Delhi District Court
State vs Pawan@Pona on 9 April, 2024
IN THE COURT OF Ms. NEHA GUPTA SINGH,
CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
NORTH DISTRICT : DELHI
STATE Vs. : Pawan @ Pona & Anr.
FIR No : 545/2022
P. S. : Alipur
U/s : 387/34 IPC
JUDGMENT
(a) Serial No. of the 11712/2023
case
(b) Date of offence 27.05.2023-22.06.2023
(c) Complainant Lalit Prakash
(d) Accused 1. Pawan @ Pona
S/o Dharamvir Singh
2. Sandeep @ Choti
S/o Sh. Inder Singh
(e) Offence U/Sec. 387/34 IPC
(f) Plea of accused Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final Order Acquitted for offense/s 387/34 IPC
(h) Date of institution 07.10.20223
(i) Date of reserve of 9.04.2023
order / judgment
(j) Date of judgment 9.04.2023
BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS FOR THE DECISION:-
1. The prosecution story in brief is that on 27.05.2023 at village Boodpur Alipur, Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Alipur, both the accused persons in order to commit extortion CC No. 11712/2023 State Vs. Pawan & Anr. FIR No. 545/2023 PS Alipur Page 1 of 4 attempted to put the complainant Lalit Parkash in fear of death or a grievous hurt to the complainant by making several threatening calls over telephone and also by making visit to his office and house and demanded Rs.50 lacs as Rangdari. FIR was registered on complaint of Lalit Prakash.
2. Investigation was completed and police report under section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed under sections 387/34 IPC. Cognizance was taken and accused persons were summoned.
3. Copy of charge sheet and documents were supplied to the accused persons in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C.
4. Arguments on charge were heard and charge against accused Pawan @ Pona and Sandeep @ Choti framed under section 387/34 IPC vide order dated 08.01.2024. Both the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused prosecution examined only three witness.
6. PW-1 Sh. Lalit Prakash/ complainant and PW- 2 Sh. Aman Sharma/ complainant's son deposed nothing against the accused persons in the present case and they both totally turned hostile. These witnesses are duly cross examined by Ld APP for the state.
7. PW- 3 SI Ravinder Kumar deposed that on 28.07.2023, he was posted as SI at PS Alipur and on that day, a complaint regarding extortion was received at PS Alipur and the same was marked to him for investigation and the said complaint made by complainant - Lalit Prakash @ Pinte which is Ex. PW- 1/A. He further deposed that thereafter, he prepared rukka i.e. Ex. PW-3/A and same was handed over to Duty Officer for CC No. 11712/2023 State Vs. Pawan & Anr. FIR No. 545/2023 PS Alipur Page 2 of 4 registration of the FIR and he got FIR lodged and same was handed over to him and he visited the place of occurrence with complainant, who was present at PS at village Budhpur, Delhi, where he made inquiries there and made site plan and thereafter, he came back at PS. He further deposed that on 09.08.2023, he received an information that the accused-Pawan @ Pona involved in the present case had already been arrested in some other case of PS Bawana. He further deposed that on 11.08.2023, he visited the Rohini Jail, where he arrested-Pawan @ Pona. He further deposed that he formally arrested him and recorded his disclosure statement vide memos Ex. PW-3/B and Ex. PW-3/C. He further deposed that on 13.09.2023, he formally arrested co-accused Sandeep @ Choti and recorded his disclosure statement vide memos Ex. PW-3/D and Ex. PW- 3/E. He further deposed that he applied for TIP for both the accused persons to which accused-Sandeep @ Choti refused to participate, however, in the TIP, accused Pawan @ Pona had been corrected identified by the complainant-Lalit Prakash and copy of application is Mark-A and he recorded statement of complainant regarding this fact. He further deposed that complainant had also handed over the chat qua threat made by accused persons to the complainant and same is Mark-L. He further deposed that after completion of investigation, he prepared the charge-sheet and filed before the concerned court. He correctly identified both accused persons present in the court today. This witness is duly cross examined by Ld counsel for the accused.
8. Since, complainant and eyewitness did not support the prosecution, , examining formal witnesses would have been a CC No. 11712/2023 State Vs. Pawan & Anr. FIR No. 545/2023 PS Alipur Page 3 of 4 futile exercise. Accordingly PE was closed. Statement U/s 313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed with as no incriminating evidence has come on record. Final arguments were heard.
9. I have heard the arguments addressed by the Learned APP Sh.
Gurdaulat Singh Sidhu for state and the Ld. counsel of accused and have carefully perused the record.
10. It is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence. Further, it is a settled proposition of criminal law that in order to successfully bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution is supposed to stand on its own legs and it cannot derive any benefits whatsoever from the weakness, if any, in the defense of the accused. Accused persons are entitled to the benefit of every reasonable doubt in the prosecution story and any such doubt in the prosecution case entitles the accused to acquittal.
11. PW 1 is the complainant and PW-2 is his son eyewitness. They have not supported the prosecution. They did not identify accused or verified their complaint. Accordingly, Prosecution has failed to establish the identity of accused persons and facts of case.
12. In such circumstances it cannot be said that prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, accused persons Pawan @ Pona and Sandeep @ Choti are acquitted for offence under section 387/34 IPC.
Announced in the open court Neha Digitally signed
by Neha Gupta
On this day 09th April 2024 Gupta Singh
Date: 2024.04.09
Singh
(Neha Gupta 16:29:23
Singh)+0530
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
North Rohini Delhi
CC No. 11712/2023 State Vs. Pawan & Anr. FIR No. 545/2023 PS Alipur Page 4 of 4