carton. This carton was placed in a separate plastic sack. All four plastic sacks were tied with white cloth and sealed with the seal of "MK." The sample bottles were also sealed in the same manner. The sacks were marked as Serial Nos. 1 to 4, and the samples as S1 and S2. Form M-29 was filled at the spot. After use, the seal was handed over to him. HC Manoj Dhariwal took the recovered illicit liquor along with sample bottles into custody vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/A. Thereafter, HC Manoj Dhariwal took the offending vehicle into custody vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. HC Manoj Dhariwal prepared a rukka and handed it over to Ct. Sandeep for registration of FIR. Ct. Sandeep went to the police station and got the FIR registered. After registration of FIR, Ct. Sandeep returned to the spot along with HC Dinesh, to whom further investigation was assigned. HC Manoj Dhariwal handed over the accused persons along with the case property and relevant documents to HC Dinesh. HC Dinesh prepared the site plan. Thereafter, HC Dinesh issued notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. to both accused persons and bound them down. He inquired from accused Vikas and recorded his disclosure statement vide Ex.PW1/E. He also inquired from accused Prince and recorded his disclosure statement vide Ex.PW1/F. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer, along with the police team, brought the case property to the police station, where it was deposited in the Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 2026.04.22 16:04:49 +0530 Page 10 of 21 Malkhana. The Investigating Officer also recorded his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The witness was duly cross-examined by the accused persons.
6. PW-4 HC Dinesh Kumar has deposed that on 13.10.2020, he was present at the police station when the FIR of the present case was registered, and after registration of the FIR, the investigation of the case was marked to him by the SHO concerned. Ct. Sandeep handed over the original tehrir and a copy of the FIR to him. Thereafter, he, along with Ct. Sandeep, went to the spot. At the spot, he met Ct. Manish and HC Manoj.
HC Manoj produced two persons along with illicit liquor and one white-coloured Alto car before him and handed over custody of the same along with relevant documents to him. Upon inquiry, the persons disclosed their names as Vikas and Prince. During investigation, he prepared the site plan at the instance of HC Manoj vide Ex.PW1/D. He served notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. upon accused Vikas and Prince vide Ex.PW4/A and Ex.PW4/B respectively. He recorded the disclosure statements of accused Vikas and Prince vide Ex.PW1/E and Ex.PW1/F respectively. He bound down both accused persons Vikas and Prince vide bound down memos Ex.PW4/C and Ex.PW4/D respectively. Thereafter, he alongwith his staff, brought the case property to the police station and deposited the same in the Malkhana vide seizure memo. He recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. On 27.10.2020, he got the sample bottle deposited in the excise laboratory through Ct. Manoj vide RC No. 170/21/2020. He received the result of the sample and placed it on record. He also obtained ownership details of the offending vehicle bearing registration number DL- Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:04:54 +0530 Page 11 of 21 3CAH-1655 from the transport authority and found that the vehicle was registered in the name of Mahavir Singh, son of Lakhi Ram, resident of H. No. 38, Main Market, Sultanpur. During investigation, he met Mahavir Singh and served notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. upon him vide Ex.PW4/E. He bound down the said accused vide bound down memo Ex.PW4/F. He inquired from accused Mahavir Singh. After completion of investigation, he prepared the charge-sheet and filed the same before the concerned Court. The witness was duly cross- examined by the accused persons.
7. It is pertinent to mention that the accused persons have also admitted the genuineness of FIR, Certificate u/s 65B IEA, Chemical Examination Report and Road Certificate without admitting the content of the same. Prosecution evidence was thereafter closed.
8. On completion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused persons were recorded u/s 281 Cr.P.C r/w 313 Cr.P.C, wherein all the incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons, to which they stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case and all the exhibits are false and manipulated. Further, the accused persons did not wish to lead defence evidence.
9. Short point for determination before this court is as under:-
"Whether on 13.10.2020, at about 07:10 PM, at near Farm No.04, Mandi Border Check Post, Mandi, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS- Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 16:04:58 +0530 Page 12 of 21 Fatehpur Beri, accused persons were found carrying 48 quarter bottles of illicit liquor with the label of "Double Blue Delux Blended Whiskey, for sale in Haryana only, 180 ML" in vehicle bearing registration no. DL-3CAH-1655 ("Offending vehicle"), without any licence or permit or pass, thereby accused persons have committed an offence punishable u/s 33/52 Delhi Excise Act"
10. It is argued by the Ld. APP for the state that the ocular and the documentary evidence on record has proved the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt. Ld. APP for the state submitted that there is sufficient material available on record to convict the accused persons and hence prayed for conviction of accused persons as per the evidence produced by the prosecution witnesses.
11. It is argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused persons that no recovery was effected from possession of accused persons. It is submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove the recovery. The Ld. Counsel for accused persons submitted that the accused persons are innocent and falsely implicated in the present matter.
12. Final arguments heard. Case file perused.
13. In the present case accused persons are charged under Section 33/52 of Delhi Excise Act. Before appreciating the evidence in hand, it is important to go through the relevant provision of the Act:-
Section 33. Penalty for unlawful import, export, Digitally transport, manufacture, possession, sale, etc. ASHISH signed by ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 16:05:02 +0530 Page 13 of 21 (1) Whoever, in contravention of provision of this Act or of any rule or order made or notification issued or of any licence, permit or pass, granted under this Act--
(a) manufactures, imports, exports, transports or removes any intoxicant;
(b) constructs or works any manufactory or warehouse;
(c) bottles any liquor for purposes of sale;
(d) uses, keeps or has in his possession any material, still, utensil, implement or apparatus, whatsoever, for the purpose of manufacturing any intoxicant other than toddy or tari;
(e) possesses any material or film either with or without the Government logo or logo of any State or wrapper or any other thing in which liquor can be packed or any apparatus or implement or machine for the purpose of packing any liquor;
(f) sells any intoxicant, collects, possesses or buys any intoxicant beyond the prescribed quantity, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to one lath rupees.
Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:05:06 +0530 Page 14 of 21
14. It is also significant to note that Section 52 of Delhi Excise Act presumes that accused persons have committed the offence (u/s 33 of the act) for the possession of which accused persons are unable to account satisfactorily. However, this presumption can be rebutted if proved contrary. It is further to be noted that initial still lies with the prosecution to show that accused persons were found with illicit liquor without any licence. Section 52 of the Act lays down as follows:
Section 52. Presumption as to commission of offence in certain cases:
(1) In prosecution under section 33, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the accused person has committed the offence punishable under that section in respect of any intoxicant, still, utensil, implement or apparatus, for the possession of which he is unable to account satisfactorily.
(2) XXXXXXX
15. In order to receive the benefit of Section 52 of the Act, the prosecution is duty bound to prove that the accused persons were found in the possession of illicit liquor. As per version of the prosecution, the same is proved by the recovery memo and testimony of the witnesses. However, the manner of conducting inquiry, seizure and search etc. on the spot at the time of detaining the accused persons were and alleged recovery of liquor in this case, makes the prosecution version highly doubtful as there are various material contradictions can be seen in statement of prosecution witnesses.
Digitally
signed by
ASHISH
ASHISH KUMAR
KUMAR MEENA
FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22
16:05:11
+0530
Page 15 of 21
16. It is the case of prosecution that the complainant/HC Manoj alongwith Ct. Manish and Ct. Sandeep apprehended the accused persons with offending vehicle carrying illicit liquor. Thereafter, HC Manoj took out sample bottles from each cartons and sealed the remaining case property with the seal of "MK". Thereafter, he seized the case property and offending vehicle vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW1/B. Thereafter, he got present FIR registered through Ct. Sandeep. Thereafter, the matter was deputed to IO/HC Dinesh. As discussed above, IO/HC Dinesh has not seen the case property as the same were already sealed and seized by the complainant. This Court fails to understand as to why the complainant/HC Manoj was in such hurry to seize and seal the case property prior to registration of FIR. It is an admitted position that the IO has only prepared site and conducted the investigation qua the owner of offending vehicle after registration of FIR. It is to be noted that the seizure memos are in printed formats, whereas, other documents including disclosure statement of accused persons are prepared in the handwriting of police official. Thus, the chances of preparation of seizure memo at later stage cannot be ruled out. The said contradiction also proves to be fatal to the case of prosecution. Further, such lapse in investigation proves to be fatal to the case of prosecution.
17. Interestingly, all the witnesses have stated that no photographs of the case properties were taken at the time of recovery of property by them. It is to be noted that the prosecution has placed Ex.P3 (photograph of alleged illicit liquor) were tendered in evidence before this Court. It is to be noted that Ex.P3 alleges that the illicit liquor was again sealed in Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:05:15 +0530 Page 16 of 21 the katta recovered from the possession of the accused. However, the prosecution has failed to show who is the author of said photographs, as all the witnesses have deposed that they have not taken any photographs of the case property. Further, the prosecution has failed to explain as to why the collective photographs of the case property was not taken prior to sealing of the case property. It is further to be noted that the photograph of offending vehicle has not placed on record. In view of this court, the said lapse and contradiction in investigation proves to be fatal to the case of prosecution.
18. Further, it is deposed by all the witnesses that that they tried to join independent witnesses in the investigation but none of the joined citing personal reasons. As per site plan, the place of incident appears to be busy area and the said incident is stated to have taken place at around 07:10 PM. Further, it is evident from the testimony of the witnesses that accused persons were apprehended alongwith the alleged illicit liquor at public place, but still no public independent person was cited as a witness in this case. Though witnesses have stated in his testimony that some public persons were requested to join, but none of them agreed and it is not clear whether took any effort to give notice to passerby to join them as witnesses but witness did not disclose the names of any such witnesses. IO has also failed to show any effort to include public witnesses in order to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt and inspire the confidence of this court.
19. Regarding the importance of joining independent witness during investigation in a case like the present one, reliance may be placed on Anoop Joshi Vs. State 1999(2) C.C. Cases 314 Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:05:20 +0530 Page 17 of 21 (HC), wherein, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has observed as under:
"18. It is repeatedly laid down by this court that in such cases it should be shown by the police that sincere efforts have been made to join independent witnesses. In the present case, it is evident that no such sincere efforts have been made, particularly when we find that shops were open and one or two shopkeepers could have been persuaded to join the raiding party to witness the recovery being made from the appellant. In case any of the shopkeepers had declined to join the raiding party, the police could have later on taken legal action against such shopkeepers because they could not have escaped the rigours of law while declining to perform their legal duty to assist the police in investigation as a citizen, which is an offence under the IPC".
20. Similarly, in Nanak Chand Vs. State of Delhi reported as DHC 1992 CRI LJ 55 it is observed as under:-
"That the recovery is proved by three police officials who have differed on who snatched the Kirpan from the petitioner and at what time. The recovery was from a street with houses on both sides and shops nearby. And, yet no witness from the public has been produced. Not that in every case the police officials are to be treated as unworthy of reliance but their failure to join witnesses from the public especially when they are available at their elbow, may, Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:05:25 +0530 Page 18 of 21 as in the present case, cast doubt. They have again churned out a stereotyped version. Its rejection needs no Napoleon on the Bridge at Arcola".
21. Also, in State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, AIR 1994 SC 1872, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:
"It therefore emerges that non-compliance of these provisions i.e. Sections 100 and 165 Cr.P.C. would amount to an irregularity and the effect of the same on the main case depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Of course, in such a situation, the court has to consider whether any prejudice has been caused to the accused and also examine the evidence in respect of search in the light of the fact that these provisions have not been complied with and further consider whether the weight of evidence is in any manner affected because of the non-compliance. It is well-settled that the testimony of a witness is not to be doubted or discarded merely on the ground that he happens to be an official but as a rule of caution and depending upon the circumstances of the case, the courts look for independent corroboration. This again depends on question whether the official has deliberately failed to comply with these provisions or failure was due to lack of time and opportunity to associate some independent witnesses with the search and strictly comply with these provisions." [Emphasis supplied]
22. Considering the aforesaid observations made by the Higher Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. 2026.04.22 16:05:28 +0530 Page 19 of 21 Courts, the omissions / failure on the part of investigating agency to join independent public witnesses create reasonable doubt in the prosecution story and substantiates the defence version that there is false implication of the accused in the present case and that the recovery has been falsely planted upon the accused. Further, considering facts and circumstances of the present case in the light of ratio in State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, AIR 1994 SC, there was no lack of time and opportunity to associate some independent witnesses with the search and strictly comply with the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, the above- mentioned facts create serious doubt on the case of the prosecution.
23. Further, as per evidence on record, the seal after use was not given to any independent public person. Hence, considering the legal position, the benefit of doubt should be given to the accused, as tampering with case property in such a scenario cannot be ruled out. The reliance is placed on the judgment of Ramji Singh Vs. State of Haryana 2007 (3) R.C.C. (Criminal) 452, wherein it is held that-
"7. The very purpose of giving seal to an independent person is to avoid tampering of the case property. It is well settled that till the case property is not dispatched to the forensic science laboratory, the seal should not be available to the prosecuting agency and in the absence of such a safeguard the possibility of seal, contraband and the samples being tampered with cannot be ruled out."
24. Similarly, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Safiullah v. State, 1993 (1) RCR (Criminal) 622, held that - Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA 2026.04.22 16:05:33 +0530 Page 20 of 21 "10. The seals after use were kept by the police officials themselves. Therefore, the possibility of tampering with the contents of the sealed parcel cannot be ruled out. It was very essential for the prosecution to have established from stage to stage the fact that the sample was not tampered with. Once a doubt is created in the preservation of the sample the benefit of the same should go to the accused."
25. Further, Chapter 22 Rule 49 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 , provides that the hour of arrival and departure on duty at or from a police station of all enrolled police officers of whatever rank, whether posted at the police station or elsewhere, with a statement of the nature of their duty shall be entered vide a separate entry and this entry shall be made immediately on arrival or prior to the departure of the officer concerned and shall be attested by the latter personality by signature or seal. In the present case, all these departures or the arrival entries have not been proved on the record by the prosecution. In absence of such proof, the presence of the police officials at the spot cannot be believed. Reference can be made to on Rattan Lal Vs. State 1987 (2) Crimes 29.
26. From the aforesaid discussion, it is very clear that the manner in which the inquiry, seizure and search etc. has been conducted on the spot at the time of alleged recovery of liquor, it makes the prosecution version highly doubtful. In a criminal trial, the onus remains on the prosecution to prove the guilt of accused beyond all reasonable doubts and benefit of doubt, if any, must necessarily go in favour of the accused. It is for the prosecution Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr. MEENA Date:
2026.04.22 16:05:37 +0530 Page 21 of 21 to travel the entire distance from may have to must have. If the prosecution appears to be improbable or lacks credibility the benefit of doubt necessarily has to go to the accused persons.
27. Hence, accused persons namely (1). Vikas, S/o Sh. Mahavir Singh and (2). Prince, S/o Sh. Bhagwan Dass stands acquitted for the offence punishable under section 33/52(2)/58 of Delhi Excise Act, they have been charged with. Ordered accordingly.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.04.2026. IT IS CERTIFIED THAT THE PRESENT JUDGMENT RUNS INTO TWENTY ONE PAGES AND EACH PAGE BEARS SIGNATURE OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
Digitally signedASHISH by ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR Date:
MEENA MEENA 2026.04.22 16:05:44 +0530 (ASHISH KUMAR MEENA) JMFC-01/SAKET COURT(SOUTH) NEW DELHI/22.04.2026 FIR No: 396/2020 PS: Fatehpur Beri State Vs. Vikas & Anr.