Delhi District Court
State vs Mohd Amin Etc on 29 April, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. CHARU AGGARWAL: ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS JUDGE-02: SHAHDARA DISTRICT:
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
SC No. : 621/2018
FIR No. : 199/2018
Police Station : Shahdara
under Section : 328/379/34 IPC.
State Versus 1. Mohd. Amin
S/o Abdul Kalim
R/o H. NO.1862, Ram
Park Extension, Loni,
Ghaziabad, U.P.
(Proclaimed Offender)
2. Abrar Ahmad
S/o Mohd. Aslam
R/o H. No. F-65, New
Seelampur, Delhi
Date of Committal to Sessions Court : 22.12.2018
Date on which Judgment reserved : 20.04.2026
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 29.04.2026
JUDGMENT
1. Accused Abrar Ahmed has faced trial for the offence under Section 328/379/34 IPC. Co-accused Mohd. Amin, vide order dated 09.07.2024, during the pendency of the case, was declared Proclaimed Offender.
In brief, the case of the prosecution is that both accused in furtherance of their common intention, administered some poinous/stupefying/unwholesome FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.1/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:56:57 +0530 substnace to victim Ramanand by mixing it in a sweet (ladoo) to facilitate theft of his e-rickshaw and other belongings.
2. Case of the Prosecution 2.1 On 13.07.2018, upon receipt of DD No. 18A, Investigating Officer SI Suresh Chand, accompanied by Constable Ram Avtar, proceeded to Hedgewar Hospital. There, they found injured-Ramanand, aged 56 years, undergoing treatment under MLC No. 2490/18. The attending doctor declared Ramanand, "unfit for statement". As per MLC, the alleged history was administer of some unknown substance. No eyewitnesses to the incident were available at the hospital, accordingly, the DD entry was kept pending. Subsequently, on 17.07.2018, the injured was declared 'fit for statement'.' During enquiry, Ramanand provided the following statement:
He is resident of House No. 4/2680, Gali No. 6, Bihari Colony, Shahdara, Delhi, is employed as an e-rickshaw driver. On 13.07.2018, at approximately 8:00 a.m., he left his residence in his e-rickshaw bearing registration number DL-13ER-0581 (Yatri DLX, engine no. YCDM 3225, red in colour). Around 9:00 a.m., he picked up a passenger from opposite Shyam Lal College for Shiv Mandir, Lal Quarter, Krishna Nagar, Delhi.
Upon alighting from the rickshaw, the said passenger was speaking on his mobile phone, stating that he had reached. At that moment, another individual emerged from the temple carrying a box of sweets. While distributing prasad to others, this person approached Ramanand and FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.2/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:57:04 +0530 handed him a laddu, asking him to accept it as prasad. Ramanand ate part of the laddu but noticed it tasted slightly sour, so he discarded the remainder and continued driving his rickshaw.
Shortly thereafter, he began experiencing a headache and a feeling of dizziness. As his condition worsened, he decided to return home. However, upon reaching near the DTC Bus Terminal at G.T. Road, Shahdara, his sense of intoxication intensified, and he eventually lost consciousness completely.
Later on, his family members told him he had been brought home by another rickshaw driver, who had found him unconscious near the DTC Terminal. His family then admitted him to the hospital for treatment. He found his mobile phone (Samsung, green and black in colour, SIM No. 8376073547) and a sum of Rs.300/- were missing. The individuals who had handed him the laddu was approximately 30-35 years and that he would be able to identify them.
2.2 On the basis of above allegations, an FIR under Sections 328/379/34 IPC of this case was registered. 2.3 On 14.10.2018, both accused persons were arrested in connection with another case, FIR No. 283/2018 dated 13.10.2018, registered at P.S. Shahdara under Section 25 of the Arms Act. During interrogation, they disclosed their involvement in the present case. Accordingly, they were arrested in the present case. On 16.10.2018, a Test Identification Parade (TIP) was scheduled, but both accused refused to participate.FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.3/18 Digitally signed by
CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
16:57:12 +0530
2.4 Subsequently, the complainant's statement
under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein he stated that he had identified both accused at the police station:
Mohd. Amin as the passenger in the e-rickshaw, and Abrar Ahmed as the person who had brought the sweet box. The case property was not recovered during investigation. During investigation, gastric lavage sample of the victim Ramanand was sent to FSL for examination. As per the FSL report dated 25.09.2019, no poisnous, stupefying or unwholesome substance was found in his body.
3. Committal proceedings After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate, who after compliance of Section 207 Cr. PC, committed the case to Sessions Court as the offence under Section 328 IPC is Sessions Triable. Pursuant to the order of Ld. Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge (SHD), KKD Courts, the present case was assigned to this Court for its trial.
4. Charge framed against the accused Upon committal, after hearing both the sides on the point of charge, vide order dated 04.02.2019, Ld. Predecessor of this court framed the charge under Section 328/379/34 IPC against both the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. Prosecution Evidence.
To substantiate the charge, prosecution has examined 09 witnesses.
5.1 PW1 is ASI Praveen Kumar who 17.08.2017 was working as Duty Officer at PS Shahdara from 4 pm to FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.4/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:57:19 +0530 12 mindnight . He has stated that on that day, IO SI Suresh Chand produced a rukka before him for registration of FIR on the basis of which the FIR (Ex. PW-1/A) of present case was registered; this PW made endoresement on rukka (Ex. PW-1/B). After registration of FIR, copy of FIR and original rukka were handed over to IO. This PW issued a certificate (Ex.PW-1/C ) u/s 65-B Indian Evidence Act. 5.2 PW-2 is complainant/victim Ramanand, who has stated that he is an e-rickshaw driver. On 13.07.2018, at about 8:00 a.m., he left his residence with his e-rickshaw bearing registration number DL-13ER-0581 for Shahdara. From Shahdara, he proceeded to Shyamlal College, where co-accused Mohd. Amin boarded his rickshaw for Shiv Mandir, Lal Quarter.
Upon reaching Shiv Mandir, Mohd. Amin made a telephonic call, saying "Sir, main aa gaya" ("Sir, I have reached"). While alighting, Mohd. Amin handed over a Rs.100/ note against the agreed fare of Rs.50/. As the complainant did not have change, he requested Mohd. Amin to provide Rs.50 in change. In the meantime, accused Abrar Ahmad emerged from the temple carrying a box of laddus. He handed one laddu to the complainant as prasad.
The complainant ate part of the laddu but immediately noticed a bitter taste, so he discarded the remainder near the temple. Soon thereafter, he began feeling unwell and semi-conscious. Despite the rainfall that day, he managed to drive slowly towards Shyamlal Chowk, intending to return home. At some distance from Shyamlal FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.5/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:57:26 +0530 College, both accused again intercepted him and boarded his rickshaw.
Mohd. Amin sat beside the complainant on the driver's seat and began driving the rickshaw, as the complainant was semi-conscious and unable to drive properly. Abrar Ahmad sat on the rear seat and struck the complainant with a fist blow on his eyes, causing him to fall. Both accused then robbed him of his mobile phone, Rs.300 in cash, his driving licence, registration certificate, e-rickshaw badge, and all his clothes except his underwear. They pushed him at a secluded spot near Shyamlal College and fled with his rickshaw.
An acquaintance of the complainant, namely Ajay, saw him in this condition and took him home, from where his children shifted him to Hedgewar Hospital. He remained admitted there for one week. On 17.07.2018, his statement (Ex. PW-2/A) was recorded by the police at the hospital. He later led the police to the place of occurrence, where a rough site plan was prepared at his instance. On 22.10.2018, he was called to the police station, where both accused were present, and he identified them. 5.3 PW-3 is Ct. Sachin who has stated that on 13.10.2018, he was posted at PS Shahdara as Special Staff with ACP. On that day, SI Manish received a secret information that two bikes would come from Welcome side which were to be checked, accordingly, the police officials took position on the picket; at about 6:30 pm, police officials saw that one splendor motorcycle and one Activa scooty were coming from Welcome side the driver of those vehicles FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.6/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:57:34 +0530 after seeing the police team started running after leaving scooty and motor-cycle, however, they were chased and apprehended near Shyam Lal College. From the search of accused Mohd. Amin, two strips of tablets, one live cartridge and from the possession of accused Abrar Ahmad, one countrymade pistol were recovered. All the recovered articles were seized by SI Manish and this PW was sent to PS for registration of FIR, accordingly, FIR No. 283/18 PS Shahdara was registered. ASI Harvinder Singh reached at the spot and arrested both the accused in the said FIR and also their Disclosure statements (Ex. PW-3/E & Ex. PW-3/F) . 5.4 PW4 is Ct. Ashish, who on 15.11.2018 was posted as Ct. at PS Shahdara; on that day, MHC(M) handed over him one sealed pulanda along with seal of depositing the same with FSL vide RC No. 83/21/18 (PW-4/A). The pulanda was deposited by him at FSL against acknowledgment Ex. PW-4/B. 5.5 PW-5 is ASI Harvinder Singh who has stated that on 13.10.2018, he was posted as ASI at PS Shahdara. On that day, investigation of FIR No. 283/18 u/s 25 Arms Act was handed over to him. He arrested both the accused vide arrest memo Ex PW3/A & Ex. PW-3/B, their personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW-3/C & Ex. PW-3/D and their disclosures were recorded vide Ex. PW-3/E & Ex. PW-3/F. In disclosure statement, both the accused disclosed their involvement in the present case. 5.6 PW-6 is SI Kaushik Ghosh who has stated that on 14.10.2018, he was posted at PS Shahdara. On that day, he came to know that both the accused were arrested in FIR FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.7/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:57:42 +0530 No. 283/18 who have made disclosure of their involvement in this case. This PW interrogated both the accused and formally arrested them vide memo Ex. PW-6/A & Ex. PW- 6/B and recorded their disclosure statement Ex. PW-6/C & Ex. PW-6/D. Both the accused were kept in muffled face during entire proceedings.
5.7 PW-7 is Ct. Deepak who has stated that on 13.10.2018, he was posted as Ct. at PS Shahdara and on that day, he and Ct. Sachin were on patrolling duty. On the instructions of SI Manish, they put barricades in front of old Police Station and started checking the vehicles in the presence of SI Manish. At about 6:30 pm, two boys came on motor-cycle and scooty to whom SI Manish gave signal to stop but they tried to run away while taking turn but they were chased by the police team on which they started running after leaving their vehicles on the road. At a distance of 15-20 steps, near bus stand of Shyam Lal College, both the said boys were apprehended who disclosed their names as Mohd. Amin and Abrar Ahmad. SI Manish took search of both of them and found one live cartridge and two strips of intoxicating medicines from the pocket of accused Mohd. Amin and from the possession of accused Abrar Ahmad, one country made pistol was recovered. SI Manish arrested him in FIR No. 283/18 conducted their personal search and recorded their disclosure statement and also seized the case property. On 14.10.2018, this PW joined the investigation of this case along with SI Kaushik Ghosh who arrested both the accused in the present case.
FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.8/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date:
+0530
2026.04.29 16:57:54
5.8 PW-8 is IO/SI Suresh Chand (retd.) who has
stated that on 13.07.2018, he was posted as SI at PS Shahdara. On that day at about 7:30 pm, on receipt of DD No. 18A, he along with Ct. Ram Avatar reached at Dr. Hedgewar Hospital from where he obtained MLC of injured Ramanand who was under treatment. At that time, the doctor declared the patient 'unfit' for statement. No eye witness of the incident was found, therefore, the said DD was kept pending. The concerned doctor handed over one sealed bottle containing gastric lavage of the patient having seal of CMO DELHI DHAS; the said bottle was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW-8/A, thereafter, he along with Ct. Sachin came at the spot where no eye witness was present; the sealed bottle was deposited in malkhana of PS. On 17.07.2018, this PW again visited the hospital and met complainant/injured and at this time, patient was declared fit for statement. After enquiring the complainant, this PW recorded his statement Ex. PW-2/A in verbitum; this PW prepared tehrir Ex. PW-8/B and handed over to DO for regisration of FIR, accordingly, FIR was registered. Statement of witness Ajay was recorded, this PW prepared the sketch of incident Ex. PW-8/C, statement of one witness Titu was also recorded who was working as DTC. 5.9 PW-9 ASI Kavinder Kumar who has stated that on 20.07.2018, further investigation of this case was handed over to this PW; during investigation, he checked the CCTV Cameras installed near the spot and also made search of accused persons but they could not be found; on 06.08.2018, he wrote a letter to MLO, State Transport Authority, FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.9/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:58:01 +0530 Surajmal Vihar regarding stolen E-Rickshaw, thereafter, from 13.10.2018 to 20.10.2018, this PW was on leave and when on 21.10.2018, he joined his duty, he came to know that that accused persons involved in the present case have been arrested by SI Kaushik Ghosh. On the same day, this PW moved an application for granting PC of the accused persons before concerned court since in the disclosure statement both the accused have stated that they have sold the robbed e-rickshaw to one Jahangir R/o Loni, UP but despite efforts, the said person namely Jahangir could not be traced, therefore, e-rickshaw also remained untraced; on 15.11.2018, the seized exhibit was sent to FSL Rohini through Ct. Ashish. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed by this PW before the court and after receiving of FSL result, supplementary charge sheet was also filed by him on 24.10.2019.
5.10 The prosecution witnesses were cross-examined by the Ld. counsel of the accused.
5.11 On 23.12.2019 the accused persons have admitted the FSL Report dated 25.09.2019 regarding 'gastric lavage' of victim, as per which, no stypefying, poisnous or unwholesome substance was found in his body. 5.12 On 27.02.2026 the accused Abrar Ahmed has admitted the MLC bearing no. 2490/2018 dated 13.07.2018 of complainant Ramanand.
As per the MLC of victim, he was admitted in the hospital by his son on the same day of incident on 13.07.2018 in the evening at 18.59 hrs. with the alleged history of intake of some unknown substance. As per MLC, FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.10/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:58:07 +0530 at the time of his admission, he was conscious oriented but unfit for statement. He was declared 'fit for statement' on 16.07.2018.
6. Statement of accused:
After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused Abrar Ahmed under Section 313 Cr.PC. was recorded in which the entire incriminating evidence was put to him and he pleaded his innocence and false implication in this case.
7. Arguments 7.1 I have heard Ld. Addl. PP and Ld. Counsel for accused and perused the entire record.
7.2 Ld. Addl. PP has argued that accused Mohd. Amin malafidely hired the e-rikshaw of victim for shiv temple at Krishna Nagar, where co-accused Abrar was already present and under a conspiracy, they administered some intoxicating drug to complainant in sweet (ladoo) due to which he became unconscious, thereafter, they committed theft of his e-rikshaw and other articles. It was further argued that in the evening when victim was shifted to hospital by his son, as per his MLC, he was unfit for statement and was declared fit for statement on 16.07.2018. Ld. APP has argued that the testimony of the victim is cogent and consistent to convict the accused for both the offences, he is charged with, i.e. u/s 328/379/34 IPC.
7.3 Per contra, it is argued by Ld. defence counsel that the very origin of the incident is doubtful, as no such incident as alleged by the complainant took place but victim has falsely implicated the accused. He has argued that as per FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.11/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:58:14 +0530 FSL report no poisonous substance found on chemical examination of victim's gastric lavage. Thus, he submits that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against accused for the offence u/s 328 IPC.
7.4 For the offence u/s 379 IPC, Ld. counsel has argued that accused persons were arrested pursuant to their disclosure statements, but no recovery was effect from them. He has also argued that victim has improved his version in relation to this offence since in his prime statement, he nowhere stated from where the accused committed theft of his e-rikshaw but in his chief-examination, he improved his case and added the facts of commission of theft against accused.
8. Analysis.
8.1 Accused is charged with the offence u/s 328/379/34 IPC on the allegations that accused administered the victim poisonous substance and committed theft of his e- rikshaw and his other belongings.
8.2 Section 328 IPC, deals with administration of poison etc. to a person with intent to cause hurt or to commit an offence. The Section reads as under:-
"Whoever administers to or causes to be taken by any person any poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, or other thing with intent to cause hurt to such person, or with intent to commit or to facilitate the commission of an offence or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."Digitally signed by
CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
16:58:49 +0530
FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.12/18
8.3 Accused can be held guilt under this Section,
firstly, on proving by the prosecution, that any poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, was administered to the victim by the accused. Secondly, the said act was done with an intent to commit an offence. If these ingredients are established only then, the person can be held liable for the offence punishable under section 328 of IPC. 8.4 In the present case, PW-2 victim has deposed that on 13.7.2018 at about 9 a.m. both accused by hatching cranial conspiracy administered some poisonous substance in sweet (ladoo) to him after eating which, he became unconscious and was shifted to his house by one of his acquaints. Thereafter, PW-2 was shifted to hospital by his son. As per MLC of victim, he was shifted to hospital on 13.07.2018 at 18.59 hrs in the evening,; he was conscious oriented when shifted to hospital but was unfit for statement. In MLC, doctor has not given any conclusive finding what was the nature of the drug given to the victim. 8.5 The gastric lavage of the victim Ramanand was sent to FSL for examination. As per FSL result, no specific substance could be identified due to which, victim was unwell. Further, it is categorically mentioned in the said report that it is not the case of metallic poison, alkaloids, barbitals and tranquilizer. Thus, as per FSL result, no intoxicating, unwholesome, stupefying substance was found in the body of victim. The FSL report is as under:-
"On Chemical, TLC & GC-MS examination, metallic poisons, ethyl and methyl alcohol, cyanide, phosphide, FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.13/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:58:56 +0530 alkaloids, barbiturates, tranquilizers and pesticides could not be detected'."
8.6 In Sanjay Singh and Another Vs. State, 2008 VII AD (Delhi) 151, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has held as under:-
"6. The essential element of section 328 IPC is that the victim should be administered "poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, or other thing." The forensic examination of the stomach wash in order to determine the substance that administered was poison is, therefore, imperative for ascertaining the commission of the offence under section 328 IPC. The opinion of the victim who is rendered unconscious after taking the substance may not be stated final as to whether the drug administered was either "poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug."
8.7 In Joseph Kurian Philip Jose Vs. State of Kerala (AIR 1995 SC 4), the Court observed:-
"In order to prove offence under Section 328 IPC, the prosecution is required to prove that the substance in question was a poison, or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug etc, that the accused administered the substance to the complainant or caused the complainant to take such substance, that he did so with intent to cause hurt or knowing it to be likely that he would thereby cause hurt, or with the intention to commit or facilitate the commission of an offence. It is, therefore, essential for the prosecution to prove that the accused was directly responsible for administering poison etc. or causing it to be taken by any person, through another. In other words, the accused may accomplish the act by himself or by means of another. In either situation direct, reliable and cogent evidence is necessary"
8.8 Thus, it is settled law that in order to record conviction u/s 328 IPC, there must be some evidence of poison brought on record in addition to the oral testimony of the victim.
FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.14/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
16:59:12 +0530
8.9 In the case in hand, there is no evidence except
oral testimony of PW-2 victim that there was any intoxicating substance found in the body of the victim causing him unconscious. In the MLC, the doctor did not provide a definite conclusion regarding the type of drug administered to the victim. The victim's gastric lavage sample was forwarded to the FSL for analysis. According to the FSL report, no specific substance could be detected, which explains why the victim experienced illness. 8.10 Simply on the basis of the statement of PW-2 alone it could not be concluded that he had become unconscious because of eating ladoo offered to him by the accused. There had to be scientific evidence to the effect that PW-2 had, in fact, become unconscious because of consuming any drug or intoxicating substance etc. mixed in said ladoo but unfortunately, there is no such evidence on record. In the absence of scientific evidence, the bald statement of the victim cannot be taken as gospel truth to convict the accused u/s 328 IPC.
8.11 Thus, court is of the considered opinion that State has failed to prove the charges under section 328 IPC IPC against accused, hence, he is acquitted from the charges punishable under Section 328 IPC.
9. For the offence u/s 379 IPC, the prosecution case is that accused firstly administrated some intoxicated substance to victim due to which he became unconscious thereafter they committed theft of his e-rikshaw and other belongings.
Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
16:59:20 +0530
FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.15/18
9.1 In preceding paras, I have already come to the
conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove that accused administrated any poisonous substance to accused. 9.2 On the allegation of theft, there is material contradiction in the initial statement Ex. PW2/A of the victim Ramanand on the basis of which FIR was registered and his deposition in court.
10. It is settled law that the minor discrepancies in the evidence of eye-witnesses, can be ignored and cannot fail the prosecution case but if found to be not minor in nature, may be a ground for disbelieving and discrediting their evidence. In such circumstances, witnesses may not inspire confidence and if their evidence is found to be in conflict and contradiction with other evidence or with the statement already recorded, in such a case it cannot be held that prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Reliance be placed on Mahendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2009) 11 SCC 334).
11. In case, the complainant in the FIR or the witness in his statement under Section 161 Cr. PC, has not disclosed certain facts but meets the prosecution case first time before the court, such version lacks credence and is liable to be discarded. (reliance on State Represented by Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu Vs. Sait @ Krishnakumar, (2008) 15 SCC 440).
12. It has been clearly liad down in State Represented by Inspector of Police, Tamilnadu, (2008) 15 SCC 440 that, in case, the complainant in the FIR or the witness in his statement u/s 161 Cr, PC, has not disclosed certain facts but FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.16/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:59:27 +0530 meets the prosecution case first time before the court during trial, such version lacks credence and is liable to be discarded.
13. In the present case, it is evident that the testimony of PW2 Ramanand is riddled with material contradictions and improvisations. In his statement Ex. PW2/A as well as in his statement under Section 161 Cr. PC, he categorically asserted that after consuming the ladoo he became unconscious near the DTC Bus Terminal and was wholly unaware of subsequent events, being later informed by his family that another rickshaw driver had dropped him home. However, while deposing before the Court, PW2 introduced for the first time an entirely new version, alleging that he remained semi-conscious, encountered the accused again near Shyam Lal College, and was assaulted and robbed of his e-rickshaw and personal belongings. These allegations of assault and theft were never disclosed during investigation and represent a clear embellishment of the prosecution case. Such material improvements on vital aspects of the incident gravely undermine the credibility of PW2. His contradictory versions are irreconcilable, and the belated introduction of new incriminating facts amounts to an afterthought designed to strengthen the prosecution case. Consequently, PW2 cannot be regarded as a reliable or trustworthy witness with respect to the alleged robbery/theft of his e-rickshaw and other articles, and his testimony on these material aspects is discarded.
14. In view of above discussion suffice it to state that prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.17/18 Digitally signed by CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:59:34 +0530 Mohd. Abrar beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of doubt must necessarily go to the accused, as per settled principles of criminal jurisprudence, accordingly, accused Mohd. Abrar is acquitted for the offence under section 328/379/34 IPC. The accused is directed to furnish bonds under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 481 of the BNSS) in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to remain in force for a period of six months, in accordance with law. Bailbond furnished and accepted.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance. CHARU Digitally signed by CHARU AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29 16:59:42 +0530 Announced in the open (Charu Aggarwal) Court on 29.04.2026 ASJ-02/E-COURT Shahdara/KKD/Delhi.
Annexure:-
In terms of "Manojbhai Jethabhai Parmar (Rohit) Vs. State of Gujarat, Crl. Appeal No. 2973/2023" passed by Hon'ble Apex Court, the tabulated charts are annexed herewith.FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. Page No.18/18
Annexure 1 Specimen Chart for Witnesses Examined:
Prosecution Name of Witnesses Description Witness No. PW-1 ASI Praveen Kumar Duty Officer PW-2 Sh. Ramanand Complainant/victim PW-3 Ct. Sachin Joined investigation with IO. PW-4 Ct. Ashish He deposited sealed pullanda to FSL Rohini. PW-5 ASI Harvinder Singh Investigating Officer PW-6 SI Kaushik Ghosh Investigating Officer PW-7 Ct. Deepak Joined investigation with IO.
PW-8 SI Suresh Chand Investigating Officer
PW-9 ASI Kavinder Kumar Investigating Officer
Digitally signed by
CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
16:59:55 +0530
(Charu Aggarwal)
ASJ-02/E-Court/Shahdara
KKD/Delhi/29.04.2026
Annexure-2
Specimen Chart for Exhibited Documents:
Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by
Ex. PW-1/A Copy of FIR PW1 ASI Praveen Kumar
Ex. PW-1/B Endorsement on rukka - do -
Ex. PW-1/C Certificate under Section 65B of Indian - do -
Evidence Act.
Ex. PW-2/A Statement of complainant/victim PW2 Ramanand
Ex. PW3/A Arrest memo of accused Mohd. Amin in FIR PW3 Ct. Sachin
No. 283/2018.
Ex. PW3/B Arrest memo of accused Abrar Ahmed in FIR - do -
No. 283/2018.
Ex. PW3/C Personal search memo of accused Abrar - do -
Ahmed in FIR No. 283/2018.
Ex. PW3/D Personal search memo of accused Mohd. - do -
Amiin in FIR No. 283/2018.
Ex. PW3/E Disclosure statement of accused Abrar - do -
Ahmed in FIR No. 283/2018.
Ex. PW3/F Disclosure statement of accused Mohd. Amin - do -
in FIR No. 283/2018.
Ex. PW4/A Copy of road certificate no. 83/21/18 PW4 Ct. Ashish
Ex. PW4/B Acknowledgment of case acceptance at - do -
FSL regarding depositing of case property State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara Page No. 1/2 Ex. PW6/A Arrest memo of accused Mohd. Amin in PW6 SI Kaushik Ghosh present FIR.
Ex. PW6/B Arrest memo of accused Abrar Ahmed in - do -
present FIR.
Ex. PW6/C Disclosure statement of accused Mohd. Amin - do -
in present FIR.
Ex. PW6/D Disclosure statement of accused Abrar - do -
Ahmad in present FIR.
Ex. PW8/A Seizure memo of bottle containing gastric PW8 SI Suresh Chand lavage of complainant/victim.
Ex. PW8/B Tehrir - do - Ex. PW8/C Sketch of incident spot - do - Ex. PW9/A Information to concerned Motor Licencing PW9 ASI Kavinder Kumar
Officer regarding stolen E-Rickshaw No. DL- 13-er-0581.Digitally signed by
CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
17:00:04 +0530
(Charu Aggarwal)
ASJ-02/E-Court/Shahdara
KKD/Delhi/29.04.2026
Annexure 3
Specimen Chart for Material Objects/Muddamals:
Material Object No. Description of the Proved by/Attested by
Exhibit
Nil Nil Nil
Digitally signed by
CHARU CHARU AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.04.29
17:00:13 +0530
(Charu Aggarwal)
ASJ-02/E-Court/Shahdara
KKD/Delhi/29.04.2026
State Vs. Mohd. Amin and anr. FIR No. 199/2018 P.S. Shahdara Page No. 2/2