Delhi District Court
State vs . Dheeru & Anr. on 3 June, 2014
Page No. 1 of 9
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANKIT SINGLA
MM03(SOUTH DISTRICT), SAKET, NEW DELHI
STATE Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
FIR NO. : 39/2013
P.S. : Neb Sarai
U.S. : 380/411 IPC
J U D G M E N T
a. Sl. No. of the case and : 42/2 dt. 5.4.2013
date of its institution
b. Name of the complainant : Asish Kumar Awadhiya S/o Sh. Sita Ram Awadhiya R/o T3, Balaji Apartment, H. No. 14, Khasra No. 322, Neb Sarai Village, New Delhi c. Date of commission of offence : 30.01.2013 d. Name of the accused : 1. Dheeru S/o Ramesh Kumar H. No. 40, Devli Village, New Delhi.
2. Mohd. Sahil S/o Noor Aslam H. No. F242, Khanpur, Shutterwali Gali, New Delhi.
e. Offence complained of : U/s 380/411/34 IPC f. Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty g. Case reserved for orders : 26.05.2014 h. Final order : Convicted u/s. 411 IPC FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr. Page No. 2 of 9 i Date of such order : 03.06.2014
BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS FOR THE DECISION:
1. By way of this judgment, I shall dispose off present FIR which was lodged on the complaint of Ashish Kumar Awadhiya.
2. The brief fact of the case are that on mid night of 24.01.2013 between 9.30AM to 05.30PM at H. No. P3, Balaji Appartment, Neb Sarai Village, Kh. No. 322, New Delhi, both the accused in furtherance of their common intention committed theft of ACER laptop, Kodak camera, Sony mobile, gold jewelery i.e. two chains, two ring, one pandent and two silver ancklet, Vodaphone data card and Rs. 25000/ cash belonging to complainant and thus committed an offence punishable u/s. 380/34 IPC and secondly on 14.2.2013, accused Mohd. Sahil was found in possession of above said ACER laptop at F242 Khanpur, Satter Wali Gali, and accused Dhiru was found in possession of above said Sony Ericsson mobile phone at house no. 40, Devli Village, New Delhi, belonging to above said complainant which both of the accused in furtherance of their common intention dishonestly received / retained FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 3 of 9
knowing or having to believe the same to be stolen one from the aree of Neb Sarai and thus both the accused persons committed an offence punishable u/s. 411 / 34 IPC.
3. After completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was filed in the Court. Copies were supplied to accused and after completion of necessary formalities, on 22.04.2013 charge for commission of the above said offences were framed upon both the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution to prove its case examined (06) six witnesses.
Statement of accused was also recorded U/sec. 313 Cr.PC whereby all three accused persons denied the story of the prosecution. The relevant and material extract of evidence produced by the prosecution are as mentioned in the paragraphs below.
5. PW1 Ashish Kuamr Awadhiya deposed that on 24.01.2013, he left his house and went to his office at IGNOU and came back at around 05.30 pm, when he came back at his residence i.e. above address, he saw the the lock of the main door was broken and everything was scattered on the floor. He immediately called police at FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 4 of 9
100 and when police came, he checked the missing articles that were Acer Laptop, Vodafone Data Card, Kodak Camera, Sony Erricson Mobile, gold jewellery (two gold chains, two rings, one pendent and two silver anklets) and cash of Rs.25,000/. He gave his complaint to the police which is Ex PW1/A bearing his signature at point A. He also handed over the copy of purchase bill of laptop which is Ex PW1/B. This witness further deposed that on 20.02.2013, he came to know that laptop and Sony Erricon mobile phone were recovered by the police and he got released the same on Superdari vide Superdarginama Ex PW1/C bearing his signatures at point A. Case property are Ex P1 & P2.
6. PW2 HC Banwari Lal deposed that on 14.02.2013, he was posted as HC at PS Neb Sarai. On that day,he joined the investigation with the IO SI Joginder Singh in the case FIR No. 43/13 U/s 457/380 IPC PS Neb Sarai. At about, 07.00 pm, when they reached at Khanpur Red Light, IO received a secret information that accused persons in that case would come J J colony, near Masjid, Khanpur. IO requested FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 5 of 9
45 public persons to join the investigation but none of them agreed and refused. IO also got joined ASI Phool Singh who was from special staff in the raiding team and having the same information. Thereafter, IO prepared raiding team and reached the spot i.e. J J colony, near Masjid, Khanpur and accused persons came at about 07.20 pm and they were arrested on the identification of secret informer and accused persons revealed their name as Md Sahil, Dheeru and copy of arrest memos are Marked as Mark X & Y. Accused Dheeru got recovered one mobile phone make Sony Erricson which is the case property in the present case, IO seized the same vide seizure memo Ex PW2/B bearing his signature at point A. Both the accused persons made their disclosure statement and copy of same are mark Z1 & Z2 bearing his signature at point A. Accused Md Sahil got recovered one Acer Laptop from his residence i.e. F242, Shutter Wali Galli, Khanpur, which is the case property in the present case. IO SI Joginder Singh called IO of the present case i.e. IO ASI Dalbir Singh who seized the Acer laptop vide memo Ex PW2/A bearing his signature at point A. IO formally FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 6 of 9
arrested both the accused persons vide memo Ex PW2/C & D, both bearing his signature at point A. IO recorded the disclosure statement of accused persons vide memo Ex PW2/E & F, both bearing his signature at point A. Accused Dheeru pointed out the place of commission of offence and pointing out memo is Ex PW2/G bearing his signature at point A. IO recorded his statement at the spot. This witness correctly identified both the accused persons.
7. PW3 ASI Phool Singh deposed in line with PW2 HC Banwari Lal.
8. PW4 HC Kunji Lal is the duty officer who deposed that on 30.1.2013 he was posted as HC at PS Neb Sarai ; his duty hours were from 4PM to 12 mid night ; at about 6PM he received a rukka from IO and on the basis of which he got registered the present FIR Ex PW4/A ; he had also endorsed on rukka Ex Pw1/A (SR) and after registration of FIR, he handed over the copy of FIR and rukka to ASI Dalbir Singh.
9. PW5 SI Joginder singh also deposed in line with PW2 HC Banwari Lal.
FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 7 of 9
10. PW6 ASI Dalbir Singh is the investigating officer of this case who also deposed in line with PW2 HC Banari Lal. In addition to the above, he prepared the site plan Ex PW6/A at the instance of complainant.
11. No other witness was examined by the prosecution and PE was closed. Statement of the accused u/s 313 Cr.PC was recorded wherein accused denied the allegation leveled against him.
12. Arguments as advanced by Ld. APP as well as Defence counsel were heard.
13. I have carefully perused the material on record and gone through the submissions of Ld. APP for the State and Ld. counsel for the accused.
14. In order to prove the charges u/s. 411/34 IPC prosecution was bound to prove that : (1) case property is stolen:
(2) it was recovered from the possession of accused persons. (3) accused persons had knowledge and intention to believe that the same is stolen property.
15. PW1 Sh. Ashish Kumar Awadhiya proves his complaint which is Ex.PW1/A. In his complaint he has proved the facts that on 24.01.2013 FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 8 of 9theft took place in his house and ACER Laptop, Vodafone Data Card, Kodak Camera, Sony Ericson Mobile, gold jewellery and cash of Rs. 25000/ were stolen. This witness after recovery of laptop and mobile got the same released on superdari which is Ex.PW1/C. He brought the property in the court. The case property is Ex.P1 and P2. His testimony proves beyond reasonable doubt that the case property mobile phone and laptop was stolen property.
16. Now, second ingredient that the case property was recovered at the instance of accused persons, to prove this, prosecution produced PW2 , PW3, PW5 & PW6. These witnesses fully supported the case of prosecution. PW2 deposed that on 14.02.2013 he received a secret information that accused persons who had stolen articles would come in JJ Colony near Masjid, Khanpur and on secret information both the accused persons were got arrested and accused persons made disclosure statement and on basis of this, accused Dheeru got recovered one mobile phone which was seized vide memo Ex.PW2/B and accused Mohd. Sahil got recovered Acer laptop from his house which was seized vide memo Ex.PW2/A. PW3 corroborated the testimony of PW2. Ld. Defence Counsel could not extract any material contradiction in the testimony of these witnesses. Thus in view of unshaken testimony of these witnesses which FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.
Page No. 9 of 9is further corroborated by the material on record, it stands established that accused persons were found in possession of stolen laptop & mobile phone.
17. In order to prove third ingredient that case property was retained with intention or reason to believe no formal evidence is led. However no evidence were produced however accused persons did not give any explanation regarding the possession in their statement u/s 313 Cr.PC nor they led any evidence. Thus, presumption is drawn that they were keeping this property with knowledge or at least reason to believe that same is stolen. Accordingly, 411 IPC proved qua accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, both accused namely Dheeru and Mohd. Sahil are convicted for the offence u/s 411 IPC.
18. However, to prove charge u/s 380 IPC, prosecution could not adduce any evidence. Prosecution has failed to produce any person who saw the accused persons committing theft. Accordingly, both accused namely Dheeru and Mohd. Sahil are acquitted for the offence u/s 380 IPC.
Announced in open court (Ankita Singla) on 03.06.2014 MM(03)/South District/Saket FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr. Page No. 10 of 9 FIR No. 39/13 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr. 3.6.2014 Present ; Ld. APP for State. Both accused produced in court from JC.
Vide my separate judgment on even date, both the accused are acquitted of the offence u/s. 380 IPC. However, they are convicted u/s. 411 IPC.
To come up for arguments on sentence on _________.
(Ankit Singla)
MM(03)/SD/Saket
3.6.2014
FIR No. 39/2013 State Vs. Dheeru & Anr.