Delhi District Court
State vs Sanjay on 22 November, 2012
IN THE COURT OF MS. AMBIKA SINGH, METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE06,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
FIR No: 85/2012
Under Section: 457/380/511 IPC
PS: Parliament Street
State Vs Sanjay
JUDGMENT U/s 355 Cr.P.C
a) Sl. No. of the case : 02403R0052212012
b) The date of commission of the
offence : 15.06.2012
c) Name of the complainant : Amir Singh S/o Sh. Banwari Lal
d) Name, parentage & address
of accused. : Sanjay S/o Sh. Satpal Singh R/o vagabond of
Gurudwara Banglasahib, New Delhi.
e) Offence complained of or proved: 457/380/511 IPC
f) The plea of the accused and his
examination : In his statement u/s 313 CrPC as
recorded on 25.10.2012, the accused has
denied all the material incriminating
circumstances appearing in the prosecution
evidence on record against him. Accused
has further stated that he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further
stated that the present case is a false case
and he does not want to lead evidence in
his defence.
g) The final order : Accused convicted u/s 457/380/511 IPC.
h) The date of such order : 22.11.2012
Date of institution of case : 09.08.2012
Date of reserving of order : 06.11.2012
Date of Pronouncement : 22.11.2012
FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 1 of 11
BRIEF FACTS / STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
1. Accused Sanjay S/o Sh. Satpal Singh is facing trail on the allegations that on 15.06.2012 at about 05:00 AM at Dak Bhawan, Near Patel Chowk, New Delhi, a place within the jurisdiction of PS Parliament Street, he committed the offence of house breaking by night in order to steal the copper wire from the AC fitted in the Dak Bhawan which is a place used for custody of property and he was caught red handed at the spot while he was attempting to steal the said copper wire.
2. After hearing the arguments, charge U/s 457/380/511 IPC was framed against accused Sanjay by the present court on 07.09.2012 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. The prosecution has examined total six witnesses in support of its case i.e. PW1 HC Bir Sen, PW2 SI Amir Singh, PW3 Ct. Jeetram, PW4 Ct. Om Prakash, PW5 Ct. Ramesh and PW6 ASI Hari Singh.
4. Statement of the accused was recorded u/s 313 CrPC on 25.10.2012 wherein the accused has denied all the material incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence on record against him. Accused further stated that this was a false case against him and he did not prefer to lead evidence in his defence.
FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 2 of 11
5. I have heard the final arguments and carefully perused the record.
6. As mentioned above, the prosecution in support of its case, has examined total six witnesses.
PW1 HC Bir Sen has proved the present FIR vide Ex. PW1/A. He has also proved his endorsement on rukka vide Ex. PW1/B. PW2 SI Amir Singh has deposed in his testimony that on 14/15.06.2012, he was working as SI, SSF, MHA and was the company commander. On that day, his duty hours were from 07:00 PM (14.06.2012) to 07:00 AM (15.06.2012) at Dak Bhawan. At about 05:00 AM, he along with Ct. Jeetram and Ct. Om Prakash were on patrolling duty and reached at back side of the Dak Bhawan, Near Rafi Marg. They saw that one person had climbed on the wall and was breaking the copper wires of the AC and on raising alarm, the accused left the copper wires of the AC and tried to escape from the spot. The said accused person was apprehended by him with the help of Ct. Jeetram and Ct. Om Prakash whose name was revealed as Sanjay. The accused admitted that he had entered into the premises of Dak Bhawan with the intention to steal the copper wires from the AC. The complaint of PW2 in this regard is Ex. PW2/A. PW1 had shown the site to the IO who had prepared the site plan at his instance which is Ex. PW2/B. The accused was arrested by the IO vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/C. The accused was also personally searched FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 3 of 11 by the IO vide personal search memo Ex. PW2/D. Thereafter, the IO interrogated the accused and the disclosure statement of the accused was recorded by the IO, same is Ex. PW2/E. PW1 identified the accused present in the court on that day.
PW3 Ct. Jeetram deposed in his testimony that on 14/15.06.2012, he was working as Constable, SSF, MHA and was posted at Dak Bhawan, New Delhi. On that day, his duty hours were from 07:00 PM (14.06.2012) to 07:00 AM (15.06.2012) along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Om Prakash. At about 05:00 AM, he along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Om Prakash were on patrolling duty and reached behind the Dak Bhawan. They saw that one person had entered into the premises of Dak Bhawan and had climbed upon the wall and was trying to break the copper wires fitted in the AC. On raising alarm, the said person tried to escape from the spot and had sustained minor injuries as he had jumped down from the wall. Thereafter, he along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Om Prakash apprehended the said person who revealed his name as Sanjay. The accused told that he had entered into the premises in order to steal copper wires fitted in the AC. The police was called at 100 number. Police arrived at the spot. The accused was arrested by the IO vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/C. The accused was also personally searched by the IO vide personal search memo Ex. PW2/D. Thereafter, IO interrogated the accused and disclosure statement of the accused was recorded by the IO, same is Ex. PW2/E. Statement of PW3 was recorded by the IO. PW3 identified the FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 4 of 11 accused present in the court on that day.
PW4 Ct. Om Prakash has deposed in his testimony that on 14/15.06.2012, he was working as Constable, SSF, MHA and was posted at Dak Bhawan, Patel Chowk, New Delhi. On that day, his duty hours were from 07:00 PM (14.06.2012) to 07:00 AM (15.06.2012) along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Jeetram. In the morning at about 05:00 AM, he along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Jeetram were on checking duty and reached behind the Dak Bhawan near the back Gate, Rafi Marg. They saw that one person had entered into the premises of Dak Bhawan and had climbed upon the wall and was trying to break the copper wires fitted in the AC. On raising alarm, the said person jumped down from the wall and tried to escape from the spot. Thereafter, PW4 along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Jeetram apprehended the said person who revealed his name as Sanjay. The accused had also sustained minor injuries. The accused told that he had entered into the premises in order to steal copper wires fitted in the AC. The police was called at 100 number. Police arrived at the spot. SI Amir Singh handed over the accused to the IO who was arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/C. The accused was also personally searched by the IO vide personal search memo Ex. PW2/D. Thereafter, IO interrogated the accused and disclosure statement of the accused was recorded by the IO in which the accused had stated that he had entered into the premises and was trying to remove the copper wires from the AC, same is Ex. PW2/E. Statement of PW4 was recorded by the IO. PW4 FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 5 of 11 identified the accused present in the court on that day. PW5 Ct. Ramesh has deposed in his testimony that on 15.06.2012, he was posted as Constable, DHG at PS Parliament Street and on that day on receipt of DD No. 32A by the IO ASI Hari Singh had joined the investigation of the present case. Thereafter, he along with IO ASI Hari Singh had gone to the spot i.e. Dak Bhawan, near Patel Chowk where they met SI Amir Singh, Ct. Jeet Ram and Ct. Om Prakash of SSF along with the accused. SI Amir Singh handed over the accused whose name was revealed as Sanjay to the IO. Thereafter, the IO recorded the statement of the complainant SI Amir Singh who told that the accused was apprehended by them while he was attempting to steal the copper wire from the AC fitted in Dak Bhawan. Thereafter, the IO prepared the rukka and handed over the same to PW5 for registration of FIR. Thereafter, PW5 left the spot and went to PS Parliament Street and got the FIR 85/12 registered. After some time, PW5 returned back to the spot and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to the IO. Thereafter, the accused was arrested by the IO vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/C. The personal search of the accused was also conducted by the IO vide personal search memo Ex. PW2/D. The disclosure statement of the accused Ex. PW2/E was recorded by the IO. Statement of PW5 was recorded by the IO. PW5 identified the accused present in the court on that day. FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 6 of 11 PW6 ASI Hari Singh has deposed in his testimony that on 15.06.2012, he was posted as ASI at PS Parliament Street and on that day the investigation of the present case was handed over to him vide DD No. 32A dated 15.06.2012, same is Ex. PW6/A. Thereafter, Ct. Ramesh had joined the investigation in the present case. Thereafter, PW6 along with Ct. Ramesh had gone to the spot i.e. Dak Bhawan, near Patel Chowk where they met SI Amir Singh, Ct. Om Prakash and Ct. Jeet Ram of Secretariat Security Force (SSF) along with the accused. Thereafter, PW6 recorded the statement of complainant SI Amir Singh and prepared a rukka vide his endorsement Ex. PW6/B. Thereafter, PW6 handed over the rukka to Ct. Ramesh for registration of FIR. Ct. Ramesh left the spot and after some time he returned back along with original rukka and copy of FIR. Thereafter, PW6 arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/C. Thereafter, PW6 conducted the personal search of the accused vide personal search memo Ex. PW2/D. Thereafter, PW6 recorded the disclosure statement of the accused Ex. PW2/E. Thereafter, PW6 prepared the site plan Ex. PW2/B at the instance of the complainant. PW6 recorded the statements of the witnesses u/s 161 CrPC. The parcha12 of the accused was filled in for verification of address. Thereafter, PW6 prepared the challan and filed the same before the court for judicial verdict. PW6 identified the accused present in the court on that day.
7. To prove the offence punishable u/s 457 IPC, the prosecution has to prove beyond the reasonable doubt that the accused committed lurking house FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 7 of 11 trespass in night or house breaking in night in order to commit any offence or in order of committing theft.
To prove the offence punishable u/s 380/511 IPC, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was attempting to commit theft in a place used for custody of property or in dwelling house.
8. It is the prosecution story that on 15.06.2012 at about 05:00 AM at Dak Bhawan, Near Patel Chowk, New Delhi, the accused committed offence of house breaking by night in order to steal copper wire from the AC fitted in the Dak Bhawan which is a place used for custody of property and he was caught red handed at spot while he was attempting to steal the said copper wire.
9. PW2 SI Amir Singh, PW3 Ct. Jeetram and PW4 Ct. Om Prakash are the eyewitness of the present case. PW2 is SI Amir Singh who on the date of incident was working as SI, Secretariat Security Force (SSF), Ministry of Home Affairs. It is deposed by him that about 05:00 AM when he along with Ct. Jeetram and Ct. Om Prakash reached at back side of the Dak Bhawan, Near Rafi Marg, they saw that one person had climbed on the wall and was breaking the copper wires of the AC and on raising alarm, the accused left the copper wires of the AC and tried to escape from the spot. The said accused was apprehended by him with the help of Ct. Jeetram and Ct. Om Prakash. He has also identified the accused present in the court on that day. He has also made FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 8 of 11 the complaint Ex.PW2/A.
10. PW3 is Ct. Jeetram who has also deposed that at about 05:00 AM, he along with SI Amir Singh and Ct. Om Prakash were on patrolling duty and reached behind the Dak Bhawan. They saw that one person had entered into the premises of Dak Bhawan and had climbed upon the wall and was trying to break the copper wires fitted in the AC. On raising alarm, the said person tried to escape from the spot. Thereafter, he along with PW2 and PW4 apprehended the said person. He also identified the accused.
11. PW4 is Ct. Om Prakash who has also deposed on the lines of PW2 and PW3.
He has also identified the accused present in the court on that day.
12. PW5 is Ct. Ramesh who has deposed that on 15.06.2012 on receipt of DD No. 32A by the IO ASI Hari Singh, he had joined the investigation of the present case. He along with IO ASI Hari Singh i.e. PW6 had gone to the spot i.e. Dak Bhawan, near Patel Chowk where they met PW2 SI Amir Singh, PW3 Ct. Jeetram and PW4 Ct. Om Prakash. PW2 SI Amir Singh handed over the accused whose name was revealed as Sanjay to the IO. Thereafter, PW5 left the spot and went to PS Parliament Street and got the FIR 85/12 registered.
13. PW6 ASI Hari Singh is the IO of the present case. He has deposed that on 15.06.2012, the present case was handed over to him vide DD No. 32A which FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 9 of 11 is Ex. PW6/A. Thereafter, he along with Ct. Ramesh had gone to the spot i.e. Dak Bhawan, near Patel Chowk where they met PW2 SI Amir Singh, PW3 Ct. Jeetram and PW4 Ct. Om Prakash along with the accused. He recorded the statement of complainant SI Amir Singh. Thereafter, he also arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/C.
14. The accused has not crossexamined the witnesses despite opportunity.
Further, PW2 SI Amir Singh, PW3 Ct. Jeetram and PW4 Ct. Om Prakash had deposed emphatically on oath that they caught the accused red handed while he was attempting to steal the copper wires fitted in the AC at Dak Bhawan.
15. In the statement u/s 313 CrPC, accused has stated that the present case is a false case and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. However, no motive has been brought on record as to why PWs will depose falsely against the accused and they will falsely implicate the accused in the present case. Absolutely nothing has come on record to discredit the testimony of PW2 SI Amir Singh, PW3 Ct. Jeetram and PW4 Ct. Om Prakash, hence, reliance can be placed on their testimonies. In light of the testimony of PWs, it is crystal clear that the accused is the guilty of the offence punishable u/s 457/380/511 IPC and is liable to be convicted.
16. In light of above discussions, it is crystal clear that prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the offence of FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 10 of 11 house breaking by night in order to steal the copper wire from the AC fitted in the Dak Bhawan which is a place used for custody of property and he was caught red handed at the spot while he was attempting to steal the said copper wire. Therefore, the accused is liable to be convicted for the offence punishable u/s 457/380/511 IPC. Accordingly, accused Sanjay is convicted for the offence punishable u/s 457/380/511 IPC.
Announced in the open (Ambika Singh)
Court on 22.11.2012 Metropolitan Magistrate06,
PHC, New Delhi
FIR No. 85/2012 P.S. Parliament Street Page 11 of 11