Delhi District Court
Fir No.:12/07, Ps New Usman Pur, U/Sec. ... vs . Naeem on 17 March, 2010
1 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC. IN THE COURT OF SH. B. S. CHUMBAK, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/NE-3/KKD:DLEHI Case ID Number 02402R0230172007 Session Case No. 48/09 Assigned to Sessions 17/4/07 Arguments heard on 19/2/10 Date of order 11/03/10 FIR NO. 12/2007 Police Station NEW USMAN PUR Under Section 394/397/34 IPC & 25 ARMS ACT. Out come of the case CONVICTED IN THE MATTER OF: STATE VS. 1. Naeem S/O ABDUL AZIZ R/O E-13/496, J- BLOCK, JHUGGI NEW SEELAM PUR DELHI. 2. JAVED @ BHURA S/O ABDUL AZIZ R/O L-33, WELCOME, DELHI. PRESENT: Ms. Neelam Narang Ld. Addl. PP for State. Sh. S.S Chaudhary Advocate on behalf of accused persons. JUDGMENT
1. On 06.1.2007 a case u/s 394/397/34 IPC was registered at PS New Usman Pur vide FIR No. 12/07 on the basis of statement made by Sh. Ram Niwas 1 2 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
s/o Sh.Balbir Singh r/o T-181, Gali No.2, Gautam Puri Delhi against three unknown persons..
2. Brief facts arising out of this case are that on the intervening night of 05/06.1.2007 an information was received vide DD No. 27Athat three/four persons committed robbery in a house bearing No. T-187, Gali No.2 near Gautam Puri, Delhi and ran away from the spot. On receipt of this information ASI Jawahar Singh along with Const. Khushi Ram reached at the place of occurrence i.e T-187 Gali No.2, Gautam Puri Delhi. On reaching there Ram Niwas met them and he got his statement recorded which is as follows:
"He has been residing at the aforesaid address in the house of his in laws and has been doing the business of painting in Cannaught Place.
On 5.1.07 at about 9.30 P.M when he was present in his room on first floor of his house, his wife was also with him. Some one has knocked the door and on hearing the noise of knocking when he opened the door, three young boys aged about 22-25 years entered into his room and he can identify them if shown 2 3 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
to him. Two persons were having country made Katta and one was having Ustra in their hands. One of the accused pointed out a Katta towards him and demanded Rs.5000/-. When he shown his inability to make the payment, one among them took out the keys of Almirah from the pocket of his pant and removed Rs.2000/- from his Almirah. They also removed one pair of Kundal belonging to his wife. They also landed country made katta Butt blow on his head at the time when they fled away from his house. He also came to know that all these three boys also removed currency notes from the house of his tenant Amar Pal and also landed Ustra blow on his person. Some one informed the PCR. Police reached at the spot. He and Amar Pal were got medically examined".
3. On the basis of aforesaid statement of complainant Ram Niwas the present case was registered, investigation was initiated. MLC of the complainant and injured Amar Pal bearing No. B-75/07 and B-7576/07 were obtained, site plan was prepared at the instance of complainant Ram 3 4 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
Niwas. Statement of Ram Niwas, his wife Ms. Mala and injured Amar Pal were recorded u/sec. 161 Cr.P.C. Steps to arrest the accused persons were taken but they could not be arrested. Ultimately on 16.1.07 on the basis of secret information accused Naeem s/o Abdul Aziz was arrested, his search was taken. A country made loaded katta 315 Bore was recovered from the right side pocket of his pant. Country made katta was unloaded and live cartridges was taken out, sketch of katta and cartridges were prepared. Accused was interrogated and during the course of interrogation he made disclosure statement and the brief facts of his disclosure statement are as under:
"On 5.1.2007 at about 9.30 P.M he along with Javed Bhura and Jakir left their houses with the intention to commit the criminal offences.
He and Javed were having loaded country made kattas and Jakir was having Ustra in his hand. They all entered into a house at Gautam Puri Gali No.9, some one raised alarm therefore, they fled away from there and on seeing the open house in Gali no.2 they entered in the said house. One boy was cooking the food, accused Javed pointed out country made katta on the chest of that boy 4 5 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
and demanded currency notes from him. When he refused to give the money then he and accused Jakir searched his house and removed currency notes after breaking the Gulak which was placed in their room. Jakir also caused injuries with Ustra nd on hearing noise they run away from his room after closing the door from out side. Thereafter they all went to the first floor of the house. Javed knocked the door of room and on hearing the noise, one person came out and immediately on opening the room, they all entered into the said room and pointed out a country made katta towards his chest and demanded rs.5000/- from him. Accused Jakir took out the keys from the pant worn by that person and removed Rs.2000/- from Almirah and he removed a pair of Kundal from the ears of a woman who was present there. When the person resisted he landed a country made katta Butt blow on his head and run away from the spot. He can also got recovered the pair of Kundal from the drawer of dressing table kept in his house and he can also got arrested co- accused Javed and Jakir."5 6
FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
4. Identification memo was prepared at his instance, pair of Kundal was recovered from the drawer of a dressing table kept in a jhuggi belonging to accused Naeem at his instance and sealed into a parcel sealed with the seal of JS. Steps to arrest of co-accused with the help of accused Naeem were taken. Accused Javed s/o Abdul Aziz was found absconding from his house. Naeem could not trace the house of Jakir and on 17.1.07 accused Nayem was produced before the court in muffled face for the purpose of conducting his Test Identification Proceedings (TIP). On 18.1.07 TIP of accused Naeem was fixed. Both the witnesses were produced in the court of ld. MM on 22.1.07 but accused refused to take part in TIP. On 14.3.07 TIP of case property(pair of Kundal) was got conducted by concerned Link MM wherein PW Ms. Mala w/o Ram Niwas has correctly identified her pair of Kundal. Statement of witnesses were recorded, Kata which was recovered from the possession of Naeem was sent to CFSLand after completion of all the necessary investigation challan u/s 173 Cr.P.C against accused Naeem was presented to the court of Ld. MM.
5. Ld. MM after taking cognizance of the offence u/sec. 394/397/34 IPC r/w 6 7 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
Sec. 25 of Arms Act, against the accused, copies as required u/s 207 Cr.P.C were supplied to the accused and committed the case to the court of Sessions and on allocation to this court for trial.
6. During the proceedings before the court on 17.7.07 a supplementary challan against co-accused Javed @ Bhura was also allocated to this court and thereafter supplementary challan was also directed to be tagged with this case and proceedings are directed to be conducted in this case being the main case.
7. Arguments on the point of charge heard. After hearing arguments and taking into consideration the material placed on record a prima facie case for the offence u/s 452/392/395 r/w 397/34 IPC was made out against the accused persons namely Naeem and Javed @ Bhura. Charge was accordingly framed by the then Ld. ASJ on 17.7.07 to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial,thereafter case was fixed for prosecution evidence.
During the course of trial on 18.1.2010 a charge for the offence u/sec. 25 of Arms Act was framed against co-accused Naeem to which he again 7 8 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, thereafter case was fixed for prosecution evidence.
8. Sh.Ram Niwas/victim/ complainant appeared as (PW1), Ms.Mala w/o Ram Niwas appeared as (PW2), Sh. Amar Pal, another injured/victim as (PW3), Dr. Sidharath as (PW4), H.C Pargesh Kumar as (PW5), Const. Khubi Ram as (PW6), Const. Pradeep Kumar as (PW6A), H.C Kamal Singh as (PW7), Sh. Ravinder Singh Ld.MM as (PW8), Sh.Bhupesh Kumar Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge as (PW9), Const. Adesh as (PW10), SI Jawahar Singh as (PW11), ASIBabu Ram as (PW12) and ASI Ram Kishore as (PW13). Thereafter, no PW was left to be examined, therefore, prosecution evidence was closed.
9. Brief testimony of the PW's are as follows :
i) PW1 is the complainant in this case and deposed that on 5/1/07 he was present in his room on the first floor of his house. On that day at about 9.30 P.m someone knocked the door of his room. He opened the door, three persons entered into his room, two of them were having country made kattas with them and one was having Ustra. One of them had put katta on 8 9 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
his chest and demanded Rs.5000/- from him. When he refused to pay the said amount, one of the accused had taken Rs.2000/- from his pant which was hanging on the wall. He further stated that person who had taken Rs.2000/- from his pant is not present in the court and person who has pointed out the katta on his chest and demanded Rs,5000/- from him, is present and identified him as Javed present in the court. He further deposed that other accused who had taken the ear rings/Kundal from his wife also identified him as Naeem present in the court. He further stated that while running the house accused Javed hit the Butt of the Katta on his head as a result of which he received injuries. He further deposed that he also came to know that accused also committed robbery in the house of his tenant Amar Pal who is residing on the ground floor and injuries were also caused to him. Someone informed the police, the police reached at the spot. He and injured Amar Pal were taken to GTB hospital, his statement was recorded by the police which is Ex.PW 1/A, site plan was prepared at his instance which is Ex.PW 1/B. During his cross-examination he confronted from his statement Ex.PW1/A on the point that accused taken away Rs.2000/- from his pant which was hanging on the wall on the other hand in his statement Ex.PW 1/A he 9 10 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
stated that accused had taken away the keys of Almirah from his pant and thereafter took away Rs.2000/- from his Almirah. Rest of his testimony is reiterated by him as submitted by him during his examination in chief.
ii) PW 2 corroborated the testimony of PW.1/her husband and specifically stated that on 5/6.1.07 she along with her husband was present in the room at the first floor and on that day at about 9.30 P.M some one knocked the door of her room. Her husband opened the door. Three unknown persons entered into her house out of them two were having country made Katta and one was having Ustra in their hands. One of the co-accused put Katta on his husband and other who was holding the Ustra in his hand had put Ustra on her. One of the assailant of the accused persons is not present in the court. She identified all the accused persons who entered into her house on 5/1/07. She further corroborated that accused persons had taken Kundals from her after putting Ustra and other assailants taken away Rs.2000/- from Almirah. She further stated that while leaving the house accused persons also caused injuries to her husband. She also came to know that accused persons also committed robbery in the house of Amar Pal who was living in their house as a tenant on ground floor. Someone 10 11 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
informed the police, police reached at the spot. Her husband and Amar Pal were got medically examined in GTB Hospital. She further stated that she identified the Kundal/ear rings during TIP. She also identified her signatures on the TIP proceedings Ex.PW 2/A. She also identified the Kundals when shown to her as Ex. P.1. During her cross-examination she reiterated her testimony as submitted by her during examination in chief.
iii) PW.3 irrespective of corroborating the testimonies of PW 1 and PW2 further stated that on 5/1/07 at about 9.30 P.M he was present in his room and was cooking food. His father had gone to Gali No.8 Gautam Puri at the house of his relative. The main door of the house was lying open. Three persons had entered into his house, two of them were having country made katta and one was holding Ustra/razor. They demanded Rs.2000/- from him and when he shown his inability to pay Rs.2000/-, one of the accused persons slapped him and other associate had put country made katta on his chest and removed Rs.2000/- from Gullak and person who was having Ustra caused injuries on his ear. He further stated that while leaving room they bolted the door from out side. He raised alarm and on hearing alarm one neighbour Pappu came and open the room and rescued him. He 11 12 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
identified both the accused persons who were present in the court (as the same who committed the ofence on 5/1/07). PCR reached there, police took him and Ram Niwas to the police station. Ram Niwas also received injuries and from the police station they both were taken to the GTB Hospital for medical examination. During his cross-examination he confronted from his statement Ex.PW 3/A on the point that he had stated to the police that accused persons had slapped him but this fact is not recorded in his statement u/sec. 161 Cr.P.C. Rest of his testimony is reiterated by him as submitted by him during his examination in chief.
iv) PW4 deposed that on 06/1/07 he was working as Jr. Resident in GTB Hospital and on that day at about 12.15 a.m one Amar Pal s/o Subhash aged about 20 years male was brought to GTB hospital by Ct. Khoobi Ram with the alleged history of assault. On examination patient was found conscious oriented. He noticed the following injuries on the person of patient :
a. One incised wound size 0.5 x 0.1 cm in the left Pinna The MLC Ex.PW 4/A was prepared by him bearing his signatures at point A. 12 13 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
He further deposed that on the same day Ram Niwas s/o Balbir Sharma 28 years, male was also brought for his medical examination by Const.
Khoobi Ram. On his medical examination patient was found conscious oriented and he noticed clean lacerated wound 1.00 x 0.5 cm with no active bleeding. He prepared the MLC Ex.PW 4/B bearing his signatures at point A. He further deposed that after their examination, both the patients were referred to Surgery Department for further management.
v) PW5 is formal witness. He deposed that on 06/1/07 at about 1.25 a.m Const. Khoobi Ram brought a rukka sent by ASI Jawahar Singh. On the basis of said ruqqa he recorded formal FIR bearing no. 12/07 u/sec.
394/307/34 IPC.. After registration of the case he handed over the rukka and copy of the FIR for its transmission to the IO. He also brought the original FIR. Copy of the FIR is Ex. PW5/A.(OSR).
vi) PW.6 corroborated the testimony of PW 4 Dr. Sidharth and PW.5 H.C Pragesh and deposed that in the intervening night of 5/6-1-07 he was on emergency duty. On that day on receipt of DD No. 27A he along with ASI Jawahar Singh reached at the spot i.e T-187 Gali No.2 Gautam Puri Delhi. 13 14 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
On reaching there, public persons Ram Niwas and Amar Pal met them and got their statements recorded to the IO. Ram Niwas and Amar Pal both were taken to GTB hospital by him and got them medically examined, after medical examination he came back to the spot and handed over the MLC of both the injured to the IO. IO prepared the rukka and handed over to him for registration of the case. On receipt of rukka he went to the police station and got the FIR registered vide FIR No. 12/07 through H.C Pargesh Kumar. He further deposed that after registration of the case, H.C Pargesh kumar handed over the copy of the FIR and rukka to him and he again returned back to the spot with the rukka and copy of FIR and given the same to the IO. IO also recorded the supplementary statement of Ms. Mala w/o Ram Niwas and other family members were also interrogated in his presence.
During his cross-examination he reiterated his testimony as submitted by him during his examination in chief.
vii)PW6A deposed that on 16/1/07 he was posted as constable at P.S New Usman Pur and on that day at about 4.30 P.M ASI Jawahar Singh and Const. Adesh told him that they received a secret information through informer that a man who had committed robbery on 6/1/07 was sitting on 14 15 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
the footpath of Pandu sila Temple in the area of Usman Pur. He along with ASI Jawahr Singh, Const. Adesh and informer went to police station to Pandu Sila Temple and on the pointing out of the informer they apprehended that boy sitting on the Patri. On seeing the police officials that boy started walking very fast towards Nala. They chased that boy and over powered him. ASI Jawahar Singh took his search and on his search one Desi Katta was recovered from the right side pocket of his trouser. On inspection Katta was found to be loaded one, sketch of Katta Ex.PW 6A/A was prepared bearing his signatures at point A. Katta and the live cartridges were taken in possession and sealed with the seal of JS and seizure memo Ex.PW 6A/B bearing his signatures at point A. Name of that boy was revealed as Naeem who was correctly identified by the witness. Accused Naeem took them to the spot i.e T-187 Gali No.2 Gautam Puri Delhi and pointed out towards the place of occurrence and the pointing out memo Ex.PW 6A/C was prepared, site plan already Ex.PW 1/B was prepared by the IO. During interrogation accused Naeem also disclosed that he has committed the offence of robbed at T-187 Gautam Puri Delhi on5/1/07 and had spent the money which was robed by him along with his other associates. He also stated that he can got recovered the ear 15 16 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
rings/Kundal which they have taken from the possession of PW.2 Mala. Disclosure statement of accused was recorded by the IO which is Ex.PW 6A/D in his presence. Pursuant to the disclosure statement, accused Naeem took them to New Seelam Pur and got recovered from the draw of dressing table kept in his house, seizure memo of the same was prepared which is Ex.PW 6A/E. Accused also disclosed the name of other co- accused as Jakir and Javed who participated in the commission of offence. Accused Naeem also took them to the jhuggi of Jakir at New Seelam Pur area but his jhuggi could not be traced by him. Thereafter accused took them to the house of Javed at Welcome but same was also found locked. Accused Naeem was taken to the GTB Hospital and was got medically examined. Accused was arrested, his personal search memo Ex.PW 6A/F and arrest memo Ex.PW6A/G was prepared in his presence. He also identified the case property duly sealed with the seal of CFSL Ballistic devision Chandigarh when shown to him i.e one Kata nd one tested cartridge Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2 . He also stated that he can identify the ear rings if shown to him.
viii)PW7 is again formal witness and deposed that on 5/1/07 he was posted as 16 17 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
duty officer at police station New Usman Pur from 4 P.m to 12 night. On that day at about 10.12 P.M he recorded the DD No. 27A. He also brought the original register pertaining to DD No. 27A, copy of the same is Ex.PW7/A(OSR).
ix) PW8 deposed that on 9.3.07 an application for conducting the TIP of the case property (golden ear ring) was assigned to him by Sh. Ajay Gupta Ld. MM. He directed the IO to produce the witness and alleged case property required to be identified by the witness on 14.3.07 vide his order dt. 9.3.07 which is Ex.PW 8/A bearing his signatures at point A. On 14.3.07 IO produced the case property in sealed pullanda sealed with the seal of JS and also produced three pairs of gold ear rings of similar description which were required tobe mixed with the case property. Thereafter he directed the IO to go out side his chamber. He made necessary arrangements and called the witness (PW2)Smt. Mala w/o Ram Niwas. After having careful look on the ear rings she correctly identified her ear rings. He recorded the proceedings under his dictation already Ex.PW 2/A bearing his signatures at point A. He also gave his certificate which bears his signatures at point A2. IO also moved an application for 17 18 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
receiving the copy of the proceedings which was allowed by him vide order dt. 14.3.07 which is Ex.PW 8/A. He also sent the proceedings in sealed envelope to the court concerned which has also been opened at the time of examination of PW2.
x) PW9 deposed that on 18/1/07 an application for conducting the TIP of accused Naeem was assigned to him by Sh. Ajay Gupta Ld. MM KKD Delhi vide his order dt. 17/1/07. He directed the IO to produce the witness on 22/1/07 at Central Jail Tihar vide his order Ex.PW9/A for conducting the TIP of the accused.
On 22/1/07 he visited the jail premises. IO also produced the witness there, duly identified by him. Accused produced from jail No.8 by Sh. Manoj Kumar Assitt. Suptd. None was present in the room except himself his steno and the accused. He explained the meaning of TIP in Hindi to the accused and asked the accused whether he wants to participate the TIP or not. On which accused submits that he does not want to join the TIP proceedings. He again warned him and questioned him that in case he does not join the proceedings, an adverse inference may be drawn against him during trial. Still he refused to join the TIP. His statement to this effect 18 19 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
was recorded which is Ex.PW 9/B. He also gave the certificate in lieu of proceedings conducted by him, bearing his signatures at point A. He also directed the official concerned to send the proceedings in sealed envelope to the concerned court,vide his order Ex. PW 9/B. IO moved an application for seeking the copy of the proceedings wich was allowed by him vide order Ex.PW 9/C.
xi)PW10 deposed that on 16/1/07 at about 4.30 P.M he along with Const. Pradeep, IO/SI Jawahar Singh and secret informer reached at Pandu Sila and found one boy siting on the footpath of the road. Secret informer pointed out towards him and on seeing the police officials that boy tried to fled away from the spot but they overpowered and apprehended him. On his search by the IO a country made Katta was recovered from the right side dub from the pant and name of the boy was revealed as Naeem. On checking the said Katta it was found to be loaded, same was opened and cartridge was taken out. Sketch of the katta was prepared in his presence which is Ex.PW6/A. Country made Katta and cartridges were converted into pullanda and duly sealed with the seal of JS. Seizure memo Ex.PW 6/B. Accused Naeem was interrogated by the IO and he made disclosure 19 20 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
statement Ex.PW 6/D in his presence. At his instance pointing out memo Ex.PW 6/B was prepared, accused was arrested and his personal search and arrest memo Ex.PW 6/F and Ex.PW 6/G were prepared in his presence. At the instance of accused pair of golden Kundal were recovered from the draw of dressing table kept in his jhuggi, in New Seelam Pur area which were sealed with the seal of JS and seizure memo to this effect is Ex.PW 6/E. Accused Naeem also disclosed the name of co-accused persons Jakir and Javed @ Bhura who had also participated in the commission of offence on the day of incident. He also identified the case property i.e country made Katta and one test fired cartridge Ex.P.1 & Ex.P.2. He also identified the ear rings/Kundals Ex.P.10/P1. During his cross-examination he reiterated his testimony as submitted by him during examination in chief.
xii) PW11 is the investigating officer who corroborated the testimony of PW 10 Const. Adesh, irrespective of corroborating testimony of other witnesses he further stated that he recorded the statement of complainant Ram Niwas Ex.PW 1/A and directed Const. Khoobi Ram to got both the injured namely Ram Niwas and Amar Pal for medically examined at GTB hospital. He 20 21 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
prepared rukka on the statement of Ram Niwas Ex.PW 11/A and got the case registered through Const. Khoobi Ram. After registration of the case he prepared the site plan Ex.PW 11/B at the instance of Ram Niwas. He also recorded the statement of PW.Amar Pal and Ms. Mala. He also recorded the supplementary statement of Ram Niwas and Ct. Khoobi Ram. He also identified the case property i.e country made Katta and live cartridge ear rings Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 and Ex.P10/P1 respectively. During his cross-examination he reiterated his testimony as submitted by him in his examination in chief.
xiii) PW 12 deposed that he had seen the sanction order u/sec. 39 Arms Act duly signed by Sh. Rajiv Ranjan Addl. DCP N/E Distt., and identified his signatures at point A on the sanction order Ex.PW 12/A.
xiv)PW 13 deposed that on 12/6/07 accused Javed @ Bhura was arrested by him in case u/sec. 25 Arms Act registered at P.S New Usman Pur vide FIR No. 233/07. In that case accused Javed made a disclosure statement with regard to the commission of offence , registered at P.S New Usman Pur vide FIR No.12/07( present case). He further deposed that the IO of 21 22 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
the present case had been transferred from the police station New Usman Pur therefore, further investigation of this case was assigned to him. He interrogated accused Javed, recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW 13/A, Complainant Ram Niwas also came to the police station enquired about this case. He identified accused Javed in the police station. Accused was arrested vide memo Ex.PW 13/B, his personal search Ex.PW 13/C was prepared by him. Accused also pointed out the place of incident and he prepared the pointing out memo Ex.PW 13/D. He obtained the sanction 39 of the Arms act already Ex.PW 12/A. He obtained the CFSL report Ex.PW 13/E, after recording the statement of witnesses and on completion of investigation a supplementary charge sheet against Javed was filed in the court. He reiterated his testimony as submitted by him during his examination in chief. After his examination no other PW left to be examined and prosecution evidence was closed and case was fixed for examination of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C
10.During the course of examination of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C they controverted all the allegations as alleged against them and submitted that they both were innocent and was falsely implicated in this case. They did not desire to lead defence evidence, therefore, defence evidence was 22 23 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
closed and case was fixed for final arguments.
11.I have heard the arguments on behalf of Ld. Counsel for accused and on behalf of Ld. Addl. PP for state.
12.Ld. Counsel for accused submitted that before convicting the accused under any penal of law it is the duty of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and in the present case no sufficient corroborative incriminating evidence is placed on record.
13. In support of their contention they submitted that PW1 Ram Niwas in his examination in chief submitted that one of the co-accused had taken Rs.2000/- from his pant which was hanging on the wall however in his statement u/sec. 161 Cr.P.C he stated that one of the co-accused has taken the keys of the Almirah from his pocket and thereafter removed Rs.2000/-from Almirah. During his cross-examination he also failed to explain whether accused Naeem or other co-accused were wearing wrist watch, chappal or shoes. PW.1 also failed to explain the description of the clothes worn by the accused persons despite of the fact that light was on in 23 24 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
his room. He further stated that he had kept Rs.2000/- in the Almirah under the cloth on the top portion and the currency notes were in the denomination of Rs.100/- each . During his cross-examination he also admitted that he identified one of the accused when he had gone to the police station to receive the Kundal of his wife. He also stated that he had seen many photographs at the police station but he had not seen the photograph of accused persons.
14.PW.2 also stated that accused had taken her Kundals after putting Ustra on her and other associate had taken Rs.2000/- from Almirah where as PW.1 has stated that accused had taken Rs.2000/- from his pant hanging on the wall of his room.
15.PW3 in his examination in chief stated that one among the three accused persons had slapped him and other associate put Katta on his chest and thereafter they removed Rs1500/- from a gullak and the person who was having Ustra/razor had caused injuries to him on his ear with the Ustra/razor. But on perusal of the statement Ex.PW 3/A it is no where recorded that one of the co-accused slapped him.
24 25 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
16.PW4 is the doctor who medically examined PW.1 Ram Niwas and PW3 Amar Pal.
17.PW5 is the duty officer who proved the FIR Ex.PW 5/A being recorded by him.
18.PW6 corroborated the testimony of PW.4 as he took the injured persons to GTB Hospital for medical examination of the injured.
19.PW6A, PW10 and PW11 all are the police officials and they all deposed and investigated only on the testimony of complainant (PW1). PW6A has submitted that IO took the search of the accused and one country made Katta was recovered from the right side pocket of his trouser. On the other hand IO PW.11 in his examination in chief submitted that on the search of the accused one Desi Kata was recovered from the right side dub of his earing pant and this contradiction in itself is sufficient to demolish the case of the prosecution 25 26 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
20.PW.7 is again formal witness who recorded the DD No. 27 A and proved the same as Ex.PW 7/A.
21.PW8 conducted the TIP of the case property and PW9 conducted the TIP of the accused Naeem and in view of the testimony of aforesaid witnesses it has become crystal clear that no incriminating corroborative evidence with regard to the commission of offence is placed on record by the prosecution. It has also brought on record that initially accused Naeem was arrested in a case registered at P.S New Usman Pur u/sec. Arms Act vide FIR No.233/07 and in that case he made disclosure statement with regard to the commission of offence in the present case. No other material in view of the disclosure statement allegedly recorded by the IO is brought on record and only on the disclosure statement of the accused persons conviction cannot be based and requested for seeking acquittal of the accused persons.
22.On the contrary Ld. Addl.PP for state submitted that prosecution has placed sufficient incriminating corroborative evidence in support of its case.
23.In support of her contentions she stated that initially the case was 26 27 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
registered on the basis of statement of Ram Niwas (PW1) and in his statement he has specifically stated that on 5/1/07 when he was present in his room at first floor of his house at about 9.30 P.M someone knocked the door of his rom and he opened the door, three persons entered in his room, two of them were having country made katta with them and one was having Ustra/razor with them. One of them put the katta on his chest and demanded Rs.5000/- and when he refused to pay the said amount thereafter one of the co-accused had removed Rs.2000/- from his pant which was hanging on the wall and that person who removed Rs.2000/- from his pant was not present in the court as he admittedly could not be arrested. He correctly identified the other co-accused who pointed out the Katta on his chest as Javed and other associate who removed ear rings from his wife as Naem. He specifically stated that accused Javed while leaving his room landed a country made katta butt blow on his head as a result of which he received injuries on his head. The factum of receiving the injuries on his head by butt blow is proved by PW.4 Dr. Sidharath vide MLC Ex.PW 4/B. In the MLC it is mentioned that on 6/1/07 at about 12.15 a.m injured Ram Naresh (PW1) was brought to GTB Hospital by Const. Khoobi Ram. It is also opined that on his examination he found clean 27 28 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
lacerated wound 1.00 x 0.5 cm with no active bleeding which clearly goes to show that PW.1 received injuries in the hands of the accused Javed on the day of incident. Accused has been duly identified by him as well as by PW.2 Ms. Mala w/o Ram Naresh and PW 3 Amar Pal. The factum of presence of both the accused at the spot is further corroborated by PW.3 Amar Pal who specifically stated that on 5/1/07 at about 9.30 p.m he was present in his rom. Main door of the house was lying opened, three persons entered into his house, two of them were holding country made kata and one was having ustra /razor. They demanded Rs.2000/- from him and when he shown his inability to make the payment, one of those accused slapped him. Other associate had put katta on his chest and removed Rs.1500/- from gullak. He further stated that the person who was having Ustra/razor had caused injuries on his ear. On receiving injuries he raised alarm on which his neighbourer namely Pappu reached there and open the door from out side. Out of three persons he identified two accused persons in the court. The factum of receiving injuries on his ear is further proved by PW.4 Dr. Sidharath who has stated that on 6/1/07 at about 12.15 a.m PW.3 Amar Pal aged 20 years was brought to GTB Hospital for his medical examination by Const. Khoobi Ram and on 28 29 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
examination following injuries were noticed:
i. One incised wound in the left Pina 0.5 x 01.cm.
MLC Ex.PW. 4/A proved by PW. 4 Dr. Sidharath and this fact is further proved by PW.1 Ram naresh, PW.2 Ms. Mala w/o Ram Naresh(injured/PW.1) and PW.3 Amar Pal and all have rightly identified the accused persons in the court.
24.The factum of removal of the ear rings from the person of Ms. Mala/ PW.2 is also proved by PW.1 Ram Naresh/ Husband of PW.2. TIP of the case property i.e pair of ear rings was got done by PW.8. Ld. MM and during TIP proceedings Ex.PW.2/A, she correctly identified the case property which was taken away from her possession by the accused persons on the day of incident.
25.The factum of refusal to join in the TIP proceedings by accused Naeem is also proved by PW.9 vide his proceedings Ex.PW 9/A wherein accused refused to join the TIP therefore, adverse inference may also be drawn against him on account of the said refusal.
29 30 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
26.The factum of registration of the case vide FIR No. 12/07 is proved by PW.5 H.C Pargesh Kumar and the FIR is Ex.PW 5/A bearing his signatures at point A. The factum of taking both the injured to GTB hospital is proved by PW.6 and same fact is mentioned on MLC of both the injured PW.2 Ms. Mala and PW.3 Amar Pal that they were taken to GTB hospital by PW.6 Khoobi Ram and this fact is proved by PW.4 Dr. Sidharath. PW.6 also corroborated the factum of preparing the rukka and handing over the same to him for registration of the case. This fact is corroborated by PW.5 H.C Pargesh.
27.PW.6A Const. Pardeep joined the investigation with the IO and he corroborated the factum of joining the investigation and the proceedings conducted by the IO such as a country made Katta was recovered from the right side dub of his trouser. Preparing of sketch of Arms Ex.PW.6/A, seizure memo Ex.PW 6/B, pointing out memo Ex.PW 6/C and the site plan already Ex.PW 1/B are also proved by him.
28.The factum of regarding of disclosure statement of the accused Ex.PW 6/D, recovery of Kundal at the instance of Naeem from drawer of dressing table kept in the jhuggi and Naeem in the area of Seelam Pur vide memo Ex.PW 6/E, arrest and personal search of the accused vide memo Ex.PW 30 31 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
6/E and F are also proved. He also identified the case property Ex.P.1, Ex.P.2 and Ex.P10/P1. The factum of receiving of information on 5/1/07 vide DD No. 27A is proved by PW.7 H.C Kamal Singh. The photo copy of entries in the register are Ex.PW.7/A (OSR).
29.PW.10 again is a witness who joined the investigation with the IO.
30.PW.11 is the investigating officer of this case and corroborated testimonies of PWs as well as the factum of recording of statement of all the witnesses.
31.PW.12 proved the factum of granting sanction 39 of the Arms Act by the then Ld. DCP vide order Ex.PW 22/A.
32.PW.13 proved that on 12/6/07 accused Javed @ Bhura was arrested in a case u/sec. 25 of Arms Act registered at P.S New Usman Pur vide FIR No. 233/07 and during investigation of that case accused made a disclosure statement confessing therein to commit the offence in the present case and on the basis of disclosure statement made matter was further investigated by him, the disclosure statement Ex.PW 13/A, arrest memo 31 32 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
Ex.PW 13/B and personal search memo ExPW 13/C were also prepared by him. He also corroborated the fact that accused pointed out the place of incident and pointing out memo is prepared which is Ex.PW 13/D. He also corroborated the factum of obtaining sanction u/sec. 39 of Arms Act. He also proved that he had obtained the report of CFSL, same is Ex.PW 13/E.
33.In view of the aforesaid testimonies of witnesses it has become crystal clear that prosecution succeeded in brining on record unbreakable chain of circumstances against the accused persons. It is further submitted that all the eye witnesses PW.1,PW2 and PW3 have also placed sufficient corroborative evidence against the accused persons and they all have identified the accused in the court.
34.Ld. Addl. PP for the state further submitted that contradictions and confrontation which has been discussed by Ld. counsel for the accused are not of serious nature and are not sufficient to demolish the case of the prosecution and she also placed a reliance on a decided case reported as VISHWA NATH VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 2006 IV AD (CRL.)(DHC) 215" wherein it is observed as under:
32 33
FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
"The small, minor and insignificant contradictions, human memory is vicissitudinary. Police officers have to work day in and day out. It is very difficult for them to keep in mind all minute details after expiry of so much time. In this case the incident had taken place on 2.4.99 and the statement of witnesses were recorded on 21.7.00 and 31.7.00."
Ld. Addl. PP also placed her reliance on another decided case cited as "STATE OF U.P, VS HARI MOHAN & ORS. AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 142" wherein it is observed as under:
"The investigation which is defective in nature- cannot be made a basis for acquitting accused- More so when a case is made out against all or any one of the accused."
35.In such circumstances it has become crystal clear that prosecution succeeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt and requested for conviction of the accused persons under the offence as alleged against them.
33 34 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
36.I also placed reliance on the provision of section 394 & 397 IPC which reads thus:
SECTION 394:
"If any person, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery, voluntarily causes hurt, such person and any other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
SECTION 397:
"If, at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any person, the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years."
37.In the present case tt has come on record that accused at the time of 34 35 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
commission of offence two accused were having country made katta and one was having Ustra in their hands. It has also brought on record that at the time of leaving the place of incident, one of the co-accused landed a Ustra blow on the ear of PW3 and another co-accused landed a country made Katta blow on the head of PW.1/complainant. In such circumstances it is established that the prosecution succeeded in placing on record all the essential ingredients to attract the provision of Sec. 394/397 IPC
38.After hearing the arguments on behalf of Ld. counsel for both the parties I carefully perused the evidence adduced by the prosecution as well as the observations given by the Lordship I am of the considered view that following facts are established :
i). PW.1 is complainant in this case has specifically stated that three persons entered in his house on 5/1/07 at about 9.30 P.M and two of them were having katta with them and one was having Ustra/razor. One of them put katta on his chest and demanded Rs.5000/- from him. When he refused to make payment , one of accused has taken Rs.2000/- from his pant which was hanging on wall of his room.35 36
FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
The person who had taken Rs.2000/- could not be arrested and was not even identified by him but PW.1 identified the accused Javed and Naeem. It is further proved that other associate/ Naeem(correctly identified) had taken ear rings from his wife and accused Javed also hit the butt of the Katta on his head and this fact is proved by PW.4 Dr. Sidharath who medically examined injured on the day of incident. It is also proved that he was taken to GTB hospital by Ct. Khoobi Ram and this fact was mentioned in the MLC which clearly goes to show that accused Javed and Naeem entered on the first floor of the house of PW.1 Ram Niwas and committed aforesaid offence and this fact is duly proved by PW.2, wife of PW.1 and PW.3 Amar Pal/ tenant of PW.1 which clearly goes to show that accused Javed and Naeem along with their other associates (not arrest) entered into the house of PW.1,PW.2 and PW3, caused injuries on the head of PW.1 and on ear (Pinna) of PW.3 and also removed golden ear rings from the possession of PW.2 Ms. Mala wife of Ram Niwas/PW.1.
ii) Accused Naeem was arrested on 16/1/07 at the instance of secret information and on his search one country made katta was recovered and this fact is duly proved by the police officials who were present with the IO. 36 37 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
Ear rings belonging to PW.2 Ms. Mala were also recovered at the instance of Naeem accused from the drawer of his dressing table kept in his house at New Seelam Pur and these Kundals/ ear rings have been duly identified by PW.2 during TIP proceedings conducted by PW.8 Ld. MM.
39.Therefore, it is established that recovery of ear rings were effected on the basis of disclosure statement made by accused Naeem and is proved against him. Both the accused were duly identified by public witnesses as well as by the police officials. No evidence in rebuttal to the testimony of public witnesses as well as police officials are brought on record except the minor contradictions and confrontations allegedly disclosed by the Ld. counsel for the accused during the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and in view of the observations given by their Lordship in the decided cases discussed above, these contradictions and confrontations are not sufficient to demolish the case of the prosecution.
40.In view of the aforesaid discussion and taking into consideration the evidence adduced by the prosecution and the facts and circumstances under which the offence was committed, I am of the considered view that 37 38 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
prosecution succeeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused persons therefore, I hold both the accused namely Naeem and Javed @ Bhura guilty for the offence u/sec. 394/397/34 IPC. Let both the convicts be heard on the quantum of sentence.
(B.S. CHUMBAK) ASJ-3/North East District KKD/Delhi Announced in the open court Delhi Dt. 11th day of March 2010.
38 39 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
FIR NO. 12/07
PS NEW USMAN PURI 11.3.2010 Present: Ms. Neelam Narang Ld. Addl. PP for state.
Both the accused are produced from J/C. Vide separate detailed judgment of today accused Naeem and Javed @Bhura hold guilty for the offence u/s 394/397/34 IPC. Let they be heard on the point of sentence on 17.3.2010.
(B.S. CHUMBAK) ASJ-3/NE DISTRICT DELHI/11.3.2010 17.3.2010 Present: Ms. Neelam Narang Ld. Addl. PP for state.
Both the convicts produced from J/C. Arguments on the point of sentence heard.
After hearing arguments I sentenced both the convicts for a term of Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- each and in default of payment of fine they both shall further undergo SI for six months for the offence u/s 394/34 IPC. Both the convicts shall also be sentenced for a term of Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- each and in default of payment of fine they both shall further undergo SI for six months for the offence u/s 397/34IPC. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. Fine not paid.
Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C shall be given to the convicts as per law. Copy of the judgment and this order be given to the convicts free of cost. File be consigned to the Record Room.
(B.S. CHUMBAK) ASJ-3/NE DISTRICT DELHI/17.3.2010 39 40 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
IN THE COURT OF SH. B.S. CHUMBAK: ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-3(North East): KARKARDOOMA : DELHI SC No. 48/09 FIR NO.:12/07 PS New Usman Pur State Vs. Naeem etc. 17.3.2010 ORDER ON SENTENCE
1. I have heard the arguments on behalf of Ld. Addl. P.P for State as well as on behalf of Ld. Counsel for the convict on the quantum of sentence.
2. Ld. Counsel for the convicts submitted that convicts are young persons aged about 22 and 23 years respectively. Convict Naeem has to look after his old aged widow mother who is suffering from various ailments, his elder brother who is deaf and dumb and his younger sister who is marriageable age and except him no other male member is bread earner in his family. Ld. counsel for convict Javed @ Bhura has pleaded that convict Javed @ Bhura to look after his old aged widow mother who is suffering from various ailments, and his four sisters and except him no other male member is bread earner in his family.
3. It is further pleaded that both the convicts are not the previous convict and the conduct of both the convicts during the whole trial remain good and no 40 41 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
any sort of complaint were brought on record by the Jail Authority and considering the young age of convicts, requested for releasing them on probation of good conduct as provided u/sec. 3 and 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act r/w Sec. 360 Cr.P.C., or to take lenient view at the time of awarding sentence.
4. On the contrary Ld. Addl. P.P for state argued that all the public witnesses who had seen the incident with their own eyes has specifically deposed against the convicts and identified them in the court. The convicts also failed to place on record any explanation to the effect that they were falsely implicated in the present case by the public witnesses. In such circumstances it cannot be said that convicts have become entitled for taking lenient on the point of sentence and requested for awarding maximum sentence.
5. Ld. Addl. PP for state also placed her reliance on a decided case cited as "
State of Punjab Vs Rakesh Kumar, 2009 Crl. L. J 396" wherein it is observed as under:
"Protection of society and stamping out criminal proclivity must be the object of law which must e achieved by imposing appropriate sentence. Therefore, law as a cornerstone of the edifice of "order" should meet challenges confronting the society. In operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix. By deft modulation sentencing process be stern where it 41 42 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
should be, and tempered with mercy where it warrants to be. The facts and given circumstances in each case, the nature of the crime, the manner in which it was planned and committed, the motive for commission of the crime, the conduct of the accused, the nature of weapons used and all other attending circumstances are relevant facts which would enter into the area of consideration. Undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law and society could not long endure under such serious threats."
6. Ld. Addl. PP for the state further pleaded that at the time of committing robbery the offenders used deadly weapon i.e country made Katta and an Ustra/Razor and also attempted to cause grievous hurt by landing a country made Katta Butt blow on the head of complainant and other co- accused landed an Ustra/razor blow on the ear of PW.3. In such circumstance the offenders shall not be punished for the term of imprisonment less than seven years and the plea of taking lenient view at the time of awarding sentence, is not tenable in law and is liable to be declined.
7. In view of the contentions of Ld. Counsel for both the parties and Addl. PP for state I have gone through the observations given by their lordships in the aforesaid decided case and the circumstances under which the offence was committed and if of the considered view that awarding of lesser sentence than the minimum sentence as provided u/sec. 397 IPC would 42 43 FIR NO.:12/07, PS NEW USMAN PUR, U/SEC. 394/397/34 & 25 ARMS ACT IPC ST VS. NAEEM ETC.
not serve the purpose. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the contention of Ld. Counsel for convicts for releasing both the convicts on probation is declined.
8. Accordingly I hereby sentenced both the convicts for a term of Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- each and in default of payment of fine they both shall further undergo SI for six months for the offence u/s 394/34 IPC. Both the convicts shall be sentenced for a term of Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- each and in default of payment of fine they both shall further undergo SI for six months for the offence u/s 397/34IPC. Both the sentence shall run concurrently. Fine not paid.
9. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C shall be given to the convicts as per law. Copy of the judgment and this order be given to the convict free of cost. File be consigned to the Record Room.
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT (B.S. CHUMBAK)
DATED Dt. 17th March 2010 ASJ-3 (North-East) KKD
DELHI
43