Delhi District Court
State vs Gaurav @ Garilla Etc on 20 January, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. SUSHIL KUMAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-04 (NORTH),
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.
CNR No. DLNT01-012112-2016
SC No. 59332/2016
FIR No. 497/2016
PS Narela
U/s: 307/34 IPC & U/s 25/27 Arms Act
State
Vs.
1. GAURAV @ GARILLA
S/o Late Sh. Om Prakash,
R/o F-5/295, Sector-16, Rohini,
Delhi.
2. Anil Kumar @ Singhania
S/o Sh. Balwan Singh,
R/o Village Singhana, PS Safido, District Jind,
Haryana.
Date of institution : 20.10.2016
Date of committal to Sessions Court : 16.03.2017
Date of institution in Sessions Court : 26.10.2016
Date on which Judgment pronounced : 20.01.2025
JUDGMENT
1. Briefly stated, the facts of the case of prosecution are that on receipt of DD No.54B dated 05.07.2015, SI Satish Kumar along with Ct. Naresh reached at Factor No.F-1768, DSIDC, Narela, where they met Complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel outside the factory. The complainant had shown a Swift Dzire Car bearing SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 1 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:25:48 +0530 registration No.DL8CAH1212 whereupon impacts of gun shot were found and two empty cartridges and led was also found outside the factory no.1705. Statement of complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel S/o Sh. Girdhar Anand was recorded by SI Satish Kumar.
2. Complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel S/o Sh. Girdhar Anand, stated in his statement that he is having a Daal Mil factory at F-1768, DSIDC, Narela, Delhi. That today i.e., on 05.07.2016, he had come to the aforesaid factory along with his father and Ct. Vikas, PSO of his father and that about 01:00 PM, during the day, he was taking back for parking the above-said car to factory no.1705 after his father and PSO Ct. Vikas got down from the same. That when he was reversing the car and reached near factory no.F-1705, all of a sudden, three boys came on a Red colour motorcycle. That the pillion rider fired three rounds towards him from the fire arm carried by him which hit his car. That after firing gun shots, all three boys ran away from the spot on their motorcycle. That the said boys were aged around 20-25 years and they had fired gun shots towards him with the intention to kill him. That on 30.09.2025 and 01.10.2015, his father had earlier received extortion phone calls in respect of which FIR bearing No.1980/15 U/s 387/506 IPC has been registered. That further on 03.11.2015, some persons had fired gun shots at the gate of their Daal Mil situated at Sanoth Village, in respect of which another FIR bearing No.1424/15 PS Narela was registered. That action be taken against the said boys who fired gun shot towards him. Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR Date:
KUMAR 2025.01.22
10:25:55
+0530
SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 2 of 22
FIR No. 497/2016
PS Narela
3. On the basis of statement given by Complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel, the present FIR was registered for the offences punishable under section 307/120B/482/34 IPC. Crime Team was called at the spot. Crime Inspected the spot and prepared its report. Site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. The empty cartridges and led were seized from the spot. Search of the offenders was made. On 18.07.2016, Special Staff, Outer-District, arrested accused persons namely Raj Kumar @ Bhoma, Gaurav @ Garilla and Harbans @ Laddi in case bearing FIR No.552/16 U/s 25 Arms Act PS Shahabd Dairy wherein accused persons made disclosure statements regarding their involvement in the present FIR case. Accused Gaurav @ Garilla was arrested in the present FIR case as he refused to participate in the TIP Proceedings. Thereafter, on 04.08.2016, an information was received from Special Staff, Outer-District, that wanted accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania has been arrested in FIR bearing No.555/16 U/s 25 Arms Act PS K N Marg and that he has made disclosure statement regarding his involvement in the present FIR case. Accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania was arrested in the present FIR case. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania before the Court of Ld.MM having jurisdiction over the area of PS Narela.
4. After compliance of provisions of section 207 Cr.P.C., Ld. MM committed the case to the Court of Sessions.
5. Arguments on the point of charge were heard. As prima facie case was SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 3 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:26:02 +0530 made out, charge for the offences punishable under section 307/34 IPC was framed against both accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania and separate charges under sections 25/27 Arms Act were framed against accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania only vide order dated 30.05.2017, to which, both above-named accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. In order to prove its case against accused persons, prosecution has examined as many as twelve witnesses namely PW-1 Sh. R. Enivayan, Junior Forensic / Assistant Chemical Examiner, FSL, Rohini, Delhi, PW-2 Sh. Himanshu Goel, PW-3 HC Naresh, PW-4 Ct. Sandeep, PW-5 Ved Prakash, PW-6 Ct. Mukesh, PW-7 Sh. Santosh Kumar Meena, DCP Security, PW-8 ASI Ram Kumar, PW-9 ASI Saroj Bala, PW-10 ASI Rajender, PW-11 Ct. Sunil Kumar and PW-12 Inspector Avdesh.
7. PW-1 Sh. R. Eniyavan deposed that on 07.10.2016, their office received one sealed parcel in connection with case FIR no. 497/16 and the same was marked to him for examination and opinion purposes. He further deposed that he had opened the said parcel, which was found containing one bullet marked as Exhibit EB1 and empty cartridges marked as Exhibit EC1 and EC2 in the laboratory. He further deposed that he had examined the said exhibits. He further deposed that upon physical examination of Exhibit EB1, the same was found to be bullet of standard 9 mm caliber and is a part of ammunition as defined in Arms Act, 1959. He further deposed that upon physical examination of Exhibit EC1 & EC2, the same were found to be empty cartridge cases of standard 9 mm SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 4 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:26:13 +0530 caliber and are part of ammunition as defined in Arms Act, 1959. He has proved his report as Ex.PW1/A. He further deposed that after examination, the exhibits were sealed with the seal of FSL RE Delhi.
During cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for accused persons, he testified that the Exhibit EB1 was not test fired by him as the same was a part of ammunition. He further deposed that the said exhibit had already been fired and thus, he had mentioned that it was a part of ammunition and could not be fired further.
8. PW-2 Sh. Himanshu Goel is the complainant in the present FIR case on whose statement the present FIR has been registered. In his examination-in-chief, he failed to identify both the accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania as the persons who had fired gun shot upon him. In his examination-in-chief, PW-2 deposed that he alongwith his father has been running Daal Mill factory at F-1768, DSIDC Narela, Delhi. He further deposed that on 05.07.2016, he alongwith his father Sh. Girdhan Anand and PSO Ct. Vikas went to their factory at Narela. He further deposed that on that day, they went upto their factory in their Swift Dzire Car bearing registration no. DL-8CAH-1212. He further deposed that after deboarding his father and aforesaid PSO at the gate of their factory, he took his car in front of Factory No. F-1702 for parking the said car over there. He further deposed that when he was present inside the car in front of factory no. 1705 and was driving his car towards factory no. 1702, suddenly three persons came riding on one motorcycle. He further deposed that at that time, he was not looking towards the said persons but SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 5 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:26:22 +0530 he had heard the noise of bullet being fired towards his car. He further deposed that when he looked towards the place from where the said bullet fired, he noticed a gun being pointed out towards his head. He further deposed that he immediately ducked down and 2 to 3 more gun shots were fired and the said gun shots struck over the right side body of his car i.e. near back light, backside gate and over the fender line. He further deposed that by the time he was able to put up his face, by that time, the said motorcycle managed to vanish from there. He further deposed that he was not able to saw the faces of the said assailants, however, he had noticed that three persons were riding over the said motorcycle who were aged about 20 - 25 years, the said unknown assailants had fired towards him in order to kill him.
PW2 further deposed that prior to the aforesaid incident on 30.09.2015 as well as on 01.10.2015, his father had received extortion call over his phone. He further deposed that his father had got registered FIR No. 1980/15 at PS Mangolpuri in respect of said extortion call. He further deposed that even on 03.11.2015, some persons had fired in front of the gate of their another factory situated at Sannoth Village and his father had got registered FIR No. 1424/15 at PS Narela.
PW-2 further deposed that after the occurrence of the present case, he immediately deboarded from his car and rushed inside his factory and informed about the occurrence to his father as well as to PSO Ct. Vikas. He further deposed that Ct. Vikas had made a call at 100 number and first PCR and thereafter, local police had reached at the spot. He further deposed that IO had recorded his statement Ex.PW2/A and got the FIR registered. He further deposed SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 6 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:26:29 +0530 that he cannot identify the assailants as he was not able to saw their faces at the time of occurrence.
PW-2 further deposed that during investigation, police had seized empty cartridges and lead from the spot after sealing the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/B and also seized the aforesaid car vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/C. He further deposed that the aforesaid car was seized by the police during investigation and his brother Gaurav had taken the said car on superdari, however, his said brother had not brought the car today.
Both the accused persons and their counsels did not dispute the identity of said car. PW-2 correctly identified the aforesaid car from the photographs available on judicial file as Ex.P1 (colly.). He further deposed that except this, he does not know anything else in this case and he does not want to say anything else in this case.
As PW-2 did not support the prosecution story and resiled from his previous statement made before police, he was cross-examined by Addl PP for state with the permission of the Court. In his cross-examination by Ld. Addl PP for state, PW-2 denied the suggestion that he had stated in his statement Ex.PW2/A that he can identify the said three assailants if shown to him. He further denied the suggestion that on 27.07.2016, he went to PP DSIDC Narela for knowing the progress of his car or that in the office of said Chowki, he had seen one person in custody of one Constable or that he had identified the said person and stated to IO that the said person whose name was revealed to him as Gaurav @ Garilla, was the same person who was driving the aforesaid Digitally signed by SUSHIL motorcycle. SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:26:35 +0530 SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 7 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela PW-2 denied the suggestion the statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. Mark PW2/A having made any such statement to the police. He denied the suggestion that on 11.08.2016, he went to PP DSIDC Narela for knowing the progress of his car or that in the office of said Chowki, he had seen one person in custody of one police official or that he had identified the said person and stated to IO that the said person was sitting in the middle of three occupants of the aforesaid motorcycle, whose name was revealed to him as Anil @ Singhania.
PW-2 denied making statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C., Mark PW2/B. Attention of the witness was drawn towards accused Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil @ Singhania and upon seeing both the accused persons, witness submits that neither he had seen the said persons present at the said place nor he had seen them firing. He denied the suggestion that he is intentionally deposing falsely or that he is intentionally not making true and correct statement or that he is intentionally not supporting the contents of statement Ex.PW2/A, Mark PW2/A and Mark PW2/B, having entered into out of court settlement with the accused persons or being won over by them. He further deposed that he cannot identify said bullets/cartridge cases, even if shown to him as I had not noticed any particular identification mark on them.
PW-2 was not cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused persons despite opportunity. SUSHIL by SUSHIL Digitally signed KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2025.01.22 10:26:41 +0530
9. PW-3 HC Naresh deposed that on 05.07.2016, he was on emergency duty from 8 am to 8 pm with SI Satish Kumar. He further deposed that on that day, DD no. 54B was marked to SI Satish Kumar and accordingly, he had SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 8 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela accompanied him to the place of occurrence i.e. in front of factory no. F-1705, DSIDC Narela, where they had met complainant Himanshu who had shown to them the the bullet marks over his Swift Dzire Car bearing registration no. DL-8CAH-1212 and also pointed out towards cartridges and lead, lying in front of factory no. 1705. SI Satish Kumar had recorded the statement made by Himanshu. He further deposed that on the basis of said statement and facts and circumstances of the case, SI Satish Kumar had prepared rukka and rukka was handed over to him, accordingly, he went to PS, got FIR No. 497/16 registered, came back to the spot and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to SI Satish. He further deposed that from the spot, IO had seized aforesaid Swift Car vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/C and had also lifted two empty cartridges and one lead and prepared their sketch Ex.PW3/A. He further deposed that IO had kept the said cartridges and lead in a cloth pullanda and sealed the said pullanda with the seal of SKP and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW2/B. He further deposed that all the memos bear his signatures at point-B. He further deposed that efforts were made to trace the offenders but in vain. He further deposed that IO had recorded his statement in this regard. He further deposed that he can identify the aforesaid Car, cartridges and lead, if shown to him. PW-3 has identified the aforesaid car from the photographs available on judicial file and the said photographs are exhibited as Ex.P1 (colly.). PW-3 correctly identified case properties i.e., two empty cartridges and one lead as Ex.P2 (colly.) which were lifted from the spot and seized during investigation.
PW-3 was not cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused persons despite Digitally signed opportunity.
by SUSHIL
SUSHIL KUMAR
Date:
KUMAR 2025.01.22
10:26:48
+0530
SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 9 of 22
FIR No. 497/2016
PS Narela
10. PW-4 Ct. Sandeep deposed that on 18.07.2016, an information was received by ASI Anil. He further deposed that pursuant to the said information, ASI Anil had prepared raiding party consisting of himself, he himself, HC Parminder, HC Naresh and other police officials. He further deposed that on that day at about 5.30 pm, they managed to apprehend accused Gaurav @ Garilla (correctly identified by the witness) from Khera Road, near Prahladpur Stadium, Delhi. He further deposed that upon the formal search of said accused, one loaded country made katta and one live cartridge were recovered from his possession. He further deposed that ASI Anil had prepared rukka and got case FIR No.552/16, U/s 25 Arms Act registered at PS Shahbad Dairy. He further deposed that after the registration of FIR, the investigation of the said case was marked to HC Ved Prakash. He further deposed that HC Ved Prakash had effected the arrest of accused Gaurav @ Garilla in case FIR No. 552/16.
PW-4 further deposed that during investigation of FIR No. 552/16, accused Gaurav @ Garilla had made disclosure statement as Ex.PW4/A thereby disclosing his involvement in the commission of offence of the present case. He further deposed that thereafter, on 03.08.2016, an information was received by ASI Anil. He further deposed that pursuant to the said information, ASI Anil had prepared raiding party consisting of himself, he himself, HC Parminder, HC Ved Prakash and other police officials. He further deposed that on that day at about 6.50 pm, they managed to apprehend accused Anil @ Singhania (correctly identified by witness) while he was coming on a motorcycle at ahead of Transport Authority Gate. He further deposed that upon the formal search of said accused, one loaded country made katta and one live cartridge were recovered SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 10 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR Date: KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:26:53 +0530 from his possession. He further deposed that ASI Anil had prepared rukka and got case FIR No. 555/16, U/s 25 Arms Act registered at PS KN Katju Marg. He further deposed that after the registration of FIR, the investigation of the said case was marked to HC Naresh Singh. HC Naresh had effected the arrest of accused Anil @ Singhania in case FIR No. 555/16.
PW-4 further deposed that during investigation of FIR No. 555/16, accused Anil @ Singhania had made disclosure statement Ex.PW4/B thereby disclosing his involvement in the commission of offence of the present case. He further deposed that during the course of investigation, IO of the present case had also recorded his statement.
During cross-examination by Ld. Defence counsel, he denied the suggest that the aforesaid accused persons were not arrested from the place or in the manner as deposed by him or that no such recoveries have been effected from their possession or that the same were planted upon the accused. He admitted that the both the disclosure statements are not witnessed by any independent public person. He denied the suggestion that aforesaid accused persons had not made any disclosure statements or that they had forcibly obtained their signatures on blank documents or converted the same into their respective disclosure statement after due consultation with the IO of the present case.
11. PW-5 HC Ved Prakash deposed that on 18.07.2016 an information was received by ASI Anil. He further deposed that pursuant to the said information, ASI Anil had prepared raiding party consisting of himself, Ct. Sandeep, HC Parminder, HC Naresh and other police officials. He further deposed that on that SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 11 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR Date: KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:26:59 +0530 day at about 5.30 pm, they managed to apprehend accused Gaurav @ Garilla. The witness correctly identified accused Gaurav @ Garilla. PW-5 further testified that upon the formal search of accused Gaurav @ Garilla, one loaded country made katta and one live cartridge were recovered from his possession. He further deposed that ASI Anil had prepared rukka and got case FIR No. 552/16, U/s 25 Arms Act registered at PS Shahbad Dairy. He further deposed that after the registration of FIR, the investigation of the said case was marked to him. He further deposed that he had effected the arrest of accused Gaurav @ Garilla in case FIR No. 552/16. He further deposed that during investigation of FIR No. 552/16, accused Gaurav @ Garilla had made disclosure statement Ex.PW4/A thereby disclosing his involvement in the commission of offence of the present case. He further deposed that during the course of investigation, IO of the present case met him and collected relevant memos from him. He further deposed that IO had also recorded statement.
During cross-examination, PW-5 deposed that the accused Gaurav @ Garilla was not arrested from the place or in the manner as deposed by him or that no such recoveries have been effected from his possession or that the same were planted upon the said accused. He denied the suggestion that the disclosure statement of said accused is not witnessed by any independent public person. He denied the suggestion that said accused had not made any disclosure statement or that they had forcibly obtained his signatures on blank documents or converted the same into his disclosure statement after due consultation with the IO of the Digitally present case. signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:27:03 +0530 SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 12 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela
12. PW-6 Ct. Mukesh deposed that on 22.07.2016, he alongwith IO SI Satish Kumar Pandey went to Rohini Court in the court of Sh. Vikram, Ld. MM, where accused persons namely Raj Kumar @ Bhoma, Harbans @ Laddi and Gaurav @ Garilla were produced. He further deposed that with the permission of concerned court, IO had interrogated all the said accused persons and thereafter, arrested them vide arrest memos Ex.PW6/A, Ex.PW6/B and Ex.PW6/C respectively. He further deposed that thereafter, IO had obtained one day P/C remand of accused persons namely Raj Kumar @ Bhoma, Harbans @ Laddi. He further deposed that IO had also obtained the permission to get conduct the judicial TIP of accused Gaurav @ Garilla from the Court and the Ld. Court had fixed the date of judicial TIP. He further deposed that after medical examination, accused Raj Kumar @ Bhoma, Harbans @ Laddi were put in the Lock-up. He further deposed that IO had interrogated accused Raj Kumar @ Bhoma and Harbans @ Laddi. IO had recorded his statement in this regard. He further deposed that he cannot identify accused Gaurav @ Garilla and cannot assign any reason for the same.
PW-6 was cross-examined by Ld. Addl PP for state with the permission of the Court, however, witness did not identify accused Gaurav @ Garilla despite the fact that his attention was drawn towards accused Gaurav @ Garilla. The witness was cross-examined on behalf of accused persons despite opportunity.
13. PW-7 Sh. Santoh Kumar Meena deposed that on 10.01.2017, he was posted as Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, Rohini District, Delhi. He further deposed that on that day, the photocopy of case file of FIR No. 497/16, SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 13 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR Date: KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:27:10 +0530 U/s 307/482/120B/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act of PS Narela, including the report U/s 173 Cr.P.C., statement of prosecution witnesses, documents relied upon by the police [including the seizure memos and report given by Sr. Scientific Officer (Ballistic)], were placed before him. He further deposed that after going through all the relevant documents and applying his independent mind, he accorded sanction under section 39 Arms Act for the prosecution of accused Gaurav @ Garrila and Anil Kumar @ Singhaniya and the sanction accorded by him is Ex. PW 7/A.
14. PW-8 ASI Ram Kumar deposed that on 05.07.2016, he was posted as In- charge, Mobile Crime Team Outer District. He further deposed that on that day on the receipt of information, he alongwith photographer HC Shivom and other staff went at the place of occurrence i.e., F-1768, DSIDC, Narela, Bhorgarh, Delhi and reached there at about 5.30 p.m. He further deposed that SI Satish Pandey of P.S Narela met them there. He further deposed that one Himanshu s/o Girdhar Anand also met them there. He further deposed that he inspected the site. He further deposed that at the spot one car No. DL 8CAH 1212 was found and two empty cartridges of 9mm along with one lead was found on the road. He further deposed that he found the mark of bullet hole on the wheel of the car near driver seat. He further deposed that he also found bullet mark on the back wheel of the car on the driver seat side and one bullet mark was also found below the window of driver side. He further deposed that the place of occurrence was got photographed by HC Shivam from different angles. He further deposed that after carrying out the inspection of the spot, he prepared Crime Team report as SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 14 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:27:15 +0530 Ex.PW8/A.
15. PW-9 ASI Saroj Bala deposed that on 05.07.2016, is Duty Officer, PS Narela. She has proved on record the present FIR case bearing No.497/2016 PS Narela as Ex.PW9/A, his endorsement on rukka as Ex.PW9/B and certificate under section 65B of Indian Evidence Act as Ex. PW9/C. She further deposed that after registration of the FIR, she handed over the copy of FIR and rukka to Ct. Naresh for handing over the same to SI Satish Kumar for investigation.
16. PW-10 ASI Rajender deposed that on 22.07.2016, he joined investigation alongwith SI Satish and Ct. Mukesh. He further deposed that they came at Rohini Court, where accused Raj Kumar @ Bhoma , Harbans @ Ladi, Gaurav @ Gaurialla were produced before the court of Ld. M.M. Sh. Vikram in another case. He further deposed that IO/SI Satish obtained permission from Ld. MM for interrogation of all the three accused persons. He further deposed that after obtaining permission, all accused persons were interrogated and thereafter they were arrested vide arrest memo already Ex. PW 6/A to Ex.PW6/C. He further deposed that their disclosure statement were recorded vide memo Ex.PW10/A to Ex.PW10/C. He further deposed that IO obtained one day police custody remand of accused Raj Kumar @ Bhoma, Harbans @ Ladi and accused Gaurav @ Gaurialla was sent to judicial custody in muffled face. He further deposed that TIP of accused Gaurav @ Gaurialla was fixed for 25.07.2016. He further deposed that both the accused persons Raj Kumar @ Bhoma, Harbans @ Ladi were in his custody as well as in the custody of Ct. Mukesh. He further deposed SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 15 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:27:23 +0530 that thereafter, they came back to DSIIDC, Narela Chowki where both the accused persons were duly interrogated. He further deposed that they were inquired about Anil Singhania but they did not give any reply. He further deposed that they disclosed that they do not know any person in the name of Anil Singhania. He further deposed that thereafter, they were kept in lock up after getting their medical examination. He further deposed that in this regard, IO recorded my statement.
PW-10 further deposed that on 08.08.2016, he alongwith SI Satish Kumar came at Rohini Court where accused Anil Singhania who was wanted in the present case was produced before the Ld. MM. He further deposed that after getting permission from the concerned Court, SI Satish Kumar interrogated accused Anil Singhania. He further deposed that accused Anil Singhania was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW10/D. He further deposed that disclosure statement of accused was recorded vide memo Ex. PW10/E and accused was sent to Judicial custody. He correctly identified accused persons namely Gaurav @ Gaurailla and Anil Singhania.
17. PW-11 Ct. Sunil Kumar deposed that on 27.07.2016, he joined the investigation of this case with IO/SI Satish Kumar. He further deposed that IO had taken out accused Gaurav @ Garilla from the lock up to whom he can identify, if shown to him, however, accused was not present in the Court today and identity of accused was not disputed by the Ld. Defence Counsel from this witness. He further deposed that they had taken accused to Police Post, DSIIDC, Narela, Delhi. He further deposed that when IO was making detailed inquiry SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 16 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:27:31 +0530 from accused, in the meantime, one person namely Himanshu came there and identify accused Gaurav @ Garilla as the person who had fired upon him on the date of incident alongwith his other associates. He further deposed that IO recorded statement of Himanshu.
PW-11 further deposed that at the instance of accused Gaurav @ Garilla, they reached in front of factory No. F-1705, DSIIDC, Narela, Delhi, accused Gaurav @ Garilla had pointed out the place while stating that about 20 days back he alongwith his associates had committed the incident of firing. He further deposed that IO prepared pointing out memo as Ex. PW11/A. He further deposed that accused Gaurav @ Garilla was taken to hospital for his medical examination and subsequently, IO recorded his statement.
18. PW-12 Inspector Avdesh deposed that On 02.09.2016, on the instruction of SHO, he received the case file of this case for further investigation from MHC(R). He further deposed that he had gone through the case file. He further deposed that during the investigation, on 25.09.2016, he examined owner of motorcycle bearing registration no. HR 11F 3180 namely Sh. Krishan. He further deposed that as per statement of Sh. Krishan, who had sold the said motorcycle to owner of the shop name and style of M/s. Hooda i.e Sale and Purchase office at Panipat Road, Guhana. He further deposed that said statement is part of judicial record and same is Ex. PW 12/A. He further deposed that remaining investigation of the present case was already completed. He further deposed that he prepared the charge-sheet and filed before the concerned Court on 20.10.2016. He further deposed that subsequently, he collected FSL report and filed in the SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 17 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:27:37 +0530 court by way of supplementary charge-sheet after 08.02.2017.
19. In the present case, Complainant / star witness i.e., PW-2 Sh. Himanshu Goel has turned hostile and failed to identify both the accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar. PW-2 did not support the case of the prosecution despite being cross-examined by Ld. Addl PP for state. The remaining witnesses were either formal witnesses, hearsay witnesses or police officials who were not likely to substantiate the case of the prosecution. Therefore, their examination would have been a futile exercise and that would have caused unnecessary expenditure on the State exchequer. Therefore, the the prosecution evidence was closed.
20. As there was no admissible incriminating evidence against accused persons, their statements u/s. 313 Cr.P.C., were dispensed with.
21. The Court has heard Ld. Addl. PP for the State and ld. Counsel for accused persons and have carefully gone through the material available on record.
22. To prove the case against both the accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar, the prosecution was obliged to prove that on 05.07.2016 at about 01:00 PM, in front of factory No.F-1705, DSIDC, Delhi, both the above- named accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, had fired bullets from country made pistol towards the complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel S/o Sh. Girdhar Anand with such intention of knowledge and under such SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 18 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR Date: KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:27:42 +0530 circumstances that if both the accused persons, by their aforesaid acts would have caused the death of aforesaid person, they both would have been guilty of committing his murder. Prosecution was also obliged to prove that on the abovesaid date, time and place, accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania had used an unauthorized weapon i.e., country made pistol by firing bullets from the same towards complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel. Prosecution was further obliged to prove that on the abovesaid date, time and place, accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania was found in possession of three live cartridges out of which, accused had fired two cartridges towards the complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel and one cartridge which fell on the spot was also found in his possession.
23. The foundation of the case of the prosecution is based upon the statement of the complainant / victim namely Sh. Himanshu Goel (PW-1) on the basis of which the present FIR has been registered. However, PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel has failed to identify both the accused persons as the offenders who had fired guns shots upon him. He has not supported the prosecution story despite being cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for State. Nothing incriminating against above- named accused persons has come out in the testimony of complainant (PW-1) with respect to the incident of firing gun shots towards complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel which had occurred on 05.07.2016.
24. It is already discussed above that complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel did not identify both accused persons as the persons who had fired guns shots towards him at the time of alleged incident. Further, accused Anil Kumar @ SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 19 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:27:59 +0530 Singhania was also been charged for the offence punishable under section 25/27 Arms Act with the allegations that he had used a country made pistol by firing bullets towards complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel and that he was found in possession of three live cartridges out of which two were fired towards complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel by him and third fell on the spot. It is pertinent to mention that complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel has failed to identify both accused persons as the persons who had fired gunshots towards him on 05.07.2016 and both accused persons have been arrested in the present FIR case only on the basis of disclosure made by them in another case bearing No.552/16 PS Shahbad Dairy U/s 25 Arms Act.
25. It is further pertinent to mention that both accused persons have arrested formally in the present FIR case on the basis of afore-mentioned disclosure statement and separate FIR were registered against them for recovery of fire arms, therefore, in view of the above discussed testimonies of complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel, prosecution has also failed in connecting both accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania with the incident of firing guns shots towards complainant / PW-1 Sh. Himanshu Goel on 05.07.2016 and to establish the charges under section 25/27 Arms Act against accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania. Therefore, in the present case, continuing further with the trial would have been an exercise in futility as even if the remaining case would have been taken on face value, there is not even a remote possibility of conviction of the accused. Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.01.22 10:28:04 +0530 SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 20 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela
26. In case titled as Satish Mehra v. Delhi Administration & Anr. 1996 JCC 507 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that "in a case where, there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction the valuable time of Court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the conclusion on the future date".
27. The burden of proof on the prosecution is to prove the case by leading cogent, convincing and reliance evidence to prove the guilt of accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Accused cannot be convicted on the basis of mere probabilities or presumptions. Suspicion, howsoever grave may be, cannot take place of proof. Every benefit of doubt goes in favor of accused.
28. There is nothing on record to establish the culpability of accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania in the commission of the offence, charged against them. PW-1 / Complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel has turned hostile and thus, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against both accused. In the light of testimony of PW-1 / Complainant Sh. Himanshu Goel, accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania cannot be held guilty for offence alleged against him. Since PW-1 / Complainant Sh.
Himanshu Goel has turned hostile, the case of the prosecution has fallen like a pack of cards. In view of the above discussion, accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania stands acquitted of the charges punishable U/s 307/34 IPC and accused Anil Kumar @ Singhania stands acquitted of the charges punishable U/s 25/27 Arms Act.
SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 21 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016 PS Narela Digitally signed by SUSHIL SUSHIL KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2025.01.22 10:28:10 +0530
29. Accused persons namely Gaurav @ Garilla and Anil Kumar @ Singhania are directed to furnish bail bonds U/s 437-A Cr.P.C., which shall remain in force for a period of six months from today. Previous surety stands discharged. Documents, if any, of the surety/sureties be returned to the rightful owner after due acknowledgment and endorsement, if any, made on it be cancelled Digitally signed accordingly. SUSHIL by SUSHIL KUMAR Date: KUMAR 2025.01.22 10:28:15 +0530 Announced in the Open Court (Sushil Kumar) on 20th of Jan, 2025. Addl. Sessions Judge: 04 (North) Rohini Courts: Delhi.
SC No. 59332/2016 State Vs Gaurav @ Garilla & Anr. Page 22 of 22 FIR No. 497/2016PS Narela