Delhi District Court
State vs . Sushil Kumar on 12 October, 2011
State Vs. Sushil Kumar
FIR No. 517/97
PS Adarsh Nagar
IN THE COURT OF SH. NEERAJ GAUR, METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE-IV ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
Brief reasons for the judgment in the case with following particulars:
State V/s Sushil Kumar
FIR No. 517/97
PS Adarsh Nagar
U/S 451/380 IPC
C/N No. 323/98
Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998
Date of Institution: 14.12.1998
Date of commission of offence 30.09.97 to 04.10.97
Name of the Complainant Sh. Ram Niwas
Name and address of accused Sushil Kumar S/o Late Sh.
Nand Kishore R/o 436, Shahbad
Daulatpur, Delhi.
Offence complained of U/S 451/380 IPC
Plea of accused pleaded not guilty
Final Order Acquitted
Date of reserve for orders 12.10.2011
Date for announcing the orders 12.10.2011
Brief Facts and pre-trial procedure:
1. On 04.10.1997, complainant Ram Niwas Rathaur made a complaint to the police alleging therein that he was tenant with respect C No. 323/98 Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998 Page No. 1 State Vs. Sushil Kumar FIR No. 517/97 PS Adarsh Nagar to a shop/ office No. 301, Amber Tower, Azadpur under the landlordship of the accused. He was regularly paying the monthly rent @ Rs. 400 per month. 2-3 months prior to the incident, accused was threatening him to vacate the tenanted premises and further to withdraw his case against one Arun Vij. On 30.09.1997, when complainant returned to his office at 02.45 PM, then, he noticed that some other lock was affixed on the office. The liftman Shiv Kumar and security guard Pankaj informed that 3-4 days earlier, accused along with 3-4 persons came to the office, broke open the lock and removed the articles in a tempo. The said lock was then broken by the complainant and on opening the office, it was revealed that the table, chair, fan and some other documents were missing from the office.
2. On the basis of aforementioned complaint, the FIR was registered and investigation was conducted. Accused was charge-sheeted U/S 451/380 IPC. After necessary compliances, charge U/S 451/380 IPC was framed against the accused on 14.08.2000 and accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
C No. 323/98 Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998 Page No. 2
State Vs. Sushil Kumar FIR No. 517/97 PS Adarsh Nagar Trial
3. To establish the charges, prosecution examined eight witnesses.
The testimonies of material witnesses are touched upon as under:-
3.1 PW-2 Pankaj supported the prosecution case and deposed that while working as Security Guard at Amber Tower, he saw the accused along with 2-3 other persons taking away some articles from some office. PW-3 Shiv Kumar also deposed that while working as Lift Operator, he saw the accused going inside the office No. 301, from where, he took away the articles i.e. Chairs and few books in a tempo. 3.2 PW-5 Ct. Rajender and PW-7 HC Dharamvir Singh interalia deposed that some stolen articles i.e. one ceiling fan, five gas cylinders, one wooden table, one round chair and seven wall papers were got recovered by the accused from his residence in the presence of complainant.
3.3 PW-8 Inspector Ram Avtar conducted only initial investigation by preparing the rukka and site plan. He also seized one broken lock from the spot marked as Ex. P-1 which was not sealed by him. 3.4 The material witness/ complainant Ram Niwas expired before C No. 323/98 Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998 Page No. 3 State Vs. Sushil Kumar FIR No. 517/97 PS Adarsh Nagar entering the witness box. He was also superdar with respect to the allegedly stolen articles and none of these articles were produced in the Court or were identified by any of the witness.
Statement of accused and defence
4. After closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused U/S 313 CrPC was recorded. He stated that he was innocent and has been falsely implicated. No evidence in defence was led.
Arguments and appreciation of evidence in the light of legal propositions:
5. In the instant case, prosecution was firstly required to prove that accused committed house trespass in order to commit some offence. In other words, accused entered into the property in the possession of complainant Ram Niwas with intent to commit an offence which property was used as place of custody of property. The complainant could not appear in the Court as he expired. There is no evidence at all proving that the office in question was in possession of the complainant. In absence of this proof, the charge for house trespass could not be established. The accused is accordingly entitled to be C No. 323/98 Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998 Page No. 4 State Vs. Sushil Kumar FIR No. 517/97 PS Adarsh Nagar acquitted U/S 451 IPC.
6. The next burden of proof on the prosecution was that the accused committed theft from a dwelling house. PW Pankaj did not state the date when he saw the accused taking away some articles. He also did not state from where the articles were being taken away. He did not even notice what was those articles. PW-3 although stated that accused took away some chairs and books from office No. 301 but these articles were not identified in the Court for the reason that complainant who was a superdar also expired. As per the definition of theft U/S 378 IPC, the property must be taken without the consent of the person in whose possession, the property was. PW-2 and PW-3 could not prove the absence of consent on behalf of complainant. The alleged recovery could also not raise any presumption that the accused committed the alleged theft. Above all, the allegedly stolen property could neither be produced in the Court and consequently, could not be identified by any competent person. In these circumstances, charge U/S 380 IPC has also failed.
C No. 323/98 Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998 Page No. 5
State Vs. Sushil Kumar FIR No. 517/97 PS Adarsh Nagar Conclusion
7. In view of the above discussion, the accused is acquitted for the offences charged against him.
8. The Bail Bond stands cancelled and surety for the accused stands discharged. Any endorsement placed on the documents of the surety may accordingly, be cancelled. The original documents of the surety, if retained on record be returned against acknowledgment. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in open court (Neeraj Gaur)
today i.e. 12.10.2011 Metropolitan Magistrate-IV/NW
Rohini Courts, Delhi
C No. 323/98
Unique ID No. 02401R0060801998 Page No. 6