Delhi District Court
State vs Sachin@Kallu on 26 September, 2023
IN THE COURT OF SH. ABHINAV AHLAWAT
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-09 (SOUTH-WEST)
DWARKA COURTS: DELHI
State Vs. : Sachin @ Kallu
FIR No : 163/2021
U/s : 229A IPC
P.S. : Jafarpur Kalan
1. CNR No. of the Case : DLSW020582142021
2. Date of commission of offence : 22.10.2021
3. Date of institution of the case : 02.12.2021
: Ms. Surbhi, Ld.
4. Name of the complainant
Metropolitan Magistrate
5. Name of accused, parentage & : 1. Sachin @ Kallu
address S/o Surat Singh
R/o VPO Dhansa
New Delhi.
2. Ravinder
S/o Amarjeet
R/o VPO Galibpur,
Jafarpur Kalan, Delhi.
6. Offence complained of : 229A IPC
7. Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
8. Final order : Acquitted
9. Date of final order : 26.09.2023
Argued by:- Mr. Vishv Jeet Yadav, Ld. APP for the State
Mr. Dinesh Mudgil, Ld. Counsel for accused
Ravinder.
Mr. Rohit Grewal, Ld. Counsel for accused
Sachin.
FIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 1 of 7 Abhinav by
Digitally signed
Abhinav
Ahlawat
Ahlawat 15:33:37
Date: 2023.09.26
+0530
JUDGMENT
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
FACTUAL MATRIX-
1. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that on 22.10.2021, the accused failed to appear before the Court being bound down by his bail bonds furnished in FIR no.31/18 and thereby he violated the terms of bail bonds furnished by him and thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 229A of IPC for which FIR no.163/2021 was registered at the police station Jafarpur Kalan, New Delhi.
INVESTIGATION AND APPEARANCE OF ACCUSED
2. After registration of the FIR, the Investigating Officer (hereinafter, "IO") undertook investigation and on culmination of the same, the chargesheet against the accused was filed. The Ld. Predecessor of this court took the cognizance against the accused and summons were issued to the accused. On his appearance, a copy of the chargesheet was supplied to the accused in terms of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, "CrPC"). On finding a prima facie case against the accused, charge under Section 229A of IPC was framed against the accused on 14.03.2022. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
3. During the trial, prosecution led the following oral and documentary evidence against the accused to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt:-
Digitally signedFIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 2 of 7 by Abhinav Abhinav Ahlawat Ahlawat Date:
2023.09.26 15:33:48 +0530 ORAL EVIDENCE PW-1 SI Banwari Lal PW-2 Deep Narain Chaudhary DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Ex.PW1/A1 Tehrir Ex.PW1/A Notice u/S 41A Cr. P. C. Ex.PW1/B Notice u/S 41A Cr. P. C. Ex.PW1/C Notice u/S 41A Cr. P. C. Ex.PW1/D Notice u/S 41A Cr. P. C. Ex.PW2/A Certified copy of order dated 22.10.2021 Ex.PW2/B Order dated 09.11.2021
4. To prove its case, prosecution examined the following witnesses, the same are as follows.
5. PW1 SI Banwari Lal deposed that on 22.10.2021, upon the order of Ms. Surbhi, Ld. MM, Dwarka Courts, the present FIR was lodged and its investigation was handed over to him and he proved tehrir as Ex.PW1/A1 and during investigation, he came to know that the accused Ravinder had already been arrested on NBW's issued by the Court and he had already been produced before the Court and was released on court bail. The NBWs issued against accused Sachin @ Kalu had already been stayed by the Hon'ble Sessions Court and thereafter, he served notices U/s 41A Cr.PC upon both the accused persons Ex.PW1/A, Ex.PW1/B, Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D. The accused persons were interrogated and thereafter released. As the investigation had already been completed, he prepared the chargesheet and presented the same before the Court. In his crossÂexamination, he stated that he had merely obeyed order of the Hon'ble Court and both the accused persons joined the investigation and gave full cooperation to him during the investigation. He stated that the accused persons had informed him that NBWs issued by the Digitally signed FIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 3 of 7 Abhinav by Abhinav Ahlawat Ahlawat 15:33:58 Date: 2023.09.26 +0530 Court against them had already been cancelled in FIR no.31/2018. He had not collected the copy of order of the Hon'ble Sessions Court and accused persons had already appeared before the Court prior to filling of the present chargesheet.
6. PW2 Deep Narain Chaudhary, Ahlmad in the Court of Ld. Predecessor proved the certified copy of the order dated 22.10.2021 as Ex.PW2/A and order dated 09.11.2021 as Ex.PW2/B.
7. No other PW was left to be examined; hence, PE was closed.
STATEMENT OF THE ACCUSED AND DEFENCE EVIDENCE
8. Thereafter, before the start of defence evidence in order to allow the accused persons to personally explain the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against them, the statements of the accused persons were recorded on 25.02.2023 without oath under section 281 r/w 313 Cr. P. C., wherein they have stated that the proceedings were conducted through VC and they were standing outside the Court, however, their counsel asked them to not to come inside the Court and that is why NBWs were issued against them. Accused persons further stated that they do not want to lead defence evidence.
FINAL ARGUMENTS Digitally signed FIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 4 of 7 by Abhinav Abhinav Ahlawat Ahlawat Date:
2023.09.26 15:34:31 +0530
9. I have heard the Ld. APP for the State and Ld. Counsel for the accused persons at length. I have also given my thoughtful consideration to the material appearing on record.
10. It is argued by the Ld. APP for the State that all the ingredients of the offence are fulfilled in the present case. He has argued that prosecution witnesses have categorically deposed about the commission of offence and there is no ground to disbelieve their testimony. He further contends that the documentary evidence has proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt. As such, it is prayed that the accused persons be punished for the said offences.
11. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the accused persons has argued that the State has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The Ld. Counsel further argued that the entire case of the prosecution is false and fabricated and the same is evident from the material inconsistencies and contradictions borne out from the material on record. It is argued that the prosecution has failed to discharge the burden cast upon it. As such, it is prayed that the accused persons be acquitted for the said offence.
INGREDIENTS OF THE OFFENCE
12. Provision of section 229A IPC is as follows:
229A. Failure by person released on bail or bond to appear in court. -- Whoever, having been charged with an offence and released on bail or on bond without sureties, fails without sufficient cause (the burden of proving which shall lie upon him), to appear in court in accordance with the terms of the bail or bond, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.Digitally signed by Abhinav
FIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 5 of 7 Abhinav Ahlawat Ahlawat Date:
2023.09.26 15:34:41 +0530 Explanation. --The punishment under this section is-
(a) in addition to the punishment to which the offender would be liable on a conviction for the offence with which he has been charged; and
(b) without prejudice to the power of the court to order forfeiture of the bond.
The main objective of insertion of section 229A in the Indian Penal Code by way of criminal amendment act 2005 was to ensure the presence of accused who had been charged and that the case is not unnecessarily delayed due to non-appearance of the accused person.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE
13. A careful perusal of Section 229A of the IPC would show that it is applicable where the accused "has been charged for an offence"
and who fails to appear on date fixed for hearing without sufficient cause wherein the burden of proving the same shall be on the accused person.
14. Ld counsel for accused has argued that the offence under section 229A IPC is not applicable in the present case and has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court as passed in Megha Ram Jat Vs State of Rajasthan Crl.MP 4639/2019. Counsel for accused submitted that as per the above stated judgment section 229A IPC would be committed only if accused who has been released on bail upon his furnishing only a personal bond remains absent before the trial court on the scheduled date.
15. In the instant case before us, before the registration of the present case against the accused, he was summoned as an accused in case Digitally signed FIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 6 of 7 Abhinav by Abhinav Ahlawat Ahlawat 15:34:51 Date: 2023.09.26 +0530 FIR no. 31 of 2018 under section 186/353/323/34 IPC registered at PS Jaffarpur Kallan. Perusal of the said case file (which is also pending before the undersigned by the case titled as State vs Sachin @kallu and others) reveals that the charge against the accused persons were framed on 14.03.2022 whereas due to non- appearance of the accused direction for registration of case were issued against. the accused Sachin and Ravinder u/s 229A IPC on 22.10.2021.
16. Therefore, it is clear that the charges were framed against the accused persons after the directions were issued for registration of case under section 229 A IPC. In view of the above, prosecution against the accused persons on the basis of the allegation cannot be sustained and the ingredients of the section 229A IPC are not made out.
CONCLUSION
17. Upshot of the above discussion is that the case against the accused persons under section 229A IPC are not made out and accordingly, both accused persons are acquitted of the offence punishable under section 229A IPC.
Announced in the open court Abhinav by Digitally signed Abhinav Ahlawat on 26.09.2023 in the presence Ahlawat 15:35:02 Date: 2023.09.26 +0530 of the accused. (Abhinav Ahlawat) Metropolitan Magistrate-09, Dwarka, Delhi/26.09.2023
Note:- This judgment contains 7 pages and each page has been signed by me. Abhinav Digitally signed by Abhinav Ahlawat Ahlawat Date: 2023.09.26 15:35:11 +0530 (Abhinav Ahlawat) Metropolitan Magistrate-09, Dwarka, Delhi/26.09.2023 FIR No.163/2021, PS Jafarpur Kalan State vs. Sachin @ Kallu etc. Page 7 of 7