Delhi District Court
State vs Salman @ Dhandhad on 19 May, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SHRI ARVIND BANSAL
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 05 (SHAHDARA)
KARKARDOOMA COURTS : DELHI
DLSH01-007503-2021
SC No. 242/2021
FIR No.: 606/2019
U/s 394/397/411 IPC
Police Station: Welcome
STATE
Versus
Salman @ Dhandhad
S/o Rahis
R/o 573/9, Gali No. 6,
Noor E-Ilahi, Vijay Park,
Maujpur, Delhi
.... Accused
(a) Date of Institution: 20.02.2020
(b) Date of Offence: 22.11.2019
(c) Plea of accused: Pleaded not guilty & claimed
trial
(d) Argument heard &
reserved for order: 19.05.2025
(e) Final Order: Acquitted.
(f) Date of Judgment: 19.05.2025
JUDGMENT
1. The criminal law machinery was set into motion on 22.11.2019 when on receipt of DD no. 43A, IO/SI Amit Bhardwaj alongwith Ct. Naresh reached the spot i.e. in front of Ex. Taj Hotel, Seelampur, Delhi where they came to know that injured had been Digitally SC No. 242/2021 signed by STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND Police Station: Welcome ARVIND BANSAL Page No. 1 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:13:23 +0530 shifted to JPC hospital. Thereafter, they reached JPC Hospital, collected MLC no. 11965 of injured/victim Aqib with alleged history of physical assault near garbage dumping place near Ex. Taj Hotel by 'unknown' at 10:00 PM. Another MLC No. 11966 of an 'unknown' (accused Salman @ Dhandhad) was also collected with alleged history of 'beaten by public persons while running'. Injured/complainant was found under treatment in the hospital and his statement was recorded.
One Imaam Akhlakh also met the IO in the hospital and handed over to him a robbed mobile make MI Redmi 4A and one mobile make Vivo Golden color. He stated that mobile make MI Redmi 4A belonged to him and was robbed by the accused and mobile make Vivo Golden Color was recovered from the possession of accused.
Later on, accused Salman @ Dhandhad was arrested in the present case.
2. Accused Salman @ Dhandhad is facing trial having been charged for the offence u/s 394/397/411. The brief facts, shorn off unnecessary details, leading to the initiation of criminal proceedings against the accused may be summed up as under:-
2.1 On 22.11.2019 at about 9.45 PM at Near Kudedan Near Ex. Taj Hotel, Seelampur, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS Welcome, accused Salman @ Dhandhad alongwith co-accused Suhail (since not arrested), in furtherance of their common intention committed robbery of mobile phone make Panasonic having sim of Idea bearing no. 9891420401 and Rs.7,000/- from SC No. 242/2021 Digitally STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD signed by FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND Police Station: Welcome Page No. 2 of 19 ARVIND BANSAL BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:13:37 +0530 complainant/injured Aakib and also committed robbery of mobile phone make Redmi 4A, bearing IMEI no. 86540403701004 golden colour and Rs.2,000/- from other person namely Mohd. Aklakh, while they were traveling in an auto alongwith accused persons and at the time of the committing such robbery, accused Salman @ Dhandhad caused hurt on left side neck of the complainant by using knife and they also beat the complainant/injured Aakib and other person namely Mohd. Aklakh. The accused Salman @ Dhandhad was apprehended at the spot with the assistance of public persons and he was found in possession of the robbed mobile phone make Redmi 4A baring IMEI no. 86540403701004 golden colour of person namely Mohd. Aklakh.
2.2 On the statement of complainant, FIR u/s 394/397/411/34 IPC was registered against the accused. During investigation, he was arrested and his personal search memo and arrest memo were prepared. The co-accused Suhail remained untraced.
3. After completion of investigation, chargesheet u/s 173 Cr.P.C was filed by IO on 20.02.2020 u/s 394/397/411/34 IPC. The Court took cognizance of the offence and proceeded against the accused. The case file was committed to Ld. Court of Sessions vide order dated 14.09.2021 after completion of necessary legal formalities u/s 207 Cr.P.C. Upon receipt of chargesheet pursuant to order of learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Shahdara, matter was fixed for hearing on point of Charge.
ARVIND SC No. 242/2021 STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD FIR No. 606/2019 BANSAL Police Station: Welcome Page No. 3 of 19 Digitally signed by ARVIND BANSAL Date: 2025.05.19 16:13:44 +0530 3.1 After hearing arguments on charge on 15.09.2021, Charge under Section 394/397/411/34 IPC was framed against accused Salman @ Dhandhad and explained to him in vernacular to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Prosecution Evidence :-
4. In support of its case, prosecution produced and examined ten witnesses.
4.1 PW-1 Aakib Ali (complainant/victim) deposed that about two years ago (from 01.11.2021 i.e. date of deposition), he and Imam Mohd. Ikhlaq took an auto from Ambedkar College for going to Seelampur. It was little before 10 PM. Two passengers were already sitting in the said auto and they got down on the way. At about 9.45 pm, near Jafrabad Metro station, two other boys boarded the said auto. The auto started moving further. The said two boys got the auto stopped near kudedaan, near Taj Hotel. Both boys took out knives. One of the boys put the knife on his neck and the other boy brandished the knife to Mohd. Ikhlaq. The said boy demanded money from him and he gave him about Rs.7000-7500/- and mobile make Panasonic to him. The other boy demanded money from Imam Mohd. Ikhlaq. He objected to the same and asked them not to demand money from Imam as he had brought Imam for getting a jacket purchased for him.
In the meantime, the boy who had put knife on his neck stabbed the same on the left side of his neck. Blood started oozing out from his neck. Thereafter, Imam Mohd. Ikhlaq gave money and Digitally SC No. 242/2021 signed by STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND Police Station: Welcome ARVIND BANSAL Page No. 4 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:13:51 +0530 mobile phone to the other boy. Accused persons started running away from there. Ikhlaq and public persons chased them. One boy was caught by Ikhlaq and public persons. He was beaten by public persons. Other boy managed to escape from there.
After some time, accused was taken to PS, and he was taken to the Jagparvesh Hospital where he was medically examined. Thereafter he went back to the PS. IO recorded his statement Ex- PW1/A. During investigation, he handed over the copy of mobile receipt Ex.PW1/B and showed the place of incident to IO. IO prepared the site plan Ex.PW1/C at his instance.
During deposition, PW-1 stated that he could not identify the boy who had robbed him and inflicted injuries on his person.
Witness was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for the State wherein he admitted that his mobile phone number was 9891420401. He further admitted that other boy had robbed the mobile phone make Redmi 4A and Rs.2,000/- from Imam Mohd. Ikhlaq. He and Mohd. Ikhlaq were sitting on the back side of the auto and both boys were sitting in the front side. He admitted date of incident to be 22.11.2019.
Witness denied the other suggestions put forth by Ld. Addl. PP for the State and was thus, confronted with his complaint Ex.PW-1/A and Statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. PW-1/Mark X. Witness was cross-examined.
ARVIND SC No. 242/2021 STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD BANSAL FIR No. 606/2019 Police Station: Welcome Digitally signed by Page No. 5 of 19 ARVIND BANSAL Date: 2025.05.19 16:13:59 +0530 4.2 PW-2 Mohd. Akhlakh (the other victim) deposed that he knew Akib who used to work in a tyre shop. On 22.11.2019, at about 9.30 pm, he along with Akib took an auto from Ambedkar College for going to Gandhi market for purchase of a jacket. The other two passengers were already in the auto and after some distance, they de-boarded. Two other passengers also boarded the said auto. Thereafter, the auto proceeded towards the Welcome pulia near Garbage spot. One person took out a knife and put the same on the neck of Akib and robbed mobile phone of Akib and Rs. 7000/-
from him. Another person was also standing by the side of auto so that he could not get down from the auto. He was also threatening him. The person who was carrying knife, robbed his mobile phone and Rs. 2000/-. After committing the said incident, they ran away from there.
They raised alarm and followed them. Some public persons apprehended one of the above said assailants. The public persons gave beatings to the said assailant. His mobile phone and the mobile phone of Akib were recovered from the said person. Police also reached there. Thereafter, police took him, Akib and the said apprehended person to the hospital. Akib was medically examined by the doctor in the hospital as he had received injury due to the knife put on his neck by the assailant. Thereafter, police took him and Akib to the PS. Both recovered mobile phones were kept by the police. Police obtained my signatures on some document and thereafter, they were released from the PS. Witness correctly identified the phone make Redmi Ex.P-1 to be the mobile which was robbed and recovered from the Digitally SC No. 242/2021 signed by STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND FIR No. 606/2019 Police Station: Welcome ARVIND BANSAL Page No. 6 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:14:07 +0530 above said apprehended person.
After being shown Vivo Golden Color mobile phone along with Vodafone sim no. 89911190185392357225 Ex.P-2, witness identified it to be the one recovered from the possession of the assailant/apprehended person. This mobile phone did not belong to any of the witnesses.
PW-2 submitted that he can not identify the assailant who had robbed them. On being shown accused Salman in the Court, witness stated that he was not same person who had robbed them.
Witness was cross-examined by Ld. Additional PP for the State and during said cross-examination he admitted that at about 9.45 pm, they reached near Welcome pulia near Garbage spot. He further admitted that the mobile phone of Akib was not recovered from the assailant. He also admitted that Vivo Golden Colour mobile phone was recovered from the pocket of the assailant. He admitted that he handed over his mobile phone and Vivo Golden Color mobile phone to the IO in the hospital. At about 10-10:15 pm, police officer reached at the spot.
The other suggestions put by Ld. Addl. PP for the State were denied by PW-2 and witness was thus, confronted with his statement PW2/Mark A. Witness correctly identified his signatures on the arrest memo Ex.PW-1/D and Ex.PW-1/E. Witness was cross-examined at the hands of Ld. Defence Counsel.
Digitally
signed by
SC No. 242/2021 ARVIND
STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND BANSAL
FIR No. 606/2019
Police Station: Welcome BANSAL Date:
Page No. 7 of 19 2025.05.19
16:14:13
+0530
4.3 PW-3 SI Ajab Singh (being the police witness i.e. Duty
officer/DD Writer) proved the DD no. 43A as Ex.PW-3/A vide which the information regarding stabbing incident near Ex. Taj Hotel, Seelampuri and injured being taken to JPC Hospital, was registered.
4.4 PW-4 SI Ombir Singh (being the police witness i.e. Duty officer) proved the copy of FIR as Ex.PW-4/A, endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW-4/B, Certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act qua the FIR as Ex.PW-4/C, and GD no. 4A dt. 23.11.2019 as Ex.PW-4/D vide which the fact of lodging FIR and departure of Ct.
Naresh was registered.
4.5 PW-5 HC Sanjeev (being the police witness i.e. Call receiver at CPCR Haiderpur) proved the PCR call Form having event ID No. 399354 as Ex.PW-5/A (duly verified by ACP CPCR) vide which the the address was disclosed as Ext. Taj hotel, Seelampur and incident was informed as "churri maar di hai, jisko lekar Jag Pravesh Hospital Shastri Park lekar aa gye hai, churri maarne wale ko pakad rakha hai, need police".
4.6 PW-6 Retd. SI Chatarpal Singh deposed that on 22/23.11.2019, at around 09:45 PM, they (PW-6 and PW-8 HC Sandeep) heard noise from the side of Ex Taj Hotel near PS and they rushed towards that direction. When they reached in front of Ex Taj Hotel, they saw that public persons had caught hold of one boy who was already beaten by the public and was having injuries. They also found complainant Akib and his friend Akhlakh at the spot.
SC No. 242/2021 Digitally
STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD signed by
FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND
Police Station: Welcome
Page No. 8 of 19 ARVIND BANSAL
BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19
16:14:19
+0530
On inquiry, it was found that the injured boy was escaping after committing robbery (alongwith one associate) with complainant Akib and his friend Akhlakh. He was caught by the public and was beaten, while his friend/associate escaped. They shifted that injured boy and complainant to Jag Pravesh Hospital through autorickshaw. Akhlakh i.e. friend of complainant also accompanied them to the hospital. Both the injured i.e. complainant and injured boy were admitted in the hospital.
Thereafter, IO/SI Amit Bhardwaj came in the hospital from PS Welcome. PW-6 handed over the MLCs of both complainant and that injured boy to the IO (identity of that injured boy was not known at that time). Witness pointed out towards accused Salman @ Dhandad and stated that he was the same injured boy who was caught by the public persons in the intervening night of 22/23.11.2019. Witness correctly identified the accused.
Witness was not cross-examined despite opportunity being given.
4.7 PW-7 HC Naresh was accompanying PW-10 SI Amit Bhardwaj during investigation and thus, for the sake of brevity, his deposition/testimony is not being re-produced here.
Witness was not cross-examined despite opportunity being given.
4.8 PW-8 HC Sandeep was accompanying PW-6 Retd. SI Chatarpal (the then ASI) during the investigation and to avoid repetition, his testimony is not being re-produced here. He correctly SC No. 242/2021 Digitally STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD signed by FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND Police Station: Welcome Page No. 9 of 19 ARVIND BANSAL BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:14:26 +0530 identified mobile make MI Redmi 4A color golden which was handed over by the complainant to the IO as Ex.P-1. He also correctly identified one mobile make Vivo , which was handed over by the complainant to the IO which belonged to accused as Ex.P-2. Witness correctly identified accused Salman.
Witness was cross-examined.
4.9 PW-9 HC Karamvir deposed that on 23.11.2019, on the asking of SI Amit, he went to Jag Pravesh Hospital. On reaching the hospital, he met SI Amit and Ct. Naresh and all of them took accused Salman to GTB Hospital by ambulance. SI Amit left him in the hospital for surveillance of accused Salman. On the next day i.e. 24.11.2019, SI Amit alongwith Ct. Naresh went to hospital. They all took the accused to police station. The accused was lodged by the IO in the lock-up. Witness correctly identified accused.
Witness was cross-examined.
4.10 PW-10 SI Amit Bhardwaj deposed that on 22.11.2019, on the receipt of DD No. 43A at about 11:05 PM from the duty officer, he alongwith Ct. Naresh (PW-7 HC Naresh) went to the spot i.e. in front of Ex-Taj Hotel, Seelampur. On inquiry from the locals, it was revealed that injured had been shifted to Jag Pravesh Chand Hospital by the police officials of PS Jafrabad.
Thereafter, they went to Jag Pravesh Chand Hospital where ASI Chattar Pal of PS Jafrabad met them who had admitted the injured in the hospital and collected the MLC. He collected the MLC No. 11965/19 of one Akib and MLC No. 11966/19 of one Digitally SC No. 242/2021 signed by STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND FIR No. 606/2019 Police Station: Welcome ARVIND BANSAL Page No. 10 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:14:33 +0530 'unknown male aged 28 years' from ASI Chattarpal. Both Akib and that 'unknown male' were injured and were admitted in the hospital and were under treatment. One Akhlakh i.e. friend of Akib was also present in the hospital. Both Akib and his friend pointed towards that unknown male and informed that he alongwith his associate had committed robbery of mobile phone and money from them after inflicting injury by knife/churri and public persons gave beatings to that unknown male while his friend escaped. That unknown boy was under the influence of alcohol and was also having injuries and was not in a position to get up. He was having injury on his head, so he was referred for further treatment to GTB hospital. He called Ct. Karamveer to Jag Pravesh Chand hospital and they shifted that unknown boy to GTB Hospital in ambulance. Ct. Naresh (PW-7 HC Naresh) also accompanied them.
After shifting accused from JPC Hospital to GTB Hospital, he alongwith Ct. Naresh (PW-7 HC Naresh) returned to JPC Hospital and Ct. Karamvir was left at GTB Hospital for observation of accused. They met complainant Akib who was already under treatment there. He inquired from the complainant about the incident and recorded his statement. Complainant Akib alongwith his friend Akhlak handed over one mobile phone make Redmi MI 4A (belonged to Akhlakh) to him stating that the said mobile was collected by Akhlakh from the accused after the incident while he was beaten by public persons. He seized the said mobile make Redmi MI 4A vide seizure memo Ex.PW-1/F. They also handed over one mobile make Vivo which belonged to accused and stated that the said mobile was obtained by them when accused was Digitally signed by SC No. 242/2021 ARVIND STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND BANSAL Police Station: Welcome Page No. 11 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:14:40 +0530 caught hold by the public persons. On the basis of statement of complainant, he prepared tehreer and handed over the same to Ct. Naresh (PW-7 HC Naresh) for getting the FIR registered. He went to PS and got the FIR registered.
After registration of FIR, PW-7 HC Naresh returned to Jag Pravesh Hospital and handed over the copy of FIR alongwith original tehreer to PW-10. Complainant was discharged from the hospital. Thereafter, he alongwith complainant reached the spot and he prepared the site plan Ex.PW-1/C at his instance. Next day, he alongwith Ct. Naresh went to GTB hospital where accused was under treatment. In the meantime, he directed complainant to reach GTB hospital alongwith Akhlakh and they accordingly came there. Complainant Akib and Akhlakh identified accused and stated that he gave injuries to him using a knife and snatched mobile phone from Akhlakh. He interrogated accused about the incident and arrested him vide arrest memo Ex.PW-1/D. Accused was personally searched vide memo memo Ex.PW-1/E. After discharge of accused from the GTB hospital, they took him to PS on the same day and kept him behind lockup and case property was deposited in Malkhana. He recorded the statement of witnesses namely Akib and Akhlakh at the hospital and of other witnesses in the PS. PW-10 further deposed that during investigation, he obtained the PC remand of accused for one day and searched for associate of accused and weapon of offence i.e. knife and the remaining case property i.e. one mobile phone and cash amount, however, all in vain. After completion of investigation, he prepared chargesheet and filed the same before the concerned Court.
Digitally
SC No. 242/2021 signed by
STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND
FIR No. 606/2019
Police Station: Welcome
ARVIND BANSAL
Page No. 12 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19
16:14:46
+0530
PW-10 SI Amit Bhardwaj correctly identified mobile make MI Redmi 4A color golden which was handed over by the complainant to the IO as Ex.P-1. He also correctly identified one mobile make Vivo having black back cover, front color white and back color golden, which was handed over by the complainant to the IO which belonged to accused as Ex.P-2. Witness correctly identified accused Salman.
5. Vide separate statement recorded u/s 294 R/w Section 313(1)(a) Cr.P.C., accused admitted the genuineness of MLC NO. 11965 dt. 22.11.2019 of injured Aqib as Ex.A-1 and MLC No. 11966 dt. 22.11.2019 of injured (U/K) Salman as Ex.A-2.
Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. :-
6. On completion of prosecution evidence, separate statement of accused Salman @ Dhandhad was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C whereby all the incriminating material/evidence available on record was put to him. He denied the prosecution case in its entirety and stated that on the day of incident, he was going to the house of his मामू situated at Seelampur market. He was crossing the road, suddenly the complainant Akib came there and pointed towards him while shouting चोर चोर. Public persons caught hold of him and started beating him. Thereafter, he was put on a hand-cart रे हड़ी and he fell unconscious. He had not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated by the complainant in connivance with police officials. Accused did not lead any defence evidence.
Digitally
signed by
SC No. 242/2021 ARVIND
STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD
FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND BANSAL
Police Station: Welcome
Page No. 13 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19
16:14:54
+0530
Final arguments and appreciation of evidence :-
7. Final arguments advanced by Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned Addl. PP for State and Ms. Nazma Taufiq, Ld. LAC for accused heard.
8. It is the argument of Learned Legal Aid Counsel that accused has been falsely implicated in the present case by police officials and the injured. It is argued that star witnesses PW-1/Complainant/victim Aakib Ali and PW-2/victim Mohd. Akhlakh disowned the case of prosecution qua the identity of accused. It is the argument that minor admissions by the witnesses during their cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State do not provide necessary corroboration to the version of prosecution. It is stated that PW-1 and PW-2 are unworthy of credit and can not be relied upon to hold the accused guilty of commission of any offence. It is the argument that prosecution could not prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and he deserved to be acquitted from the present case.
Per contra, it is argued by Ld. Addl PP for the State that PW-1 and PW-2 have not deviated from the version narrated by both of them to the police and are not unworthy of credit. It is argued that both the said witnesses deposed the entire incident and had turned hostile only qua the identity of accused.
Ld. Addl. PP for the State pressed upon one ordersheet of the Court of concerned Ld. MM dt. 23.12.2019 as Ex.PW-10/P-1 vide which the JC remand of accused was extended and during the hearing of said JC remand, accused had threatened IO/SI Amit Digitally SC No. 242/2021 STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD signed by FIR No. 606/2019 ARVIND Police Station: Welcome Page No. 14 of 19 ARVIND BANSAL BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:15:00 +0530 Bhardwaj to teach him a lesson and also abused him in the open Court. The concerned Ld. MM also recorded the conduct of accused in the said ordersheet. It is thus, argued that conduct of accused be taken into consideration for the fact that PW-1/Complainat/Victim and PW-3/Victim must have been threatened or influenced by the accused due to which, they turned hostile qua his identity.
9. Submissions heard. Available record carefully perused.
10. The prosecution seeks to prove the charged offences under Section 394/397/411 IPC against the accused on the strength of testimony of PW-1 Aakib Ali and PW-2 Mohd. Akhlakh alongwith testimony of PW-6 Retd. SI Chattarpal and PW-8 HC Sandeep.
An anxious consideration of the testimony of PW-1 Aakib Ali and PW-2 Mohd. Akhlakh would provide that although they both stood to their guns regarding the manner of commission of offence, both of them turned hostile to the case of prosecution qua the identity of accused. Both the witnesses deposed that they can not identify the person who robbed them or caused injury to PW-1 Akib. Attention of both the witnesses was drawn towards the accused present in the Court, however, they categorically stated that he was not the person who robbed them. Even during their cross- examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, no explanation was sought from any of the witnesses for the reason of their denial to identify the accused.
Digitally signed by ARVIND ARVIND BANSAL SC No. 242/2021 STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD BANSAL Date:
FIR No. 606/2019 2025.05.19
Police Station: Welcome
Page No. 15 of 19 16:15:06
+0530
Once the witness turned hostile qua the identity of accused, they were cross-examined at length by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. Both the witnesses denied that they both alongwith accused Salman were taken to JPC Hospital for treatment by the police officials or that they showed the accused to the IO in the hospital as one of the offenders. Both the witnesses also denied being called at the Hospital again on 23.11.2019 by IO and they identifying the accused Salman as the robber.
This raises a question mark over the apprehending of accused Salman as one of the offenders immediately after the happening of alleged incident, and the correct identification of accused by both the witnesses in the hospital.
11. In the opinion of this Court, the testimony of both the material witnesses/victims PW-1 and PW-2 is fatal to the case of prosecution and makes it fall short of the required standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt' to prove the charged offence of commission of offence of robbery by accused Salman and the use of knife by him while committing robbery. This observation of the Court is fortified by the fact that none of the eye witnesses corroborated the allegation of accused Salman either committing robbery of the mobile phone and cash or using knife for causing injury to PW-1 Akib or admission of the said accused in hospital in their presence. Both the witnesses also turned hostile qua the aspect of alleged recovery of robbed case property i.e. mobile phone from the possession of accused.
Digitally signed by ARVIND SC No. 242/2021 STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND BANSAL FIR No. 606/2019 BANSAL Date:
Police Station: Welcome 2025.05.19
Page No. 16 of 19 16:15:13
+0530
It is noteworthy that while accused Salman allegedly robbed PW-2 Akhlakh of his mobile make Redmi and Rs.2,000/- cash at the point of knife. It is the case of prosecution that as soon as both the robbers started fleeing away from the spot with the robbed articles, PW-2 chased them while some public persons assisted him. It is also the case that PW-2 and public persons caught hold of one of the offenders and the mobile phone of PW-2 was recovered from his possession. There is no explanation by the prosecution regarding the non-recovery of cash amount of Rs.2,000/- from accused Salman, if he was apprehended immediately after the commission of alleged offence. It is not the case of prosecution that accused Salman handed over the said cash amount to his co-accused, who managed to flee away. Infact, investigating agency could not recover the knife allegedly used by accused Salman to threaten PW-2 Akhlakh. The reason thereof eluded the case of prosecution. Such a failure of the investigating agency in making recovery either of the robbed cash amount or the weapon of offence provides corroboration to the defence of false implication of accused.
12. It is observed that despite comprehensive cross- examination of both the victims PW-1 and PW-2, prosecution could not extract the relevant and material particulars from the witnesses for proving the charged offence either of robbery or use of a knife or alleged recovery of robbed case property.
It would not be out of place to observe that PW-1 Aakib Ali and PW-2 Akhlakh Ali are the only prosecution witness who could prove the charged offence under Section 394/397/411 Digitally SC No. 242/2021 signed by STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND FIR No. 606/2019 Police Station: Welcome ARVIND BANSAL Page No. 17 of 19 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19 16:15:20 +0530 IPC against the accused. Further, GD no. 043A Ex.PW-3/A vide which criminal law machinery was set in motion, recorded only the fact of stabbing by knife and no incident of robbery was recorded. Further, the alleged incident took place at 09:45 PM and as per the testimony of eye witnesses, they were taken to hospital at about 10:40 PM i.e. the time mentioned in their respective MLCs. In contrast thereto, GD No. 43A Ex.PW-3A was registered at 11:05 PM. The reason of delay in recording of first GD entry regarding the information of commission of offence has not been recorded either in chargesheet or in the evidence of police officials recorded before the Court.
13. Having considered the whole evidence produced by prosecution, this Court is of the opinion that the allegations of commission of offence of robbery 'by accused' or the allegations of use of knife 'by accused' or the allegations of recovery of case property i.e. mobile phone of victim Mohd. Akhlakh, could not be proved due to the hostile testimony of the material witnesses as well as other contradictions in the case of prosecution.
14. In the light of discussion in the preceding paragraphs, Court is of the opinion that case of prosecution fell much short of the standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Further, suspicion, howsoever strong, can not be a substitute to the said standard to hold the accused guilty of the charged offence. The benefit of all the deficiencies in the case of prosecution as discussed above must percolate down to the accused.
Digitally
signed by
SC No. 242/2021 ARVIND
STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD ARVIND BANSAL
FIR No. 606/2019
Police Station: Welcome
BANSAL Date:
Page No. 18 of 19 2025.05.19
16:15:27
+0530
15. Accordingly, accused Salman @ Dhandhad S/o Rahis stand acquitted of the offence under Section 394/397/411 IPC,
16. File be consigned to record room.
Digitally
signed by
ARVIND
Dictated and announced in the open ARVIND BANSAL
Court on 19.05.2025 BANSAL Date:
2025.05.19
16:15:43
+0530
(ARVIND BANSAL)
Additional Sessions Judge-05 (Shahdara) Karkardooka Courts, Delhi SC No. 242/2021 STATE VS. SALMAN @ DHANDHAD FIR No. 606/2019 Police Station: Welcome Page No. 19 of 19