Delhi District Court
State vs 1. Alam @ Saleem (On Bail) on 30 June, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJAY SHARMA-II : ADDL. SESSIONS
JUDGE-03, (CENTRAL): TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
SC No. : 27347/2016
FIR No. : 314/2011
PS : Crime Branch
U/Sec. : 399/402 IPC & 25 Arms Act
Case ID : DLCT01-000127-2012
State Versus 1. Alam @ Saleem (on bail)
S/o Mr. Munna
R/o Mohalla Qureshi,
Tehsil & District Amroha, U.P.
2. Yasin (on bail)
S/o Late Mr. Babu
R/o Mohalla Saddique Pura,
Nai Abadi, Town Area Pilakuwa
District Hapur, U.P.
3. Farman (on bail)
S/o Mr. Islam
R/o Yasin Garhi, Ward No. 15,
Near Anarwali Masjid,
Village & Post Office Dasna,
District Ghaziabad, U.P.
4. Ranjeet Yadav (P.O.)
S/o Mr. Bishambar @ Fauzi
R/o VPO Budhsaini, PS Balani,
District Baghpat, U.P.
5. Shahabuddin (on bail)
S/o Mohd. Hanif
R/o H. No. 1056,
Mohalla Yashin Garhi,
Village & Post Office Dasna,
District Ghaziabad, U.P.
6. Wasim @ Guddu @ Sameer (P.O.)
S/o Mr. Tameez Ahmed
R/o Mohalla Qureshi,
Near Aara Machine,
PS Amroha, U.P.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 1 of 35
Date of Institution : 25.02.2012
Date of Arguments : 10.03.2022
Date of Judgment : 30.06.2022
JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION:
1. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.12.2011 at 07.20 p.m. at Ghadi Park, Kudesia Ghat, near Ring Road, ISBT, Kashmere Gate, Delhi, the accused persons were making preparation for committing dacoity punishable under Section 399/34 of 'The Indian Penal Code, 1860' (Hereinafter referred to as 'IPC').
2. It is further case of the prosecution that the accused persons assembled for the purpose of committing dacoity at CNG Station, near Chandgi Ram Akhara, Kashmere Gate, Delhi, punishable under Section 402 IPC.
3. It is further case of the prosecution that illegal arms and ammunition recovered from the accused persons punishable under Section 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'. CHARGE-SHEET:
4. On 07.12.2011 at about 04.00 p.m., PW-5 Ct. Aslup produced one secret informer before PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana, in his office i.e. SOS, Crime Branch, Kotwali, Delhi, who informed him that one notorious criminal, namely, Alam is a member of Shaukat Pasha gang and he alongwith his associate, namely, Wasim @ Guddu absconded from police custody in Amroha, U.P. in 2008 and he alongwith his associates is committing theft, robbery and dacoity in areas of Delhi and U.P. FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 2 of 35
5. Secret informer informed PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana that at about 06.00 - 06.30 p.m, Alam will assemble alongwith his associates with illegal arms in Ghadi park, Kudesia Ghat, ISBT, Kashmere Gate with intention to commit robbery in CNG Station, near Chandgi Ram Akhara and if raided, they could be apprehended alongwith illegal arms.
6. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana made requisite enquiry from the secret informer and satisfied himself. He discussed the said information with Insp. Sunil Kumar who instructed him to take appropriate action.
7. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana constituted a raiding team comprising SI Ravinder Verma, HC Wasiq, HC Ravinder Kumar, PW-8 HC Eid Mohd., HC Vikram Dutt, Ct. Devender, Ct. Sajjad Ali, Ct. Prempal, PW-5 Ct. Aslup Khan alongwith secret informer led by Insp. Sunil Kumar. He got arms and ammunition alloted to the members of raiding team, as per relevant register.
8. At about 05.00 p.m., PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana reduced the secret information into writing vide DD No. 13 in SOS, Crime Branch, Kotwali, Delhi.
9. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana alongwith raiding team proceeded via Ring Road in private Tavera Jeep, Maruti 800 bearing registration No. DL 6CG 8444 and Maruti Wagon R.
10. At about 05.20 p.m., PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana alongwith raiding team reached at bus stop in front of Ring Road, ISBT, Kashmere Gate where he disclosed secret information to 7-8 passers-bye and persons standing there and requested them to join raiding team.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 3 of 35
11. However, the said public persons proceeded on their way after expressing genuine excuses without disclosing their names and addresses. He could not serve notice upon them for want of time. In view of exigency. Insp. Sunil Kumar given necessary instruction to raiding team and deployed them near Ghadi park, Kudesia Ghat, Kashmere Gate, Delhi.
12. On 07.12.2011 at about 06.35 p.m., two persons came on foot from Monastery side and sat in Ghadi park. Secret informer identified fat person as Alam @ Saleem. After about 10-15 minutes, a grey colour Maruti Swift car having registration plate DL 6CG 6456 came to Kudesia Ghat and four persons alighted from it. One of them was carrying a black bag on his shoulder. The said four persons went to the said two persons already sitting in Ghadi park. The said two persons shaken hands with the said four persons. All of them sat near a wall at Kudesia Ghat, Yamuna. He instructed PW-5 Ct. Aslup to hear their conversation.
13. At about 07.00 p.m., PW-5 Ct. Aslup went near outer side of boundary wall of the park and heard their conversation. After 10 minutes, he returned and stated that the accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem alongwith the co-accused persons was planning to rob cash from CNG Station, adjacent to Chandgi Ram Akhara. The accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem instructed the co-accused, namely, Yasin, Farman and Ranjeet to overpower salesmen and the accused, namely, Shahabuddin will tie their hands and the accused, namely, Wasim will rob cash on strength of knife.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 4 of 35
14. The accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem also instructed the co-accused persons that if any person resisted robbery, they should shoot him.
15. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana alongwith raiding team, without wasting further time, entered into the park and he disclosed his identity to the said persons and informed them that they were surrounded by police and asked them to surrender. He with the assistance of raiding team apprehended them.
16. On enquiry, the name of the said persons revealed as Alam @ Saleem S/o Mr. Munna R/o Mohalla Qureshi, PS Amroha, U.P. Age 27 years, Waseem @ Guddu @ Sameer S/o Mr. Tameez Ahmed R/o Mohalla Qureshi, near Aara Machine, PS Amroha, U.P. Age 30 years, Yasin S/o Mr. Babu R/o Mohalla Siddhique Pura, Krishan Ganj, PS Pilakuwa, District Panchsheel Nagar, U.P. Age 35 years, Farman S/o Mr. Islam R/o Anarwali Masjid, Yasin Garhi, Ward No. 15, Dasna, PS Masuri, District Ghaziabad, U.P., Age 26 years, Ranjeet Yadav S/o Mr. Bishambar @ Fauzi R/o Village & Post Budhsaini, PS Balani, District Baghpat, U.P. and Shahabuddin S/o Mohd. Hanif R/o Gaurav Enclave, near Toll Tax, PS Dasna, District Masuri, Ghaziabad, U.P. Age 25 years.
17. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana conducted cursory search of the accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem. He recovered a loaded country made pistol from right dub of his trouser and three live cartridges from right pocket of his trouser. He unloaded the said pistol and recovered a live cartridge.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 5 of 35
18. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana prepared sketch of the said pistol and four live cartridges vide Ex.PW5/B. He kept the said pistol and four live cartridges in a piece of white cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said parcel as 'A' and seized it vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/A. He filled FSL form and affixed his seal.
19. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana conducted cursory search of the accused, namely, Yasin. He recovered one loaded country made pistol from right dub of his trouser and two live cartridges from right pocket of his trouser. He unloaded the said pistol and recovered one live cartridge. He prepared sketch of the said pistol and three live cartridges vide Ex.PW5/C. He kept the said pistol and three live cartridges in a piece of white cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said parcel as 'B' and seized it vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/D. He filled FSL form and affixed his seal.
20. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana conducted cursory search of the accused, namely, Ranjeet Yadav. He recovered a loaded country made pistol from right dub of his trouser and two live cartridges from right pocket of his trouser. He unloaded the said pistol and recovered a live cartridge. He prepared sketch of the said pistol and three live cartridges vide Ex.PW5/E. He kept the said pistol and three live cartridges in a piece of white cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said parcel as 'D' and seized it vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/F. He filled FSL form and affixed his seal.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 6 of 35
21. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana conducted cursory search of the accused, namely, Farman. He recovered one loaded country made pistol from right dub of his trouser and two live cartridges from right pocket of his trouser. He unloaded the said pistol and recovered one live cartridge. He prepared sketch of the said pistol and three live cartridges vide Ex.PW5/G. He kept the said pistol and three live cartridges in a piece of white cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said cloth parcel as 'C' and seized it vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/H (inadvertently marked as Ex.PW5/G). He filled FSL form and affixed his seal.
22. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana conducted cursory search of the accused, namely, Wasim @ Guddu @ Sameer. He recovered a knife from right dub of his trouser. He prepared sketch of the said knife, after taking its measurement, vide Ex.PW5/J. He kept the said knife in a piece of white cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said cloth parcel as 'E' and seized it vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/K.
23. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana conducted cursory search of the accused, namely, Shahabuddin. He recovered a black colour leather bag containing four monkey caps, one plash, one screw-driver, four pieces of rope and three live cartridges. He prepared sketch of the said three live cartridges vide Ex.PW5/L. He kept the said three live cartridges in a piece of white cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said cloth parcel as 'F' and seized it vide FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 7 of 35 seizure memo Ex.PW5/N. He filled FSL form and affixed his seal. He kept black colour leather bag alongwith articles therein, as aforesaid, and sealed it with his seal having impression 'NSR' and marked the said parcel as 'G' and seized it vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/M. He handed over his seal to PW-5 Ct. Aslup.
24. On 07.02.2011 at 11.40 p.m., PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana prepared rukka Ex.PW7/A for registration of case under Section 399/402 IPC and 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959' and handed it over to PW-5 Ct. Aslup for being taken to PS Crime Branch for registration of FIR.
25. In the meanwhile, PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia reached at the place of incident for further investigation.
26. On 08.12.2011 at about 12.40 a.m., PW-1 HC Jaipal Singh, Duty Officer, PS Crime Branch recorded case FIR Ex.PW1/A and handed over a copy of FIR and original rukka to PW-5 Ct. Aslup for being given to PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia at the place of incident.
27. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana handed over sealed cloth parcels, documents and custody of the accused persons to PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia prepared a site plan of the place of incident Ex.PW6/A at the instance of PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana. He kept fake registration plate No. DL 6CG 6456 in a piece of cloth and sealed it with his seal having impression 'RS' and seized Maruti Swift car alongwith its keys and the said parcel vide seizure memo Ex.PW6/B. The registration number of Maruti Swift car was UP 14Z 6100.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 8 of 35
28. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia deposited the case exhibits in police malkhana vide entry at Sl. No. 1452 in Reg. No. 19 Ex.PW9/A. He recorded statement of the witnesses. He arrested the accused, namely, Shahabuddin vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/U and personal search memo Ex.PW5/V5 and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/P. He arrested the accused, namely, Wasim @ Guddu @ Sameer vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/U1 and personal search memo Ex.PW5/V and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/S. He arrested the accused, namely, Yasin vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/U2 and personal search memo Ex.PW5/V2 and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/O. He arrested the accused, namely, Farman vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/U3 and personal search memo Ex.PW5/V3 and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/R. He arrested the accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/U4 and personal search memo Ex.PW5/V1 and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/Q. He arrested the accused, namely, Ranjeet Yadav vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/U5 and personal search memo Ex.PW5/V4 and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/T. The said Maruti Swift car had registration No. UP 14Z 6100 and it belonged to Ms. Reshma wife of the accused, namely, Yasin.
29. On 13.12.2011, Ct. Surender deposited five sealed parcels with FSL, Rohini vide RC No. 582/21 Ex.PW9/B and acknowledgement receipt Ex.PW9/C. Mr. V.R. Anand, Ballistic Expert, FSL, Delhi given opinion that the case exhibits are fire arms / ammunition vide FSL report Ex.PW6/K. FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 9 of 35
30. PW-3 Mr. Sanjay Bhatia, DCP, Crime & Railways, Delhi accorded sanction under Section 39 of 'The Arms Act, 1959' for prosecution of the accused, namely, Alam @ Salim, Yasin, Farman, Ranjeet Yadav and Shahabuddin vide Ex.PW3/A.
31. On completion of investigation, the accused persons were charge-sheeted under Section 399/402 IPC & 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'.
32. Vide order dated 18.02.2012, the committal Court committed the case to the Court of Session.
33. On appraisal of material on record, the accused persons were charged under Section 399 and 402 IPC. All the accused persons except the accused, namely, Waseem @ Guddu @ Sameer were also charged under Section 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
34. During trial, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses as under:
The witnesses Description of the witnesses PW-1 HC Jaipal Singh Duty Officer, PS Crime Branch PW-2 Brij Raj Krishan, Jr. Produced original registration certificate of Asstt., RTO, Ghaziabad, UP Maruti Swift car No. UP 14Z 6100 PW-3 Sanjay Bhatia, DCP, Proved sanction under Section 39 of 'The Crime & Railways, Delhi Arms Act, 1959' PW-4 Ms. Reshma Registered owner of Maruti Swift car bearing registration No. UP 14Z 6100 PW-5 Ct. Aslup Member of raiding team / recovery witness PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia Investigating Officer PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana Complainant PW-8 HC Eid Mohd. Collected sealed parcels and FSL report PW-9 HC Jag Narayan In-charge, malkhana, PS Crime Branch FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 10 of 35
35. The accused, namely, Waseem @ Guddu @ Sameer and Ranjeet Yadav were declared proclaimed offender on 18.05.2013 and 03.05.2016 respectively.
36. Incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence were explained to the accused persons, as required under Section 313 of 'The Code of Criminal Procedure' ('Cr.P.C.'). They denied each and every circumstance appearing in evidence against them.
37. The accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem pleaded as under:
"Q. 23 : Do you want to say anything in your defence? Ans: I am innocent and I have been falsely implicated in the present case and the police had lifted me from Loni on 07.12.2011 at about 07:00 or 8:00 pm."
38. The accused, namely, Yasin pleaded as under:
"Q. 23 : Do you want to say anything in your defence? Ans: I am innocent and I have been falsely implicated in the present case. I was lifted from Petrol Pump at Pilakuwa when I was getting the vehicle filled at about 03:00 or 03:30 p.m. on 06.12.2011."
39. The accused, namely, Farman pleaded as under:
"Q. 23 : Do you want to say anything in your defence? Ans: I am innocent and I have been falsely implicated in the present case. I was lifted from Dasna when I was sitting on the pulia on 06.12.2011 at about 04:00 pm."
40. The accused, namely, Shahabuddin pleaded as under:
"Q. 23 : Do you want to say anything in your defence? Ans: I am innocent and I have been falsely implicated in the present case. I have been lifted from Pulia at Dasna when I was sitting at about 04:30 pm."
41. The accused persons did not examine any witness in defence evidence.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 11 of 35
42. I have heard arguments of Mr. Amit Dabas, Ld. Addl. PP for the State and Mr. Ayub Ahmed Qureshi, Advocate for the accused persons.
CONTENTIONS OF THE PROSECUTION:
43. Ld. Addl. PP for the State contended that the prosecution examined members of raiding team, namely, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana and PW-5 Ct. Aslup. He contended that they proved that the accused persons on 07.12.2011 at 07.20 p.m. in Ghadi park, Kudesia Ghat, near Ring Road, ISBT, Kashmere Gate, Delhi assembled for committing dacoity in CNG Station, near Chandgi Ram Akhara. He contended that arms and ammunitions alongwith articles for concealment of identity like monkey caps and implements for committing robbery like plash, screw-driver and four pieces of rope were recovered from them. He contended that FSL report Ex.PW6/K proved that arms and ammunition, as defined in 'The Arms Act, 1959', were recovered from the accused persons. He contended that the accused persons were making preparation to commit dacoity in CNG Station near Chandgi Ram Akhara in a secluded place. He contended that testimony of PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana and PW-5 Ct. Aslup is cogent, consistent and reliable. He contended that the accused persons have not given any explanation regarding their presence in a secluded place alongwith arms and ammunitions and implements. He contended that the prosecution proved sanction Ex.PW3/A for prosecution under section 39 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 12 of 35
44. Ld. Addl. PP for the State contended that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana made effort to associate independent witness. He contended that non-association of any public witness with raiding team cannot be a ground to discard otherwise credible evidence of PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana and PW-5 Ct. Aslup. He contended that there is no material inconsistency or contradiction in evidence of the prosecution witnesses. He contended that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana and PW-5 Ct. Aslup or any member of raiding team or PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia had no enmity with the accused persons. He contended that the accused persons were making preparation to commit dacoity and they assembled for purpose of committing dacoity and therefore, they are liable to be held guilty under Section 399 and 402 IPC. He contended that the accused persons are also liable to be held guilty for committing offence under section 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959' for possessing arms and ammunitions without license.
CONTENTIONS OF THE DEFENCE:
45. Mr. Ayub Ahmed Qureshi, Ld. Defence Counsel contended that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond doubt. He contended that the accused persons were picked from their native places and implicated in this case. He contended that no public witness was associated to search and seizure proceedings despite availability. He contended that arms and ammunitions were planted upon the accused persons. He contended that there are inherent contradictions and material discrepancies / lapses rendering the case fragile.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 13 of 35
46. Statutory provisions applicable to this case are, as under:
"399. Making preparation to commit dacoity.
-Whoever makes, any preparation for committing dacoity, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
"402. Assembling for purpose of committing dacoity. -Whoever, at any time after the passing of this Act, shall be one of five or more persons assembled for the purpose of committing dacoity, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine."
47. In order to sustain a charge under section 399 IPC, the prosecution is required to prove the following ingredients:
(i) Accused persons were 5 or more in number;
(ii) They were making a preparation;
(iii) The preparation was for committing dacoity.
48. The essential ingredients of offence under section 402 IPC are as follows:
(i) There was an assembly of 5 or more persons;
(ii) The purpose of assembly was to commit dacoity;
(iii) Accused was a member of the assembly.
49. Therefore, the prosecution has to prove that the accused persons assembled in Ghadi park, Kudesia Ghat, near Ring Road, ISBT, Delhi and they were making preparation to commit dacoity and further, the purpose of assembling was to commit dacoity.
50. As regards contention that there was no public witness to search and seizure proceedings, it can be stated that police officials are competent witnesses. Their evidence cannot be doubted on the sole premise that there was no public witness to search and seizure proceedings. FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 14 of 35
51. In Ajmer Singh vs. State of Haryana, (2010) 3 SCC 746, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held as under:
"19.....It is normally expected that there should be independent evidence to support the case of the prosecution. However, it is not an inviolable rule. Therefore, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, we are satisfied that it would be travesty of justice, if the appellant is acquitted merely because no independent witness has been produced.
20. We cannot forget that it may not be possible to find independent witness at all places, at all times. The obligation to take public witnesses is not absolute, if after making efforts which the Court considered in the circumstances of the case reasonable, the police officer is not able to get public witnesses to associate with the raid or arrest of the culprit, the arrest and the recovery made would not be necessarily vitiated. The Court will have to appreciate the relevant evidence and will have to determine whether the evidence of the police officer was believable after taking due care and caution in evaluating their evidence."
52. In Kashmiri Lal vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 6 SCC 595, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held as under:
"9. As far as the first submission is concerned, it is evincible from the evidence on record that the police officials had requested the people present in the ''dhaba'' to be witnesses, but they declined to cooperate and, in fact, did not make themselves available. That apart, there is no absolute command of law that the police officers cannot be cited as witnesses and their testimony should always be treated with suspicion. Ordinarily, the public at large show their disinclination to come forward to become witnesses. If the testimony of the police officer is found to be reliable and trustworthy, the court can definitely act upon the same. If in the course of scrutinising the evidence, the court finds the evidence of the police officer as unreliable and untrustworthy, the court may disbelieve him but it should not do so solely on the presumption that a witness from the Department of Police should be viewed with distrust. This is also based on the principle that quality of the evidence weighs over the quantity of evidence....."
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 15 of 35
53. It is, therefore, evident that evidence of police officials cannot be discarded on the sole premise that they are police officials and they did not associate any public witness. However, the evidence of police officials should be examined with due caution and circumspection.
54. Having noticed legal principles governing appreciation of evidence of police officials, let us proceed to evidence of police officials.
55. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana is a material witness. He constituted raiding team. He apprehended the accused persons and conducted their search and effected recoveries from them. He prepared rukka Ex.PW7/A. He deposed as under:
"On 07.12.2011, I was posted at SOS Crime Branch. On that day, at about 4:00 p.m., Const. Ashok came to my office alongwith one secret informer and informed me that one notorious gangster Alam who absconded from the custody of UP Police and involved in several criminal cases will come at Quedesia Park, Kashmere Gate alongwith his associates with the intention to commit some crime. The said information was discussed with Inspector Sunil Kumar of SOS Crime Branch who directed me to proceed further as per law. Thereafter, a raiding party was organized consisting of myself, Const. Ashok, SI Ravinder Verma, HC Ravinder Baliyan, HC Eid Mohd., HC Wasim Mohd., HC Vikram Dutt, Ct. Devender, Const. Sajjad, Const. Prem Pal and informer. Thereafter, we left the SOS Crime Branch office under the supervision of Inspector Sunil Kumar vide DD No. 13 and all of us were in civil dress and we left the office in three different private vehicles i.e. one Tavera, WagonR and Maruti car bearing registration No. DL 6CG 8444. At about 5:20 p.m., we reached ISBT, Kashmere Gate, there I requested 6-7 passers-bye to join the raiding party but none agreed and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. Thereafter, we parked our vehicles on the side of the road and went inside the Quedesia Park.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 16 of 35 At about 6:35 p.m., two persons came from the side of Monastery and informed that one of those persons was Alam. After some time, one Swift car came outside the Qudesia Park and parked the same near the Park, out of which four persons alighted and met Alam and other persons. Thereafter, all six persons entered into Ghadi Park, Qudesia Ghat. All six persons siting near the wall of park and started talking to each other. Thereafter, I directed Const. Aslup to over hear the conversation of those six persons and if anything found incriminating, he would signal the members of other raiding party while waiving his hand over his head. After sometime, Const. Aslup came back to me and informed that those six persons were talking to each other and were planing to commit dacoity in a CNG pump near Chandgi Ram Akhara. Thereafter, all the members of the raiding party entered into the park and challenged them to surrender before the police. All the persons tried to escape from the spot but they were overpowered by the members of raiding party. After the apprehension of all the six persons, they disclosed their names as Alam, Yaseen, Farman, Ranjeet Yadav, Shahbuddin and Wasim. Out of those six persons except Wasim (who is PO) is present in the Court today.....
Thereafter, I prepared rukka Ex.PW7/A and handed over the same to Ct. Aslup to get the case registered at PS Crime Branch with the request to handover the investigation to SI Ravinder Singh after registration of the case. Accordingly, the said constable went to PS SOS Crime Branch for the registration of FIR. In the meantime, SI Ravinder Teotia came at the spot and I handed over all the sealed pulandas, FSL forms, seizure memos and sketches to IO SI Ravinder Teotia. Thereafter, IO inspected the spot on my pointing out and prepared site plan which is already Ex.PW6/A. IO recorded my statement in this regard and relieved me from the investigation..... XXXX by Sh. Ayub Ahmed Qureshi, Ld. Counsel for accused Alam, Yasin, Farmjan, Ranjit Yadav and Shahbuddin.
The distance between the spot and my office is about 4 KMs. We went to the spot via Ring Road behind Lal Qila. We reached at the spot within 15-20 minutes.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 17 of 35 It is correct that heavy traffic runs on Ring Road. First of all, I left my office in a vehicle Maruti car bearing No. DL 6CG 8444 being driven by me. We were four officials in the said car. HC Ravinder Baliyan was sitting adjacent to me. In the rear seat, Ct. Aslup and informer were siting. It is correct that I had not heard, seen or read about Shaukat Pasha Gang in any newspaper or TV Channel. Vol. Shaukat Pasha is known as a reward of Rs. 50,000/- was on him. It is correct that Shaukat Pasha is known to me prior to this case.
It is correct that there is no residential area / jhuggies or temples around the Ghari Park, Qudesiya Park. I remained at the spot till 12:00/12:30 am (night). The secret informer had left the spot at about 6:35 p.m. The secret informer pointed towards those two boys from a distance of 15-20 meters. A vehicle arrived at the spot alongwith the four accused in it but I do not remember its registration number. Even, I do not remember its model, colour and chassis number. Vol. The said vehicle was having a fake number plat of Delhi registration number and during investigation, the actual registration number of the vehicle was found to be of UP. The secret informer had already left the spot before those four boys arrived at the spot. The boundary wall of Ghari Park is about 3 - 3 ½ ft. high. Ct. Aslup heard conversation of the accused persons who was hiding himself near boundary wall of the park. Ghari Park is situated inside the Qudsiya Ghat near Ring Road. The accused persons were sitting towards the wall of Yamuna Side (East). I apprehended one of the accused but today, I cannot tell which accused was apprehended by me. First of all, I prepared seizure memo of accused Alam. I had not added or altered the said seizure memo. Again said, I prepared the sketch of the recovered case property. I had not added or altered the said sketch. Similarly, I prepared sketch of the recovered case property from the possession of the other accused persons and seized them vide seizure memo. I had not added or altered the said sketches and seizure memos. It is correct that I had not stated in my examination-in-chief from which place the recovery was effected from each accused. Vol. I can tell the place of recovery.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 18 of 35 A country made pistol from the right dub of the pant and live cartridges were recovered from the right pocket of the pant of the accused Alam. A country made pistol from the right dub of the pant and live cartridges were recovered from right pocket of the pant of the accused Farman. A country made pistol from the right dub of the pant and live cartridges were recovered from the right pocket of the pant of the accused Yasin. A country made pistol from the right dub of the pant and live cartridges were recovered from right pocket of the pant of the accused Ranjit. The cartridges were recovered from the bag recovered from the accused Shahabuddin. A chhura was recovered from the right dub of the accused Wasim (since PO).
No chance prints were taken by me of the arms and ammunitions. SI Ravinder Teotia reached at the spot at about 11:15 p.m. and I left the spot at about 12:00- 12:15 am (midnight). No personal search memo or arrest memo was prepared by IO SI Ravinder in my presence. It is correct that I did not interrogate the accused persons regarding the source of recovered arms and ammunitions. Ct. Aslup left the spot with rukka at about 11:40 p.m. But I do not know when he returned to the spot alongwith the copy of FIR and rukka. It is correct that I did not inform the relatives of the accused persons regarding their apprehension. Vol. The arrest was made by SI Ravinder. It is also correct that I had not recorded any disclosure statement of the accused persons. It is correct that disclosure statements of the accused persons were not recorded by SI Ravinder in my presence. I do not know about the persons who came at the spot in a Gypsy or the Wagon-R. After leaving the spot, I straight away went home. It is also correct that the proceedings conducted afterwards is not in my knowledge. It is correct that I had not got conducted medical examination of accused persons. I did not prepare seizure memo of the Swift car in which four accused persons came at the spot. Vol. SI Ravinder Teotia had prepared the seizure memo. It is correct that the accused persons are not known to me prior to this case. It is wrong to suggest that the accused persons have been falsely implicated or that case property have been planted upon the accused.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 19 of 35 It is wrong to suggest that all the accused persons were lifted from their houses from different places to implicate them falsely in this case. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely."
56. PW-5 Ct. Aslup was a member of raiding team. He had taken rukka to PS Crime Branch for registration of FIR. He is a material witness. He deposed, as under:
"On 08.12.2011, I was posted at PS Kotwali as Constable. On that day, I had joined investigation in the present case alongwith SI N.S. Rana. On that day, secret informer informed IO SI N.S. Rana that the notorious gangster Alam who has absconded from the custody of UP Police and who is involved in several criminal cases will come at Kudeshia Ghat, Kashmere Gate with conspiracy of robbing. On this information, IO prepared raiding party comprising of myself, HC Ravinder, Ct. Sajjad Ali, HC Vikram, Ct. Prempal, Ct. Davinder and secret informer. Thereafter, we reached the spot i.e. near Kudeshia Ghat, Kashmere Gate. We reached there at about 5:20 p.m. At about 6:35 p.m., two persons were seen coming from Kashmere Gate and they sat in the park of Kudeshia Ghat. After about 15-20 minutes, 4 boys also came there in Swift car. Those four boys also joined both the persons in the park. I was deputed by the IO as shadow witness to over hear their conversation.
Accordingly, I took position behind the wall adjacent to the park. I heard that one person i.e. the accused present in the Court today (correctly identified) whose name was later on disclosed as Alam, was guiding remaining members sitting there in the park to rob the cash of CNG Pump. I immediately disclosed such conversation to IO SI N.S. Rana.
Thereafter, SI N.S. Rana alongwith the entire raiding team entered the park and asked all the members present inside the park to surrender before police being surrounded. All persons were nabbed by the police party and they were interrogated. On interrogation, they disclosed their names as Alam, Yasin, Farman, Wasim, Ranjeet and Shabuddin. Their personal search was conducted.....
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 20 of 35 Swift car number of which I do not remember but it was of grey colour was also seized vide memo.
SI N.S. Rana prepared the ruqqa which I took to PS for getting the case FIR registered and after registration of the case FIR, I came to the spot alongwith SI Ravinder Kewatia to whom further investigation was marked. First IO SI N.S. Rana handed him over entire documents, case property and accused persons to 2 nd IO and he appended FIR number on all the documents and case property.
Thereafter, on the pointing of SI N.S. Rana, 2 nd IO prepared the site plan and he also recorded disclosure of the accused persons at the spot vide Ex.PW5/O (accused Yasin), Ex.PW5/P (accused Sahabuddin), Ex.PW5/Q (accused Alam), Ex.PW5/R (accused Farman), Ex.PW5/S (accused Wasim @ Guddu) and Ex.PW5/T (accused Ranjeet Yadav) bearing my signature at point A on each.
All six accused persons were also arrested vide memo Ex.PW5/U to Ex.PW5/U5 and their personal search were conducted vide memo Ex.PW5/V to Ex.PW5/V5 bearing my signature at point A on each. IO also recorded statements of witnesses at the spot and after completion of investigation, we returned to PS. Case property was deposited in the malkhana and the accused were sent to lock up.
Accused Alam, Yasin, Farman, Ranjeet and Shabuddin are present in the Court today (correctly identified). I can also identify accused Wasim, if produced before me. (Accused Wasim is proclaimed offender).....
XXXX by Ld. Counsel Sh. Ayub Ahmad Qureshi for all accused.
I had made DD entry No. 13 at the time of leaving the office of Crime Branch Kotwali for the spot. I did not come to know about the Shaukat Pasha Gang from any newspaper or TV channel. We reached at Kashmere Gate and at about 5:20 p.m. FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 21 of 35 After reaching Kashmere Gate, we reached Ghari Park within 10-15 minutes. At that time, nobody was present inside the Ghari Park near Kudesia Ghat. I heard the conversation of the accused persons from near a wall of Ghari Park from a distance of about 5 steps. I was in civil clothes. I cannot tell the distance between the place where the members of the raiding party were standing and the place where I was hearing the conversation. It is wrong to suggest that the accused tried to flee away from the spot. I do not remember whom I apprehended. I do not remember which accused persons were apprehended by whom. We remained at the spot for about 4-5 hours. I cannot tell as to which documents was prepared first by IO. I left the spot with rukka at about 11:40 p.m. I returned to the spot at about 1:30 a.m. alongwith the copy of FIR and rukka alongwith SI Ravinder Teotia. The formal search of all accused persons was conducted by SI N.S. Rana. The sketch of the recovered arms and its seizure memos were prepared prior to the sending of rukka. It is correct that there was no addition or alteration in the said sketches and seizure memos afterwards. FSL was filled up at the spot but I cannot tell the numbers of FSL forms filled up. SI N.S. Rana himself affixed the seals on the pulandas of the recovered arms. The disclosure statements of all the accused persons were recorded by SI N.S Rana at the spot while sitting inside the park. I cannot tell the time of recording of disclosure statements. In my presence, no notice was given by IO to any public persons to join the investigation. It is correct that IO recorded the disclosure statements of the accused persons on 07.12.2011. The arrest memos of the accused persons were prepared on 07.12.2011. In my presence, IO had recorded statement of Ct. Prem Pal besides me. I cannot tell the time of recording of the statement of Ct. Prem Pal on 08.12.2011. I do not know the accused persons prior to the present incident. My statement as well as statement of Ct. Prem Pal was recorded by IO in office on 08.12.2011 at about 05.00 a.m. I do not know about recording of statement of other police officials. I have read over my statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and I signed it. Ct. Prem Pal read over his statement and signed it. The information of arrest of the accused persons was conveyed to their family members.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 22 of 35 I cannot tell to whom the information regarding their arrest was conveyed. I do not remember when I finally left the spot. I do not remember when we reached our office. I do not remember whether any arrival entry was made in the office of Crime Branch or not. I do not remember the numbers of memos or documents which I had signed. I was in Tavera vehicle when I reached at Ghari Park alongwith the members of the raiding party, whose names I do not remember. I do not remember the registration number of the Tavera vehicle.
After arrest, the accused persons were taken to Geeta Colony. I do not remember the time. The secret informer left the spot at about 6:35 p.m., after pointing out the accused persons. All the accused persons were taken to Geeta Colony in Tavera Vehicle in which myself, SI Ravinder Teotia, Ct. Prem Pal were accompanied. I do not remember the names of the police officials who accompanied in Tavera vehicle which was driven by Ct. Prem Pal. The accused persons took us to Shakar Pur and Geeta Colony area and remained for about 1 ½ hours. The accused persons were got medically examined on 08.12.2011. It is wrong to suggest that all the accused persons were lifted from their houses and implicated falsely in this case. It is wrong to suggest that we had not reached the spot. It is wrong to suggest that nothing had been recovered from the accused persons. It is wrong to suggest that we were not taken to Shakar Pur and Geeta Colony by the accused persons. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely at the instance of IO."
57. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia is Investigating Officer. He deposed, as under:
"On 07.12.2011, I was posted at PS Crime Branch, Sun Light Colony. On that day, after receiving the information from SI N.S. Rana, I reached the spot i.e. Ghadi Park, Qudeshia Ghat, near Ring Road, ISBT, Kashmere Gate where I met with SI N.S. Rana alongwith staff members and they had apprehended six persons namely Alam, Yasin, Farman, Ranjeet Yadav, Shabuddin (all are present in the court today, correctly identified by the witness) and Wasim whom I can identify, if shown to me (Accused Wasim is proclaimed offender).
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 23 of 35 SI N.S. Rana handed over ruqqa to Constable Aslup for registration of FIR and accordingly, Ct. Aslup went to PS Crime Branch for registration of FIR.
Thereafter, SI N.S. Rana handed over all the accused persons alongwith seven sealed pullandas, sketches, memos and FSL form to me. At about 2:00 a.m (night) Constable Aslup informed me through telephone regarding FIR number and he told that FIR No. 314/11 was registered. Accordingly, I put FIR number on all the documents prepared by SI N.S. Rana as well as on sealed pullandas. On the pointing out of SI N.S. Rana, I prepared the site plan Ex.PW6/A which bears my signature at point A. Thereafter, I recorded the statement of SI N.S. Rana and he was relieved from investigation. The Swift car bearing number plat of No. DL 6CG 6456 was seized vide memo Ex.PW6/B bearing my signature at point A. Thereafter, I alongwith the accused persons and police staff came to the office of Crime Branch. There all accused were interrogated and arrested vide arrest memo already Ex.PW3/U, U1, U2, U3, U4, U5 and their personal search were conducted vide memo Ex.PW5/B, B1, B2, B3, B4 and B5. All these memos bear my signature at point B on each. At that time, Ct. Aslup also came in the office of Crime Branch with the copy of FIR and original ruqqa and same were handed over to me. All accused persons made their confessional statements which were reduced into writing vide memo already Ex.PW5/O, P, Q, R, S and T. All these memos bear my signature at point B on each.
Thereafter, I handed over the case property in a sealed condition through Ct. Aslup and directed him to deposit the same with MHCM, PS Crime Branch. Thereafter, the accused persons pointed out the place of occurrence which are Ex.PW6/C, PW6/D, E, F, G, H and J bearing my signature at point A on each. The dossiers of accused persons were prepared. Accused persons were taken for their medical examination and during the day time, all accused persons were produced in the Court and send to J/C. I recorded statements of witnesses time to time.....
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 24 of 35 XXXX by Ld. Counsel Sh. Ayub Ahmad Qureshi for all accused.
The information was received from SI N.S. Rana at 11:00 p.m. on 07.12.2011. I reached the spot at about 11:30 p.m. I cannot tell the distance between PS and spot. I reached the spot on private motorcycle registration number of which I do not remember. I had gone to spot alone. Number of staff members was 8 in total namely SI N.S. Rana, HC Wasik Ahmad, HC Ravinder, HC Dharmender, Ct. Dhanraj, Ct. Prem Pal and names of rest of the officials I do not remember. SI N.S. Rana handed over ruqqa to Ct. Aslup at about 11:40 p.m. Ct. Aslup returned to the spot with copy of FIR and ruqqa at about 1:30 a.m. (night). I was handed over seven pullandas by SI N.S. Rana at about 12.00 night. I had not appended my initials at the time of inserting FIR number on memos and other documents prepared by SI N.S. Rana. Site plan was prepared by me at about 12:00 night and signature of SI N.S. Rana was obtained on site plan as witness (confronted with Ex.PW6/A which does not bear signature of SI N.S. Rana). Statement of SI N.S. Rana was recorded at about 12:15 a.m. No documents were recovered from Swift car bearing No. DL 6CG 6456. Ownership of the said car was verified from accused Yasin who disclosed that the said car exists in the name of his wife. However, no document seized in this regard. Vol. It was a fake number plate).
We reached the Crime Branch Office alongwith the accused persons and Swift car at about 1:20 a.m. on 08.12.2011 from Travera Jeep. I do not know as to by whom the Swift car was driven to the Crime Branch Office. It is wrong to suggest that no Swift car was recovered or that for this reason only, I do not know as to how the Swift car reached the PS. No notice was given to any of the public person to join the investigation at the time of recovery of Swift car. Seizure memo of the car was made after ruqqa was sent but before receiving the copy of FIR.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 25 of 35 Information of arrest of the accused persons were given to their relatives but I do not remember specifically names of their relatives. No family members of accused persons met me. It is wrong to suggest that no intimation of arrest of accused persons was given or that for this reason only, no family member of any of the accused persons came at the spot.
Ct. Aslup handed me over copy of FIR and ruqqa at the PS at about 01:30 am. I had recorded disclosure statements of the accused after 02.00 a.m. at my office. Medical of accused persons were got conducted on 08.12.2011, but I do not remember the time but perhaps it was got conducted from JPN Hospital.
It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely or that I had not investigated the matter or that I had never visited the spot or that the accused persons were lifted from their houses and implicated in this case falsely."
58. On examination of the prosecution evidence, this Court is of the opinion that it is evident that the case of the prosecution suffers from such material contradictions, inconsistencies and infirmities rendering it wholly unreliable.
59. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.12.2011 at about 05.00 p.m., PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana reduced secret information into writing vide DD No. 13 in SOS Crime Branch, Kotwali, Delhi. The prosecution has not proved DD No. 13 dated 07.12.2011. Moreover, a copy of DD No. 13 on the file of the Court states that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana recorded the said information. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana has not deposed that he reduced secret information into writing vide DD No. 13. On the contrary, PW-5 Ct. Aslup stated that he made DD No. 13. This fact is contrary to the statement of fact contained in DD No. 13.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 26 of 35
60. According to DD No. 13, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana alongwith raiding team proceeded to the place of incident in a Tavera and WagonR. However, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana stated that they proceeded to the place of incident in three different private vehicles i.e. Tavera, WagonR and Maruti car. There is no evidence as to how the said vehicles were arranged by him. There is no evidence that the said vehicles were hired or belonged to members of raiding team.
61. According to DD No. 13 and tehrir Ex.PW7/A, the raiding team proceeded to the place of incident under supervision of Insp. Sunil Kumar. This fact is also deposed by PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana. However, PW-5 Ct. Aslup and PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia have not stated anything regarding presence of Insp. Sunil Kumar alongwith members of raiding team at the place of incident.
62. According to DD No. 13, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana received a secret information that the accused, namely, Alam alongwith his associates would assemble in Ghadi Park, Kudesia Ghat, near ISBT, Kashmere Gate, Delhi to commit dacoity in CNG Station, near Chandgi Ram Akhara. On the contrary, he deposed that he received secret information that the accused, namely, Alam alongwith his associates will come at Kudesia Park, Kashmere Gate with intention to commit some crime. He did not state anything regarding assembling of the accused persons in Ghadi Park, Kudesia Ghat, Kashmere Gate, Delhi for the purpose of committing dacoity at CNG Station, near Chandgi Ram Akhara, Kashmere Gate.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 27 of 35
63. According to DD No. 13, raiding team was assigned arms and ammunition, as per register. However, no such register pertaining to allocation of arms and ammunition to raiding team was produced or proved.
64. The case of the prosecution, as stated in tehrir Ex.PW7/A, was that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana deployed PW-5 Ct. Aslup as a shadow witness and instructed him to hear conversation and at about 07.00 p.m., PW-5 Ct. Aslup went near boundary wall of the said park and heard conversation and after 10 minutes, he disclosed that the accused, namely, Alam alongwith the co-accused persons were planning to commit dacoity in CNG station near, Chandgi Ram Akhara. However, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana, in his examination-in-chief, deposed that he directed PW-5 Ct. Aslup to hear conversation of the accused persons and if anything incriminating is found, he would signal members of other raiding party while waving his hand over his head. It was a new fact introduced by PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana, in his examination-in-chief.
65. PW-5 Ct. Aslup, in his examination-in-chief, merely deposed that he heard that the accused, namely, Alam was instructing remaining members sitting in the park to rob cash from CNG station. He has not deposed conversation, as stated in tehrir Ex.PW7/A, that the accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem instructed the accused, namely, Yasin, Farman and Ranjeet Yadav to overpower salesmen and Shahabuddin to tie their hands and Wasim @ Guddu to rob cash on the point of knife and that they should shoot, if anyone resisted them.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 28 of 35
66. The case of the prosecution is that at about 06.35 p.m., the accused, namely, Alam alongwith his associate came from Monastery side and reached Ghadi Park and sat there and after 10-15 minutes, one grey Maruti Swift car having registration plate DL 6CG 6456 came and four persons alighted from it and they went to Ghadi Park where the accused, namely, Alam alongwith his associate was already sitting. However, sequence of events deposed by PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana is not matching with sequence of events narrated in tehrir Ex.PW7/A. He deposed that at about 06.35 p.m., two persons came from the side of Monastery and informer informed that one of those persons was Alam and after sometime, one Swift car came outside Kudesia Park and four persons alighted and met the accused, namely, Alam @ Saleem and other persons and thereafter, all of them entered into Ghadi Park, Kudesia Ghat.
67. It has never been the case of the prosecution that the accused persons attempted to escape from the place of incident. PW-5 Ct. Aslup also deposed in this regard. However, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana stated that the accused persons tried to escape from the place of incident but they were overpowered.
68. The case of the prosecution is that site plan of the place of incident Ex.PW6/A was prepared at the instance of PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana. However, it does not bear signature of PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 29 of 35
69. Site plan of the place of incident Ex.PW6/A does not depict the distance between PW-5 Ct. Aslup and the accused persons. PW-5 Ct. Aslup deposed that he heard conversation of the accused from near a wall of Ghadi Park from a distance of about 5 steps. However, the distance of the accused persons from the boundary wall is not mentioned in the site plan of the place of incident. Therefore, there is no evidence that PW-5 Ct. Aslup was positioned within audible range from the accused persons.
70. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana sent tehrir Ex.PW7/A, through PW-5 Ct. Aslup, at 11.40 p.m. on 07.12.2011. It is mentioned in tehrir Ex.PW7/A that PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia had already reached at the place of incident when PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana handed over tehrir to PW-5 Ct. Aslup for being taken to PS Crime Branch, Nehru Place for registration of case. In his cross-examination, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana stated that PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia reached at the place of incident at about 11.15 p.m. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia also deposed that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana handed over tehrir to PW-5 Ct. Aslup for registration of FIR who went to PS Crime Branch for registration of FIR. He deposed, in his cross-examination, that he reached at the place of incident at about 11.30 p.m. Surprisingly, PW-5 Ct. Aslup deposed, in examination-in-chief, that he returned to the place of incident alongwith PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 30 of 35
71. PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana deposed that he handed over all the documents, sealed parcels, seizure memos and FSL forms to PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia who prepared site plan of the place of incident Ex.PW6/A, at his instance and thereafter, PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia recorded his statement and relieved him. He deposed that PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia did not prepare arrest memos, personal search memos and disclosure statements of the accused persons in his presence. In his cross-examination, he deposed that he remained at the place of incident till 12.00 - 12.30 a.m. He again deposed that he left the place of incident at about 12.00 - 12.15 a.m. He deposed that he went to his home directly from the place of incident. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia stated that PW-5 Ct. Aslup returned to the place of incident with a copy of FIR and rukka at about 01.30 a.m. He deposed that he alongwith the accused persons and police officials returned to office of Crime Branch where he interrogated and arrested the accused persons. He stated that he recorded disclosure statements of the accused persons in his office at about 02.00 a.m. Surprisingly, PW-5 Ct. Aslup deposed that PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia arrested the accused persons vide arrest memos Ex.PW5/U to Ex.PW5/U5 and personal search memos Ex.PW5/V to Ex.PW5/V5 and recorded their disclosure statements Ex.PW5/O to Ex.PW5/T at the place of incident. He even stated that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana recorded disclosure statements of the accused persons while sitting in park at the place of incident on 07.12.2011.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 31 of 35
72. PW-5 Ct. Aslup deposed, in cross-examination, that he returned to the place of incident alongwith PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia and copy of FIR and rukka at about 01.30 a.m. However, PW-1 HC Jai Pal Singh, Duty Officer, PS Crime Branch, Nehru Place stated that he had handed over original rukka and a copy of FIR to PW-5 Ct. Aslup at 01.45 a.m. PW-5 Ct. Aslup stated that when he returned to the place of incident alongwith PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia, PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana handed him over entire documents, case property and accused persons to PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia who appended FIR number on the said documents. It has already come in evidence that PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana had already left the place of incident at about 12.15 - 12.30 a.m. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia stated that PW-5 Ct. Aslup informed him regarding registration of FIR at 02.00 a.m. and stated that FIR number and thereafter, he had put FIR number on all the documents.
73. PW-5 Ct. Aslup stated that he returned to the place of incident alongwith PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia where PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana handed him over documents and parcels and PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia arrested the accused persons and recorded their disclosure statements. However, PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia stated that PW-5 Ct. Aslup came to the office of Crime Branch alongwith a copy of FIR and original rukka and handed him over the said documents.
74. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia stated that he prepared site plan of the place of incident at the instance of PW-7 SI Nirbhay Rana. However, it does not bear his signature.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 32 of 35
75. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia stated that he alongwith the accused persons reached at Crime Branch office at about 01.20 a.m. on 08.12.2011. PW-5 Ct. Aslup left PS Crime Branch, Nehru Place at 01.45 a.m. PW-5 Ct. Aslup had no reason to reach at the place of incident as PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia had already reached at his office alongwith police officials and the accused persons.
76. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia deposed that PW-5 Ct. Aslup informed him, through telephone, regarding FIR number at 02.00 a.m. PW-1 HC Jai Pal Singh, Duty Officer, PS Crime Branch, Nehru Place stated that PW-5 Ct. Aslup came to PS Crime Branch, Nehru Place alongwith rukka at about 12.30 a.m. The case FIR was registered at 12.45 a.m. on 08.12.2011. He stated that PW-5 Ct. Aslup left PS Crime Branch, Nehru Place at 01.45 a.m. on 08.12.2011. On the contrary, PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia deposed that PW-5 Ct. Aslup returned to the place of incident with a copy of FIR and rukka at about 01.30 a.m. At the same time, he deposed that he alongwith the accused persons reached at Crime Branch office at 01.20 a.m. on 08.12.2011. In the same breath, he deposed that PW-5 Ct. Aslup reached office of Crime Branch with a copy of FIR and original rukka and handed him over the said documents. The entire depositions are sketchy, wavering and inconsistent.
77. PW-6 SI Ravinder Teotia deposed that he deposited case property, through PW-5 Ct. Aslup, with MHC(M) with PS Crime Branch. On the contrary, PW-9 HC Jag Narayan, MHC (M) stated that SI Ravinder Teotia deposited the case property.
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 33 of 35
78. The entire evidence of the prosecution pertaining to sequence of events as well as time and place of proceedings and author of proceedings does not inspire confidence.
79. The prosecution failed to prove that the accused persons were making preparation for committing dacoity and had assembled for the purpose of dacoity. The prosecution has also failed to prove recovery of arms and ammunition from the accused persons.
80. The prosecution miserably failed to bring home charges under Section 399 and 402 IPC as well as 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'.
CONCLUSION:
81. The accused persons, namely, Alam @ Saleem, Yasin, Farman and Shahabuddin are acquitted from offences under section 399 and 402 IPC as well as 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'.
Digitally signed SANJAY by SANJAY
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2022.06.30
15:26:44 +0530
Announced in the open Court SANJAY SHARMA-II
th
on this 30 June, 2022 Addl. Sessions Judge-03 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 34 of 35
State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors.
CNR No.: DLCT010001272012
SC No. 27347/2016
FIR No. 314/2011
PS Crime Branch
30.06.2022
Present : Mr. Ayub Ahmed Qureshi, Advocate with all the accused
persons.
Vide separate judgment announced in the open Court, the accused persons, namely, Alam @ Saleem, Yasin, Farman and Shahabuddin are acquitted from offences under Section 399 and 402 IPC as well as 25 of 'The Arms Act, 1959'. A copy of judgment is given to Ld. Counsel for the accused persons vide acknowledgement on the margin of the ordersheet. The accused persons already furnished bail bonds, as required under Section 437A Cr.P.C. File be consigned to record room.
Digitally signed SANJAY by SANJAY
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2022.06.30
15:26:59 +0530
Sanjay SharmaII
ASJ03, Central District,
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
30.06.2022
FIR No. 314/2011 State vs. Alam @ Saleem & Ors. Page No. 35 of 35