Delhi District Court
State vs . Praveen & Ors on 3 May, 2010
FIR NO. 321/94
U/S 379/411/34 IPC
PS: Narela
State Vs. Praveen & ors
IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK WASON,
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE:ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
FIR NO. 321/94
U/S 379/411/34 IPC
PS: Narela
State Vs. Praveen & ors
Date of Institution of case:19.12.94
Date of Judgment reserved:03.05.10
Date of which Judgment pronounced:03.05.10
JUDGMENT
Sl. No of case :17/2 Date of commission of offence :07/08.11.94 Name of the complainant :Sh. Ram Kumar
Name and address of accused 1. :Parveen S/o Sh. Dharambir R/o Village Susana, PS Kharkhoda, Sonepat, Presently residing at:
House of Mir Singh, Kanjhawala Road, Bawana.
2. Sat Dev S/o Sh. Sham Babu R/o H. No. 1148, Kanjhawala Road, Meer Singh, Pahalwan, Pg no. 1 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors Bawana, Delhi.
3. Sunil S/o Sh. Visheshwar, R/o Village Garra, PS Rai Garh, District Rohtak, Bihar.
4. Jitender S/o Sh. Raghbir R/o Village Bawana, Delhi.
Offence complained of :379/411/34 IPC Plea of accused :Pleaded not guilty Date of order :03.05.10 Final order :Acquitted BRIEF REASONS FOR DECISION:
1. The story of the prosecution in brief is as under:
Accused Parveen, S/o Sh. Dharambir, Sunil, S/o Sh. Visheshwar, Jitender, S/o Sh. Raghbir & Sat Dev, S/o Sh. Sham Babu have been sent up for the trial for the offence U/S 379/411/34 IPC for the reason that they on 07/08.11.94, they all committed theft of Maruti car bearing no. DDB-4840 from the house of the complainant Ram Kavar, which they have retained knowing or having reason to believe that it is a stolen property and they thereby committed the offence punishable U/S 379/411/34 IPC and Pg no. 2 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors on the basis of which FIR no. 321/94 was registered at PS Narela.
2. After investigation, chargesheet was filed against the accused persons & after supplying the copies to them in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C, charge was framed against the accused persons on 29.01.98, to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In support of its version, the prosecution examined 4 witnesses. PW1 Sh. Ram Kumar, PW2 Virender Kumar, PW3 HC Chander Bhan & PW4 SI Harish.
4. PW1 is Sh. Ram Kumar. He was the driver of maruti car bearing registeration no. DDB-4840 and he has deposed that on the day of incident he parked his car in front of his house after locking the same. He has further deposed that in the morning at about 6:00 a.m, car was missing and he reported the matter to police and police recorded his statement Ex. PW1/A. He was not cross examined.
Pg no. 3 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors
5. PW2 is Sh. Virender Kumar. He is the registered owner of car bearing registration no. DDB-4840 and he has deposed that the same was stolen and on the recovery, he got the vehicle released on superdari. Superdginama in this regard is Ex. PW2/A. He has further deposed that his driver lodged the complaint regarding the theft. He was also not cross examined.
6. PW3 is HC Chander Bhan. He is the duty officer, who has registered the present FIR no. 321/94 under section 379/411/34 IPC. He has proved the copy of the FIR as Ex. PW3/A. He was also not cross examined.
7. PW4 is SI Harish. He is the IO of the case and he has deposed that on the intervening night of 07/08.11.94, he was posted at PS Narela and on that day he was on the night emergency duty ad on 08.11.94 in the early morning at about 6:00/6.30 a.m, duty officer handed him over a call regarding the theft of a car bearing no. DDV-4840 upon which he alongwith DHG Ct. Om Parkash reached at house no. 1173, Panna Paposian, Narela, where they met Pg no. 4 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors complainant Ram Kumar. He has further deposed that he recorded the statement of complainant Ex. PW1/A, which he attested and endorsed and the rukka was given to Ct. Om Parkash for getting the case registered. He has further deposed that he inspected the spot and prepared the site plan Ex. PW4/A and searched for accused and stolen property but could not be traced out. He recorded the statement of witnesses. He has further deposed that on 10.11.94, he alongwith Ct. Dharamveer, Ct. Naresh, Driver Ct. Jasbir went to Chor Piyau Narela and were checking the vehicles. He has further deposed that at about 9:00 p.m, one maruti car bearing no. DDB-4840 was seen coming from the Narela side, in which 4 boys were sitting, they were stopped and since he was already aware about the fact that maruti car of the said number has been stolen and is wanted and he apprehended all the four boys and the boy, who was driving the said car disclosed his name as Parveen and the other boys disclosed their names as Sunil, Jitender and Satyadev. He further deposed that he recorded the disclosure statement of accused Parveen Ex. PW4/B and took the said recovered car into police possession vide memo Pg no. 5 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors Ex. PW4/C. He further deposed that one master key was also recovered from accused Parveen and the same was also taken into possession vide memo Ex. PW4/D. He further deposed that he brought accused, said recovered car and bunch of key and deposited the said car and bunch of key in malkhana and further joined the accused persons in the investigation and accused Parveen alongwith other accused pointed out the spot, from where they had stolen the car, pointed out memo in this regard is Ex. PW4/E and he has further deposed that accused persons pointed out number of spots, from where they had committed the theft of vehicles. Other pointing out memos are Ex. PW4/F, Ex. PW4/G, Ex. PW4/H, Ex. PW4/I and Ex. PW4/J. His further examination in chief was deferred.
8. After completing prosecution evidence, matter, separate statement of accused persons U/S 281 r/w 313 Cr.P.C was recorded in which accused persons submitted that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case and simultaneously stated that they do not want to lead defence evidence and accordingly, the matter was fixed for Pg no. 6 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors final arguments on 22.03.10 and on 22.03.10 at the request of accused persons, matter was adjourned to 21.04.10 and on 21.04.10, Ld. APP has moved an application U/s. 311 Cr.P.C, which was dismissed and matter was fixed for final arguments for 03.05.10.
9. I have heard both the parties. Record perused.
10. It is a matter of record that list of witnesses contains 5 witnesses but the prosecution examined only 4 witnesses and during the proceedings superdar i.e PW2 Sh. Virender Kumar was allowed to be examined as one of the witness.
11. In the present case, all the accused persons have been charged U/s. 379/411/34 IPC and to prove the case, the prosecution has to prove all the ingredients of these Sections.
12. Two material witnesses i.e Ct. Naresh Kumar and Ct. Dharamvir were not examined by the prosecution despite giving various opportunities. Even PW4 SI Harish was Pg no. 7 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors examined and his chief examination was deferred for want of case property and thereafter he was never examined before this court despite being given various opportunities. On 28.09.04, last opportunity was given and after that various opportunities were given to the prosecution to complete entire evidence but prosecution failed to complete entire evidence and vide order dated 21.11.09 P.E was closed. It is a matter of record that at the time of final arguments Ld. APP had moved an application U/s. 311 Cr.P.C for calling the witnesses and application of Ld. APP was dismissed by detailed order. Since, PW4 SI Harish was not examined after his examination was deferred, hence, his part examination in chief cannot be read in evidence and to this fact, Ld. Counsel for accused has relied upon the Judgment Mr. Ripen Kumar Vs. Department of Customs 2001 [1] JCC [Delhi] 47 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Hence, in these circumstances, there is no evidence on record to connect the accused persons with the offence for which they have been charged.
13. All these facts & circumstances show that prosecution has Pg no. 8 FIR NO. 321/94 U/S 379/411/34 IPC PS: Narela State Vs. Praveen & ors miserably failed to prove the guilt of accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, accused persons are acquitted of the said offence U/S 379/411/34 IPC, for which they have been charged with. Their bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged. Documents, if any be returned, after cancellation of endorsement.
14. File be consigned to Record Room.
(DEEPAK WASON) Metropolitan Magistrate Rohini Court,Delhi ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY i.e on 03rd May, 2010 Pg no. 9