Delhi District Court
1 State vs . Amar Singh on 19 August, 2009
1 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH
FIR No. 290/05
IN THE COURT OF SH. J.P. NAHAR, METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, DELHI
FIR NO: 290/05
U/S: 61 Ex ACT
P.S:Timarpur
State V/s Amar Singh
JUDGMENT
Sl. No. of the case 794/3
Date of commission of offence 14.06.2005
Name of the complainant Ct. Krishan Kumar
No. 1613/N
Police Station
Timarpur Delhi
Name, parentage and address Amar Singh
of the accused. S/o Shri Nathoo R/o 405,
J.J. Colony, Bawana,
Narela, Delhi
2 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH
FIR No. 290/05
Offence complained off U/S 61 1/14 Punjab
Excise Act, 1914
Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
Final order Acquitted
Date of order 19.08.2009
Date of final arguments heard 19.08.2009
BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION :
1. The facts in brief are that on 14.06.2005 at about 3.30 PM at T-point Wazirabad within the jurisdiction of Police Station Timarpur, accused was found in possession of four plastic sack containing 24 half bottles of illicit liquor without any license and in contravention of Delhi Administration notification U/s 61 of Punjab Excise Act 3 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH FIR No. 290/05 and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 61/1/14 of Punjab Excise Act.
2. The challan against the accused was filed on 23.09.2005 and accused was summoned. Charge was given to the accused on 26.09.2008.
3. The evidence against the accused was led. The prosecution has examined only one witness namely PW1 HC Isham Singh.
4. PW1 has deposed that on 14.06.2005 while he was posted at Police Station Timar Pur and was present at police booth, Wazirabad at about 3.50 PM Ct. Krishan Kumar and Ct. Ajit brought accused present in the court today before me and stated that the accused was found having possession of yellow coloured plastic sack containing 24 half bottles of illicit liquor. He requested 4- 4 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH FIR No. 290/05 5 passersby to join in proceedings but they all refused on personal ground. He recorded statement of Ct. Krishan which is Ex.PW1/A. Thereafter, he got arranged two plastic canes through Ct. Ajit and poured the contents of the half bottles recovered into those canes. He had separated one litre cane out of it for sample purposes. He prepared Form M-29 and sealed the plastic cane with the seal of IS and also kept the empty half bottles in the same sack and similarly sealed it with the seal of IS. The sample cane of one litre was also sealed with the seal of IS. He seized the recovered liquor alongwith the cans used to retain the liquor vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B and prepared Tahrir Ex.PW1/C and sent Ct. Ajit to get FIR registered. He returned with copy of FIR and original Rukka. Thereafter he arrested 5 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH FIR No. 290/05 the accused vide memo Ex.PW1/D and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.PW1/E. During the investigation he had also prepared the site plan of the place of recovery i.e. Ex.PW1/F at the instance of Ct. Krishan. The case property was deposited in Malkhana alongwith Form M-29. On 24.06.2005 he had directed Ct. Ram Bir to take the sample cane alongwith Form M- 29 and deposit the same with Excise Lab. During the investigation he had collected the result from FSL Lab which is Ex.PW1/G.
5. The case property is empty. The witness has also been declared hostile. There is no explanation regarding the above lacuna which goes to the root of the case. No written notice was given to any public witness in the suspicious circumstances of the present case.
6 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH FIR No. 290/05 In AIR 1999 SC 234 in case titled Nursy Vs. State of Haryana it was held that absence of independent witness at the time of arrest of the accused when the evidence of other witness is doubtful goes to the root of the case of the prosecution.
In view of above lacuna, PE is hence closed as it appears that even after examination of all the witness the case will not lead towards conviction. The statement of accused is recorded. Accused does not want to lead any evidence in defense. Final arguments heard. It is hereby held that prosecution has little incriminating evidence against the accused and it appears that even after examination of all the witness 7 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH FIR No. 290/05 the case will not lead towards conviction. Hence, the accused is acquitted of the charged offence. Case property be confiscated to the State. Bail bond and surety bond stands discharged.
(Announced in the open court)
Dated: 19.08.2009 (J.P. NAHAR)
MM:TIS HAZARI:DELHI
8 STATE VS. AMAR SINGH
FIR No. 290/05
FIR No. 290/05
P.S. TIMAR PUR
STATE VS. AMAR SINGH
19.08.2009
Present: Ld. APP Shri Bharat Bhushan for the State Accused in person PW1 examined and discharged. No other PW is present. PE closed. Statement of accused is dispensed with. Final arguments heard. Vide my separate detailed judgment of the even date, accused is acquitted of the charge levied against him. Case property be confiscated to the State. Bail bond surety bond stands discharged. File be consigned to Record Room.
(J.P. NAHAR) MM-01/North Delhi 19.08.2009