Delhi District Court
State vs . Krishan Gopal & Other on 20 April, 2013
State vs. Krishan Gopal & other
IN THE COURT OF SH AJAY GARG
Metropolitan Magistrate, South, Delhi
State Vs. Krishan Gopal & other
FIR N0. : 475/01
U/S : 379/34 IPC
PS : Sangam Vihar
JUDGM ENT ;
a) Sl. No. of the case : 246/2
b) Date of commission of offence : 23/24.08.2001
c) Date of institution of the case : 11.06.2003
d) Name of the complainant : Sh. Moinuddin Khan
e) Name & address of the :1) Krishan Gopal
accused s/o Sh. Hanuman Parshad
R/o H-72, JJ Colony
Tigri, New Delhi
2) Kailash
S/o Sh. Dalip Singh
R/o H-76, JJ Colony
Tigri, New Delhi
3) Prem Prakash @ Pappi
S/o Sh. Banwari Lal
R/o H-112, JJ Colony
Tigri, New Delhi
f) Offence complained off : 379/34 IPC
g) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty.
h) Arguments heard on : 20.04.2013
FIR No. 475/01 Page 1 of 5
State vs. Krishan Gopal & other
i) Final order : Acquitted
j) Date of Judgment : 20.04.2013
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION:
1.Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that in the intervening night of 23 & 24.08.2001, at DDA Park, H-Block, near CGHS Dispensary, JJ Colony, Tigri, New Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Sangam Vihar accused Krishan Gopal, Kailash and Prem Prakash committed theft of electric cable belonging to Delhi Vidyut Board. With these allegations both the accused persons have been sent to face trial for offences U/s 379/34 IPC.
2. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet U/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the IO and the accused persons were consequently summoned. A formal notice for the offence U/s 379/34 IPC was served upon the accused on 13.07.2004 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to substantiate the allegations, six witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution.
4. PW1; Sh. Moinuddin is the complainant of the instant case. He deposed that in year 2001, he received a telephone call in his office by some unknown caller who told him regarding the theft of cable belonging to Delhi Vidyut Board, from H-Block, Tigri. He deposed that the caller also informed him regarding the place i.e. roof of a house, where the stolen cable was kept by the accused persons. He deposed that he visited the spot and FIR No. 475/01 Page 2 of 5 State vs. Krishan Gopal & other found the information to be correct and further passed the information regarding the incident to his senior Mr. K.L. Uppal. He also lodged a complaint Ex. PW1/A with police. However, he failed to identify the accused persons. He was cross-examined by Ld. APP.
5. PW2; Sh. K.L. Uppal deposed that Mr. M.D. Khan informed him regarding cutting of cable by some mischievous boys and Mr. M.D. Khan produced a complaint Ex.PW1/A before him upon which he made his endorsement Ex. PW2/A.
6. PW3; Ct. Sukh Lal is a police official who joined the IO during investigation of instant case. He deposed that upon pointing out by secret informer they caught accused Prem Prakash, Kailash and Kishan Gopal and accused persons were arrested and their personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW3/A, PW3/A1, PW3/B, PW3/B1, PW3/C and PW3/C1. He identified disclosure statement of accused persons Ex. PW3/D, PW3/E and PW3/F.
7. PW4; Ct. Sat Pal is a police official who, upon instructions of IO SI Rakesh Kumar, along with Ct. Sukh Lal took the accused persons to AIIMS hospital for their medical examination.
8. PW5; (inadvertently recorded as PW6) SI Rakesh Kumar is the IO of the instant case. He deposed that SHO of PS Sangam Vihar handed over him a complaint made by complainant Moinuddin Khan for investigation of case. He deposed that he along with complain went to the spot. He got the FIR registered in the instant case. He further deposed that after registration of FIR, he again went to the spot with Ct. Sukh Pal where upon receipt of secret information and pointing out by secret informer, he arrested all the accused persons and conducted their personal search. He also recorded disclosure statement of accused persons.
FIR No. 475/01 Page 3 of 5State vs. Krishan Gopal & other He got the accused persons medically examined. He identified site plan Ex. PW6/A.
9. PW6; (inadvertently recorded as PW7) ASI Ram Kumar is the subsequent IO, who deposed that SHO of concerned police station marked the instant case to him for further investigation and he filed the challan in the instant case.
10. Upon conclusion of P.E., statement of accused persons U/s 281 Cr.P.C was recorded on 26.04.2012 wherein accused persons have denied the allegations levelled against them in toto.
11. I have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the record.
12. 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 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.
13. In the instant matter, no eye-witness was cited by the prosecution.
The complainant PW1 has not witnessed the incident in question but received a telephone call from some unknown person regarding the theft. Complainant specifically deposed that he had not seen any of the accused at the spot. Even despite cross-examination by Ld. APP, complainant has denied having witnessed any of the accused while committing theft. His testimony at best is based on ' Hearsay' which cannot be relied upon. Therefore, it is held that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts.
FIR No. 475/01 Page 4 of 5State vs. Krishan Gopal & other
14. In view of the aforesaid, accused persons are acquitted of the charges U/s 379/34 IPC levelled against them. Ordered accordingly.
Announced in the open court
on 20.04.2013 (Ajay Garg)
MM/Delhi /20.04.2013
FIR No. 475/01 Page 5 of 5