Delhi District Court
1. Surinder Kumar Khanna vs Intelligence Officer Directorate Of on 19 December, 2018
Page 1 of 55
IN THE COURT OF SH VIRENDER KUMAR GOYAL
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE04, WEST DISTRICT,
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
SC No. 56753/16
FIR No. 98/2011
P.S. Kirti Nagar
U/Sec. 395/397/412/120B/34 IPC
State
Vs.
1. Veer Bahadur
S/o Late Arjun Singh
R/o W1/223, Jhuggi Maya Puri Chowk,
Kirti Nagar, Delhi
2. Raju
S/o Late Deepak
R/o W1/84, Jhuggi Maya Puri Chowk,
Kirti Nagar, Delhi.
3. Satbir
S/o Sh. Mukesh
R/o B195, Jhuggi Chuna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar,
Delhi.
4. Dhirendra
S/o Late Ekadarshi @ Gabber
R/o B195, Jhuggi Chuna Bhatti,
Kirti Nagar, Delhi.
Page 2 of 55
5. Jugnu
S/o Late Ram Ratan
R/o A216, Harijan Camp,
Chuna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar, Delhi
Date of committal to Court of Sessions : 20.06.2011
Final Arguments concluded on : 10.12.2018
Date of Judgment : 19.12.2018
JUDGMENT
1. The FIR of present case was registered on the basis of one complaint that accused Veer Bahadur, Satveer, Dhirendra and Jugnu had entered into the house of complainant, when complainant was at home alongwith two maid servants namely Babita and Lalita and two children namely Shrey and Jaisiya. One of the accused held a knife at the neck of maid Babita and dragged her into the room of the complainant while the other two had a pistol and two other accused had knives with them. The accused threatened the complainant to hand over cash and jewellery to them and after obtaining the keys of the almirah, started searching. The accused took out cash and jewellery from the almirah and put them in the pillow cover. Thereafter they dragged the complainant to the room of her father in law and broke the almirah. They threatened the complainant that they would inflict injury on Page 3 of 55 her person. The accused took out cash from the almirah of the father in law and placed them in the bag. Son of the complainant Shrey was hit by the accused by banging his head on the wall and after tyeing the inmates, they left. It is further stated that maid Lalita untied herself and went out to call driver, who was sitting in the car parked outside the house. The said Raju telephonically called the husband of the complainant.
2. Thereafter, the investigation was completed and the chargesheet U/Sec.395/397/412/120B/34 IPC was filed on 28/05/2011 before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, West District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. Vide order dated 04/06/2011, Ld. M.M. committed the case to the Court of Sessions.
3. Vide order dated 31/01/2012, charge under sections 412 IPC was framed against all accused persons separately; u/s 397 IPC was framed against accused Veer Bahadur and Satveer; u/s 120B IPC was framed against all accused persons; and u/s 395 of IPC was framed against accused Veer Bahadur, Satveer, Dhirendra and Jugnu to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. On 30/05/2012 amended charge for the offence u/s 395 IPC r/w Section 120B IPC was framed against accused Veer Bahadur, Satveer, Dhirendra and Jugnu, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. During the trial, the prosecution has examined 15 witnesses.
Page 4 of 556. PW1 Mrs Mona has stated that on 28/03/2011, at about 12 noon, or 12.30 pm, she was at her home alongwith her two maid servants namely Babita and Lalita and two children namely Shrey and Jai Sia. Suddenly, five or six persons entered her house. One of them struck a knife on the neck of her maid Babita and dragged her in her room. One of them was having a pistol and two of them were having knives with them and some were having blades with them. They threatened her and asked her to hand over the cash and jewellery to them. Thereafter they themselves opened the almirah and started searching the almirah. They took out the jewellery and cash from the almirahs and put the entire cash and jewellery in a pillow cover. One of them, whose name she came to know later on Veer Bahadur pulled her hair and slapped. Thereafter they took her to the bedroom of her father in law. They asked her to hand over the keys of the almirah of her father in law to them but she was not having the keys, so she was unable to handover the same to them. They asked her to telephonically call her father in law without disclosing him about the incident but later on they themselves changed the mind of calling her father in law and they broke open the almirah with the help of hammer. They also threatened her to inflict sharp injuries on her person, cutting her veins and to pour hot water on her. After breaking the almirah, they took out the cash from the almirah and put the cash in a bag. They hit her son Shrey very badly and banged his head against the wall. Thereafter they took her chunnies and tied all of them in her bed room and thereafter left her house. They were also asking key of the car.
Page 5 of 557. PW1 has further stated that maid Lalita first untied herself and thereafter she untied her and other members. She thereafter went outside and called her driver Raju who at that time was sitting in the car which was parked outside their house. Raju telephonically called her husband.
8. PW1 has further stated that police arrived at the spot and recorded her statement/complaint Ex PW1/A, in which she has stated that the accused persons had robbed two diamond sets, four or six gold bangles, two diamond bangles, four to six diamond rings, two pair of diamond ear rings, cash Rs 2030 lacs; two gold chains, two small chains, two wrist watches, one make RADO of steel grey colour and the second of make KENITH COLE of brown colour; sun glasses and the vallet etc. She had given the documentary proof/receipts of jewellery to the IO. She has identified accused Raju, Satbir, Veer Bahadur, Dhirender and Jugnu. She has stated that accused Satbir was having knife in his hand at the time of incident. Accused Veer Bahadur was having pistol in his hand at the time of incident and accused Dhirender and Jugnu were also involved in the commission of dacoity.
9. PW1 has further stated that during the course of investigation, she had visited Tihar Jail, where she had identified accused Dhirender Kumar, Veer Bahadur and Atik and signed the TIP proceeding of case property as Ex PW1/X. Tip proceeding of accused Dhirender as Ex PW1/Y, TIP proceeding of accused Veer Bahadur and Atik as Ex PW1/Z and Ex PW1/Z1, second TIP proceeding of accused Veer Bahadur dated 08/04/2011 as Ex PW1/Z2.
Page 6 of 5510. PW1 has identified five gold chains as Ex PX (15) collectively;
five rings Ex P5 (1 to 5) collectively; one gold kara as Ex PZ, two diamond bangles as Ex PX1 (12) collectively; one ear ring of gold as Ex PX2, two diamond ear rings as Ex PX3 (1 to 2) collectively and four gold bangles as Ex PX4 (1 to 4) collectively. PW1 has also identified two baby bangles of gold, one gold locket in the form of Lord Ganesha, one artificial ring, two diamond rings, one pearch, one silver coin as Ex P5.
11. PW2 Lalita has stated that she has been working with Sh. Sachin Chadha as a maid servant at his house situated at B78, Mansarovar Garden, Kirti Nagar, Delhi and also reside at his address and in the month of March at about 12 noon, while she was taking bath, she heard some noise and when she came outside the bathroom and was washing her hands, about six persons entered the said house of Shri Sachin Chadha and one of them put a knife on her neck and took her to the room of Bhabhi Monika @ Mona.
12. PW3 HC Subash Chand has stated that on 28/03/2011, while he was working as duty officer at about 3.25 pm HC Ravinder had handed over one rukka prepared by SI Partap Singh to him for the registration of the case and on the basis of the same, he got recorded the FIR of present case Ex PW3/A on computer through computer operator and made endorsement on the rukka regarding the registration of the present FIR Ex PW3/B and after registration of the case, he handed over original rukka and copy of FIR to HC Ravinder to deliver the same to IO.
Page 7 of 5513. PW4 Ct Umesh Tiwari has stated that on 28/03/2011, while he was posted at PS Kirti Nagar and was working as Chittha Munshi, duty officer HC Subhash handed over the copy of DD No. 17A to him to deliver the same to SI Pratap Singh. So, he reached at the spot i.e., B78, Mansarover Garden and found SI Pratap Singh present there. He handed over the said copy of DD to him. SI Pratap Singh recorded his statement in this regard.
14. PW5 Ms Babita has stated that at the relevant time, she was working as the residence of Sachin Bhaiya in Kirti Nagar as maid and on 28/03/2011 at about 12 noon, she was in kitchen, while wife of Sachin was in her own room. One child was having bath, while the other was with Mona. At that time, about 56 people entered the house. One of the persons kept a knife on her neck and enquired about Mona. They took her before Mona and enquired about the goods, which were in the house. Mona got scared and told that the goods were lying in the adjoining room. Those persons tied her and the children and took Mona to the other room. They took all the articles as well as money. There was another maid namely Lalita. At the time when they left, they had tied Mona also and left her in that condition. She has identified all the accused persons before court.
15. PW6 Ct Prem Chand has stated that on 28/03/2011, while he was posted at PS Kirti Nagar, he joined the investigation with IO SI Partap Singh in this case and they reached Maya Puri Chowk. One secret informer met them at Maya Puri Chowk and informed that accused Raju, who is wanted Page 8 of 55 in this case is present at his jhuggi no. B195, Chuna Bhatti and if raid is conducted, he can be apprehended. When they reached there with the informer, accused Raju was apprehended, while he was standing outside his jhuggi, at the instance of informer. Accused Raju was apprehended and thereafter informer was relieved from the investigation. During the interrogation, accused Raju informed them that his three associates involved in the present case are present inside his jhuggi and thereafter accused Raju led them inside the said jhuggi where three accused persons namely Satbir, Atiq and Veer Bahadur were found present. All the three accused persons were apprehended from there.
16. PW7 ASI Ajit Singh has stated that on 28/03/2011 after receiving information from IO SI Partap Singh, he alongwith his Mobile Crime Team reached at the spot i.e., H. No. B78, Mansarovar Garden, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, where he inspected the place of occurrence and HC Devender Singh took photograph of the spot from different angles and ASI Manoj Tyagi, Finger Print Expert took six chance prints from the spot and he prepared his detailed mobile crime team report Ex PW7/A at the spot and handed over the same to the IO. IO recorded his statement on the same day.
17. PW8 HC Ravinder Singh has stated that on 28/03/2011, he joined the investigation with SI Partap Singh after receiving DD No. 17 A by him and thereafter they reached at B78, Mansarovar Garden, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, where IO recorded the statement of complainant and prepared rukka on the Page 9 of 55 same. IO also called Crime Team and photographer at the spot. He took the rukka to PS Kirti Nagar and handed over the same to duty officer and duty officer got recorded the present FIR. After registration of the case, duty officer handed over original rukka and computer copy of FIR to him and he delivered the same to the IO at the spot. They searched for the accused persons but did not find any clue about them. IO recorded the statements of Babita, Lalit, ASI Ajit Singh and supplementary statement of complainant. IO recorded his statement on 28/03/2011.
18. PW8 has further stated that on 28/04/2011, he joined the investigation with SI Partap Singh. SI Partap Singh might have received secret information through informer and thereafter he alongwith SI Partap Singh and secret informer reached jhuggi Chuna Bhatti, Harizan Camp where accused Jugnu was apprehended from the jhuggi on the pointing out of secret informer. This witness has identified accused Jugnu before the court. Accused Jugnu was interrogated and thereafer he was arrested by the IO vide arrest memo Ex PW8/A. Personal search of accused Jugnu was taken vide memo Ex PW8/B and formal search of the accused Jugnu was taken by the IO in his presence. Accused Jugnu had handed over two mobile phones, one of make Nokia and other of Samsung after taking out from the pocket of his pant, which he was wearing at that time. Disclosure statement of accused Jugnu Ex PW8/C was also recorded by the IO. Accused had disclosed that he had kept concealed the jewellery articles and cash amount, which had come in his share from the robbed articles and cash at his jhuggi and he Page 10 of 55 could get the same recovered. Thereafter accused Jugnu led them to his jhuggi and got recovered cash amount of Rs 40,000/ . Accused also got recovered one ring, one ear tops of diamond, one white pearl. The cash amount and jewellery articles were sealed in a separate pullanda with the seal of PS and these articles were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW8/D. Thereafter accused led them to the place of occurrence and pointed out the place of occurrence. IO prepared pointing out memo Ex PW8/E. IO recorded his statement on the same day.
19. PW9 Ct Sanjeev has stated that on 31/03/2011, while he was posted as constable at PS Kirti Nagar, at about 12 noon SI Partap Singh called him at PS Kirti Nagar in his room as he was having some secret information about the accused persons. Thereafter he alongwith SI Partap Singh left the police station and reached at B195, Chuna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar jhuggies. At the instance of secret informer, he alongwith SI Partap Singh entered in the jhuggi and from the jhuggi, accused Dhirender was apprehended and interrogated by the IO. He confessed his guilt of the present case and he took out ring from his right hand finger and produced the same to the IO and stated that it is the same ring, which was looted and given by accused Veeru to him. IO seized the same vide memo Ex PW9/A. Same was kept in a plastic jaar, which was sealed in a cloth parcel sealed with the seal of PS. Accused Dhirender was arrested vide arrest memo Ex PW9/B. His personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex PW9/C. Accused Dhirender also led the police party to the place of occurrence and pointed out the same vide Page 11 of 55 memo Ex PW9/D. The disclosure statement of accused Dhirender is Ex PW9/E. He has identified accused Dhirender before the court. Thereafter they returned back to the police station. Accused got medically examined from the hospital through another constable. He deposited the case property in the mal khana. This witness has identified the gold ring gents having diamond, which was recovered from the possession of accused Dhirender as Ex PW9/Article1.
20. PW10 HC Mohinder has stated that on 29/03/2011, while he was posted as HC at PS Kirti Nagar, he alongwith SI Partap Singh, HC Ghanshyam and Ct Prem left the police station for investigation of this case. SI Partap Singh had received secret information about accused Raju near his jhuggi at Maya Puri. They reached there alongwith the secret informer and at the instance of the secret informer, accused Raju, who was standing in front of his jhuggi. He was interrogated by the IO. Accused Raju confessed his involvement in the present case alongwith other accused persons. He took out four bundles of hundred rupees each amounting to Rs 40,000/ and two gold chains from the box lying in the jhuggi and produced the same to the IO. SI Partap Singh had seized the same vide memo Ex PW10/A. IO had kept the same in separate plastic containers and they were marked as A1 and A2 and both were sealed with the seal of PS in a parcel and after use, seal was handed over to him. Accused Raju was arrested vide arrest memo Ex PW10/B and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex PW10/C. Accused Raju also made his disclosure statement Ex PW10/D in pursuance Page 12 of 55 of which he got recovered said articles. Thereafter accused Raju led them at jhuggi Chunna Bhatti and stated that accused Veer Bahadur, Satbir and Atiq were sitting in the jhuggi and they apprehended all of the three accused persons. He overpowered accused Veer Bahadur, HC Ghanshyam apprehended accused Satbir and Atiq was apprehended by Ct. Prem. All the three persons were interrogated and they confessed their involvement of the present case. Accused Veer Bahadur was having one bag, which was found containing rupees four lacs of the denomination of one bundle of rupees thousand each and another bundle was in the denomination of 1000X91; 500X18 and remaining four bundles were of the denomination of rupees five hundred each and total amount was rupees four lacs. Some jewellery i.e., one thick gold chain, one more gold chain having pandel, two gold small bangles of child; two rings i.e., one gold and one silver and two diamond and silver bangles were seized by the IO vide memo Ex PW10/E. The said items were kept separately in a plastic container and they were given serial number B1 and B2 and were sealed with the seal of PS and seal after use, was handed over to him. Accused Veer Bahadur was arrested vide memo Ex PW10/F and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex PW10/G. He also made his disclosure statement Ex.PW10/H. One air gun was also recovered from the possession of accused Veer Bahadur and same was also seized vide memo Ex PW10/I and sketch of the same was prepared as Ex PW10/J and same was also kept in a cloth parcel duly sealed with the seal of PS. The other accused were also interrogated and recovery Page 13 of 55 of case property was also effected from them and they were arrested.
21. Thereafter all the accused persons led the police party at the place of occurrence and pointed out the same i.e., B78, M.S Garden. The pointing out memos Ex PW10/K and L were made by accused Raju and Veer Bahadur. This witness has identified all the accused persons before the court and also identified one air gun of black colour, which was recovered from the possession of accused Veer Bahadur as Ex PW10/Article1.
22. PW11 HC Pooran Mal has stated that on 29.03.2011, he was posted at P.S Kirti Nagar as MHC(M). On that day, SI Partap Singh deposited case property consisting of 10 parcels in present case. He made entry of same in register no. 19 at serial no. 2358 (OSR) and copy of the same is Ex.PW 11/A.
23. PW11 has further stated that on 18.04.2011, he handed over all the parcels containing jewellery to IO for the purpose of conducting TIP of case property. The parcels were again deposited in the malkhana on the same day by the IO. Entry in this regard is at point A to A1 and B to B1 on Ex.PW 11/A and on 07.06.2011 by the order of Hon'ble Court, cash of Rs. 800050/ was released to Mr. Sachin Chadda on Superdari. Entry in this regard is from point to C to C1 on Ex.PW11/A. On 10.06.2011 SI Partap Singh again took jewellery articles for conducting TIP before the Hon'ble Court and the same was again deposited in Malkhana by the IO on the same day. Entry in Page 14 of 55 this regard is from point D to D1 and from point E to E1 on Ex.PW11/A. On 27.06.2011, the jewellery articles were released to Mr. Sachin Chadda and his wife on superdari by order of Hon'ble Court. Entry in this regard is from point F to F1 on Ex.PW11/A. PW11 has further stated that on 31.03.2011, SI Partap Singh again deposited one parcel in the present case. He made entry of same in register no. 19 at serial no. 2359 and copy of same is Ex.PW11/B.
24. PW11 has further stated that on 28.04.2011, SI Partap Singh again deposited three parcel duly sealed in the present case. He made entry of same in register no. 19 at serial no. 2405 and copy of same is Ex.PW11/C. Cash and jewellery deposited vide abovesaid entry were also released on superdari to Mr. Sachin Chadda on 07.06.2011 and 16.08.2011 respectively. Entries in this regard are at point G to G1 and portion enclosed at point H.
25. PW12 Sh. Vijay Shankar, Ld. ACMM has stated that on 31.03.2011, while he was posted as Relieving Judge, West, THC, on 31.03.2011 application for TIP of accused Veer Bahadur @ Veeru, Sabtvir and Atik was marked to him by the Ld. ACMM and on 01.04.2011, application for TIP of accused Dhirender was marked to him by Ld. CMM. TIPs were fixed for 08.04.2011. These applications are Ex. PW12/A and Ex.PW12/B respectively.
26. PW12 has further stated that on 08.04.2011, he went to Tihar Jail No. Page 15 of 55 1, 3 & 7 for conducting TIP of abovesaid accused persons and he conducted the TIP proceedings vide Ex.PW1/Z, Ex.PW1/Z1, Ex.PW1/Z2 and Ex.PW1/Y. IO filed applications Ex.PW12/C and Ex.PW12/D respectively for supply copy of TIP proceedings and copies were supplied after allowing the applications.
27. PW13 HC Ghanshyam Swami has stated that on 29/03/2011, while he was posted at PS Kirti Nagar, he joined the investigation of the present case with IO SI Pratap Singh and thereafter they reached at Mayapuri Chowk, Delhi in search of accused persons. One secret informer met them there and informed SI Pratap Singh about the presence of accused Raju. Thereafter, they alongwith informer reached at Jhuggi situated near Mayapuri Chowk, where accused Raju was found present in front of his jhuggi. He was apprehended by them on the pointing out of secret informer. He was interrogated by IO and arrested in this case vide arrest memo Ex PW10/B. Personal search of accused was also taken by IO in his presence vide personal search memo Ex PW10/C. Accused Raju made disclosure statement Ex PW10/D about the present incident and the same was recorded by the IO. Accused Raju disclosed that he has kept concealed cash amount Rs 40,000/ and gold chain from the robbed money in the box in his jhuggi and his father disclosed that he can get the same recovered. Thereafter, accused Raju led them inside his jhuggi and got recovered cash amount Rs 40,000/ and two gold chains from the box lying there and the same was handed over by him to the IO in his presence. The cash amount was counted Page 16 of 55 and checked by the IO and it was found in four packets of hundred note each in the denomination of Rs 100/. Cash amount and two gold chains were kept in two plastic jars separately and thereafter sealed in a cloth pullandas with the seal of PS and were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW10/K. Pullandas were given serial no. A1 and A2 by IO.
28. PW13 has further stated that as per the disclosure statement of accused Raju, he led them towards Jhuggi No. B195, Chuna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar, where he pointed out towards three persons, who were present inside the jhuggi as his associates in the present incident. Accused Raju disclosed their names as Veeru, Satbir and Atik. They were over powered by them. He has identified accused Veer Bahadur and Satbir before court. He has further stated that he over powered accused Satbir while accused Veer Bahadur was over powered by HC Mahender and accused Atik was over powered by Ct Prem. They were interrogated by IO and arrested in this case and he prepared their arrest memos and personal search memos and also recorded their disclosure statements at the place of arrest. The arrest memo of accused Satbir is Ex PW13/A and his personal search memo is Ex. PW13/B and his disclosure statement is Ex PW13/C and as per his disclosure statement, he got recovered cash amount of Rs 2,10,050/, one gold kara, one gold Ganesh Idol and 10 rs silver coin in the shape of a note, two gold rings, two golden tops with diamonds, four artificial buttons with artificial chain and two artificial jhumki from the box lying inside the jhuggi. Accused Satbir also got recovered one knife from underneath the Page 17 of 55 said box. These articles were handed over by him to the IO in his presence. Currency notes were checked and they were found in denomination of Rs 500/, 100/, 50/, 20/ and 10/. The currency notes were kept in a jar and the jewellery articles were kept in another jar. Both the jars were sealed by the IO with the seal of PS and pullandas were given serial no. C1 and C2 and were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW13/D. IO prepared sketch of knife as Ex PW13/E and the total length of the knife was 23.6 cm, the length of blade was 13 cm and length of handle was 10 cm. The knife was kept in plastic jar and thereafter the same was converted into a pullanda and was sealed by IO with the seal of PS and were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW13/F. The proceedings pertaining to the recovery effected by other two accused persons was also conducted by the IO separately and seal after use was handed over to HC Mahinder by IO.
29. PW13 has further stated that after completing the proceedings of arrest and recovery, all the four accused persons led them to B78, Mansarovar Garden i.e., the spot of incident and pointed out from outside of the house as the same, where they have committed dacoity. He prepared the pointing out memos in this regard and pointing out memo of accused Raju is Ex PW10/K. Thereafter all the four accused persons were taken to DDU Hospital, where they were medically examined and after that, they were brought to PS Kirti Nagar and were kept in lock up. Case property was deposited by IO in the malkhana. IO has recorded his statement in this case. He has identified two gold chains as the same, which were recovered Page 18 of 55 from accused Raju and two gold diamond rings, two diamond ear rings, Gold Karah and silver note stating that the said articles were recovered from the accused Satbir as Ex PX, Ex P5, PX1, PX3, PX2 and silver note is Ex PY; gold locket in the form of Lord Ganesha and artificial buttons with chain as Ex P5 (colly) and PY1 and knife Ex PZ before the court.
30. PW14 Sh. M.P Singh, Ld. Senior Civil Judge has stated that on 18/04/2011 while he was posted as MM, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi one application Ex PW14/A for TIP of case property in this case, filed by IO SI Pratap Singh, was marked to him by his Link MM Ms. Vandana Jain vide order dated 06/04/2011. He conducted TIP proceedings of case property of present case and his detailed TIP Proceedings are Ex PW1/X.
31. PW14 has also stated that IO has also filed applications Ex PW14/B for supply of copy of TIP proceedings and copies were supplied to him after allowing the same.
32. PW14 has further stated that on 29/04/2011, while he was posted as MM, West, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, one application Ex PW14/C for TIP of accused Jugnu s/o Sh. Ram Ratan filed by IO SI Pratap Singh, was marked to him by his Link MM Ms. Vandana Jain, Ld. MM, West, THC vide her order dated 29/04/2011 and he conducted TIP proceedings of accused Jugnu s/o Late Sh. Ram Ratan. His detailed TIP proceeding is Ex PW14/D. IO filed applications Ex PW14/E for supply of copy of TIP proceedings and Page 19 of 55 copies were supplied after allowing the application.
33. PW15 SI Pratap Singh has stated that on 28.03.2011, while he was posted at PS Kirti Nagar, at about 1:30pm, he received DD No. 17A regarding theft at B78, MS Garden, Kirti Nagar, Delhi and the same is Ex PW 15/A. Upon receiving the said DD in 'akab' he alongwith HC Ravinder went to spot i.e. B78, MS Garden, Kirti Nagar. Complainant Smt. Mona @ Monika Chadda met them. He recorded her statement Ex PW 1/A and made endorsement on the same and gave the same to HC Ravinder for registration of the present case. HC Ravinder left the spot with rukka. He called the crime team and made request to the senior officers to visit the spot. Crime team came to the spot and inspected the spot. Photographer of the crime team took the photographs. He prepared the site plan Ex PW15/B at the instance of the complainant. HC Ravinder came to the spot with copy of the FIR and rukka and handed over the same to him. Senior officials also visited the spot. Incharge of Crime team ASI Ajit Singh had given his report Ex PW 7/A. He recorded the supplementary statement of complainant and statement of the other witnesses namely Babita and Lalita. They were maid servants of the complainant. Thereafter, he started searching the accused persons and case properties but on that day, it could not be found. He recorded the statement of the HC Ravinder, IC crime team and other witnesses.
34. PW15 has further stated that on 29.03.2011, he received a secret Page 20 of 55 information about the accused persons involved in the present case. Thereafter, he formed a raiding party consisting HC Mahender, HC Ghanshyam, HC Anil, Ct. Sanjeev and Ct. Prem. They left the police station Kirti Nagar. While they were on the way, Ct. Sanjeev and HC Anil left them due to some official urgency. He alongwith other members of raiding team and informer reached at Maya Puri Chowk. They went to the jhuggi area of Maya Puri Chowk, where at the instance of the secret informer, apprehended accused Raju. Accused Raju was the employee of the complainant. He interrogated accused Raju, confessed about the commission of the offense in the house of the complainant. He arrested accused Raju vide arrest memo Ex PW 10/B. He conducted the personal search of accused Raju vide memo Ex PW 10/C. He recorded the disclosure statement of accused Raju vide memo Ex PW 10/D. Accused Raju disclosed that he received Rs. 40,000/ ( forty thousand) and two gold chains in share and the same were kept in the jhuggi. Thereafter, they went to the jhuggi of the accused Raju, accused took out Rs. 40,000/ and two gold chains from the box kept in his jhuggi. He kept Rs. 40,000/ in a plastic container and sealed the same with the seal of PS. The said plastic container was marked as A1. He kept the recovered two gold chains in a plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS and the said plastic container was marked as A2. Both plastic containers marked A1 and A2 were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW 10/A. During the confession, accused Raju disclosed that his associates were Veer Bahadur, Dhirender, Ateeq, Jugnu and Satbir and they Page 21 of 55 were involved in the present case. He further disclosed that all the above mentioned persons were about to come in the jhuggi of Satbir. Thereafter, They alongwith accused Raju reached at B195, Chunna Bhati, Kirti Nagar i.e. jhuggi of Satbir. The gate of the said jhuggi was found closed from inside. They heard some conversation taking place in the jhuggi of Satbir. Thereafter, he knocked the door of the said jhuggi. Gate of the said jhuggi was opened by one person. Later on, his name was revealed as Satbir. When accused Satbir opened the door of the jhuggi, the other two persons including Satbir were trying to flee away but they apprehended them and their names were revealed as Veer Bahadur, Satbir and Atiq. He interrogated accused Veer Bahadur, who confessed about his involvement in the present case. He arrested accused Veer Bahadur, vide arrest memo Ex PW 10/F. He conducted his personal search, vide personal search memo Ex PW 10/G. He interrogated the accused and recorded his disclosure statement Ex PW 10/H. During the search of the accused, one pistol was recovered from his pocket of pant and he prepared the sketch of the said pistol, vide sketch memo Ex PW 10/J. He measured the said pistol and mentioned the measurement on Ex PW 10/J. He prepared the pullanda of the said pistol and sealed the same with seal of PS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW 10/I. The said pistol was air gun pistol. Accused Veer Bahadur was having a bag and he produced the said bag and told them that Rs. 4,00,000/ and some jewelleries of his share, had been kept in the said bag. He checked the said bag and Rs. 4,00,000/ (four lakh) and some Page 22 of 55 jewellery viz. a heavy gold chain, one another gold chain with pendant, two small size gold 'kada', two silver kada having diamonds and one gold ring and one silver ring. He kept the recovered Rs. 4,00,000/ in a plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS, it was marked as B1. He kept the recovered jewelleries in a plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS. It was marked as B2. Both containers B1 and B2 were taken into possession, vide seizure memo Ex PW 10/E.
35. PW15 has further stated that he interrogated accused Satbir. He confessed about his involvement in the present case. He arrested accused Satbir, vide arrest memo Ex PW 13/A. He conducted his personal search, vide personal search memo Ex PW 13/B. He interrogated the accused and recorded his disclosure statement Ex PW 13/C. One knife was recovered from his jhuggi under the box at his instance. He prepared the sketch of the said knife, vide sketch memo Ex PW 13/E. He measured the said knife and mentioned the measurement on Ex PW 13/E. He prepared the pullanda of the said knife and sealed with seal of PS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW 13/F. Accused Satbir took out from a box kept in his jhuggi, Rs. 2,10,050/ (two lakhs, ten thousand and fifty rupees) and some jewelleries i.e. one gold kada, two gold rings, one gold idol of Ganeshji, two gold earings (tops) having diamonds, one ten rupees silver coin in rectangular form, artificial buttons and artificial ear rings (jhumka). He kept the recovered Rs. 2,10,050/ in a plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS. It was marked as C1. He kept the recovered jewelleries in a Page 23 of 55 plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS. It was marked as C2. Both containers C1 and C2 were taken into possession, vide seizure memo Ex PW 13/D.
36. PW15 has further stated that thereafter, he interrogated the accused Ateeq (later on he was found juvenile) and arrested him. He conducted his personal search and recorded his disclosure statement mark B. A sum of Rs. 1,10,000/ (one lakh, ten thousand) in cash and some jewellery articles mentioned in mark A were got recovered by juvenile Ateeq. He prepared two separate pullandas of the said cash amount and jewellery items and sealed it with the seal of PS and both pullandas were marked as D1 and D2. Thereafter, they alongwith accused persons and recovered case property came at the spot at the instance of the accused persons, where accused Raju, Veer Bahadur and Satbir pointed out the place of occurrence i.e. H. NO. B 78, MS Garden, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, vide pointing out memo Ex PW 10/K, 10/L and 13/G respectively. Juvenile Ateeq also pointed out the place of occurrence. Thereafter, they took the accused persons and juvenile Ateeq to DDU hospital for their medical examination. After the medical examination of the accused persons and juvenile, they returned to the police station, where he deposited the case property. Firstly they came to the police station from the spot and thereafter accused persons were taken to DDU hospital. Accused persons and juvenile were put behind the bars after their medical examination.
Page 24 of 5537. PW15 has further stated that next day i.e. 30.03.2011, accused persons were produced before the concerned court in muffled face. He moved an application for the TIP of the accused persons i.e. Veer Bahadur, Satbir and juvenile Ateeq, the said application is Ex PW 12/A. TIP of the accused persons were fixed for 08.04.2011. Accused persons were got remanded in judicial custody.
38. On 31.03.2011, he received a secret information that fifth accused namely Dhirender would come at Chunna Bhati. Thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Sanjeev and secret informer left the police station for Chunna Bhati, Kirti Nagar. On the pointing out of the secret informer, they apprehended accused Dhirender. He interrogated the accused and confessed about his involvement in the present case with his associates. He arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex PW 9/B. He conducted his personal search, vide personal search memo Ex PW 9/C. He interrogated him and recorded his disclosure statement Ex PW 9/E. Accused was wearing a gold ring and he confessed that the said gold ring was a part of the robbed items. He seized the said gold ring by keeping in a plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS, vide seizure memo Ex PW 9/A. Accused was got medically examined and they returned to police station. Case property was deposited in the malkhana. Accused Dhirender was produced before the concerned court in muffled face. He moved an application for the TIP of accused, which is Ex PW 12/B bearing his signature. TIP of accused Dhirender was also fixed for 08.04.2011 with other accused persons.
Page 25 of 5539. PW15 has further stated that on 08.04.2011, TIP of the aforesaid accused persons except Raju was conducted. He got the copy of TIP proceedings of accused persons. On 06.04.2011, he moved an application for the TIP of the case property recovered from the accused persons. Copy of the said application is Ex PW 14/A. TIP of the case property was conducted on 18.04.2011. He obtained the copy of the TIP proceedings.
40. PW15 has further stated that on 28.04.2011, he received a secret information that accused namely Jugnu would come at his house situated in the area of Chunna Bhati, Kirti Nagar. Thereafter, he alongwith HC Ravinder and secret informer left the police station for Chunna Bhati, Kirti Nagar. On the pointing out the secret informer, they apprehended accused Jugnu. He interrogated the accused, who confessed about his involvement in the present case with his associates. He arrested accused vide arrest memo Ex PW 8/A. He conducted his personal search, vide personal search memo Ex PW 8/B. He interrogated him and recorded his disclosure statement Ex PW 8/C. On the pointing out of the accused, they went inside the jhuggi of accused i.e. Jhuggi no. 216, Harijan camp, Chunna Bhati, where accused took out from the box Rs. 40,000/ (forty thousand) and some jewellery i.e. one gold ear pins, one white stone like moti. He seized the said cash amount and jewellery items by keeping them in two plastic containers and sealed them with the seal of PS, vide seizure memo Ex PW 8/D. Container of the cash amount was marked as F1 and container of the other jewellery item was marked F2. Two mobile phones were recovered from the pocket of Page 26 of 55 pant of accused Jugnu, both mobile phones were out of the robbed items. He kept both the mobile phones in a plastic container and sealed with the seal of PS. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW 15/C. Accused was got medically examined and they returned to police station and the case property was deposited in the malkhana. Next day i.e. 29.04.2011, accused Jugnu was produced before the concerned court in muffled face. He moved an application for the TIP of accused. The said application is Ex PW 14/C. He refused to participate in TIP proceedings. He obtained the copy of the TIP proceedings. He moved an application for the TIP of the case property recovered from the accused Jugnu. Carbon copy of the said application is Ex PW 15/D. Copy of the TIP proceedings of accused Jugnu is Ex.4/D. TIP proceedings of the case property recovered from the accused Jugnu is Ex.PW15/E. During investigation, he recorded the statement of witnesses. After completion of the investigation he prepared the challan and filed before the court through SHO concerned.
41. PW15 has identified one iron knife as the same, which was recovered from the accused Satbir as Ex. PZ; photocopies of currency notes, which were recovered from accused persons as Mark PX(running into 372 sheets); air pistol as the same, which was recovered from the accused Veer Bahadur as Ex. PW10/Article 1; two mobile phones, out of which, one mobile phone make Nokia having IMEI no. 353224/03/885461/7 without SIM and another mobile phone make Samsung having model no. SCH S189 and FCC ID no. A3LSCHS189 without SIM as the same, which were recovered from Page 27 of 55 accused Jugnu as Ex.PW15/X1 and X2.; gold diamond ring, which was recovered from accused Dhirendra, as Ex PW15/X3; gold chains, which were recovered from accused Raju, as Ex PW15/X4; one thick gold chain as Ex PW15/X5; gold chain with pendant as Ex PW15/X6; two small size gold karas as Ex PW15/X7 (colly); one gold ring as Ex PW15/X8; two diamond silver karas as Ex PW15/X9, recovered from accused Veer Bahadur @ Veeru. He has also identified one big kara as Ex PW15/X10; two gold rings Ex PW15/X11 (colly); one gold lord Ganesha idol as Ex PW15/X12, two gold diamond tops as Ex PW15/X13 (colly); one silver currency note of Rs 10/ as Ex PW15/X14 and four artificial buttons with chain as Ex PW15/X15 (colly), recovered from accused Satbir. He has also identified one gold diamond ring as Ex PW15/X16, one diamond ear pin as Ex PW15/X17, one white moti as Ex PW15/X18, recovered from the possession of accused Jugnu. He has identified two artificial jhumkis as Ex PW15/X19 (colly), recovered from the possession of accused Satbir and one silver ring, which was recovered from accused Veer Bahadur as Ex PW15/X20.
42. Thereafter, statement of accused persons u/s 313 Cr.P.C were recorded, wherein they have denied the case of prosecution and wanted to lead defence evidence.
43. In defence, accused persons have examined seven witnesses in their defence.
Page 28 of 5544. I have heard ld. Addl. PP for State, Ld. Counsels for accused persons and have gone through the record of this case.
45. This case has been registered on the statement of Smt Mona.
According to her statement, on 28/03/2011, 56 persons aged about 20 to 25 years entered her house and they were having knives, pistol and blade. The description of robbers has also been given and details of robbed amount has also been given. Accordingly, case was registered in police station Kirti Nagar for the offences u/s 395 of IPC.
46. The incident had taken place on 28/03/2011 and during investigation, accused persons were apprehended on 29/03/2011. Accused persons namely Raju, Veer Bahadur, Satbir were apprehended on 29/03/2011, accused Dhirender was apprehended on 31/03/2011. Accused Jugnu was apprehended on 28/04/2011 and accused Atik was apprehended on 29/03/2011, however he was juvenile, so proceedings against him were conducted before JJB. Disclosure statement of all the accused persons were recorded.
47. From accused Raju, Rs 40,000/, two gold chains were recovered .
From the possession of accused Veer Bahadur, Rs 4 lacs, one gold chain, one gold chain with pendant, two small gold bangles, two rings, out of which one of gold and one of silver and two diamond silver bangles were recovered. From the possession of accused Satbir, Rs 2,10,050/ along with Page 29 of 55 one gold bangle, two gold rings, one gold Ganesha, two gold diamond ear rings, one silver note of Rs 10/ , artificial buttons with chain and two artificial jhumki were recovered. From possession of accused Dhirender, one gold ring was recovered. From accused Jugnu, Rs 40,000/, one gold diamond ring, one diamond nose pin and one white moti were recovered.
48. Air gun pistol was recovered from the possession of accused Veer Bahadur. Knife was recovered from the possession of accused Satbir.
49. Accused Dhirender, Satbir and Veer Bahadur were identified during TIP proceeding. Accused Jugnu has refused to join the TIP proceeding as her own.
50. During the TIP proceedings, complainant has identified the case property, allegedly recovered from the possession of accused persons.
51. Accused Veer Bahadur, Satbir, Direndra and Jugnu have been charged for the offences u/s 395 r/w 120 B of IPC. Separate charge for the offence u/s 412 IPC was framed against the accused Raju, Veer Bahadur, Satbir, Dhirender. Accused Veer Bahadur and Satbir have also been charged for the offences u/s 397 of IPC. Accused Veer Bahadur, Raju, Satbir, Dhirendra and Jugnu have been charged for the offences u/s 120B of IPC. Accused Veer Bahadur, Satbir, Dhirendra and Jugnu have been charged for the offence u/s 395 of IPC and accused Jugnu has also been charged for the offence u/s 412 of IPC.
Page 30 of 55Findings qua offences under Section 120 B of IPC; 395 IPC r/w 120B IPC and 397 IPC against the accused persons.
52. To prove the dacoity, complainant examined herself as PW1. She has deposed the same facts as contained in her complaint and she has stated that accused persons had robbed the entire cash and jewellery from the almirah of her house. She later on came to know the name of one of the accused as Veer Bahadur, who had pulled her hair and slapped her. She has further stated that accused persons broke open the almirah with the help of hammer. They also threatened her to inflict sharp injuries on her person, cutting her veins and to pour hot water on her. She has further stated that accused persons hit her son very badly and banged his head against the wall and thereafter they took her chunni and tied all of them in her bedroom and thereafter, they left the house. It is further stated that at that time, her driver Raju was sitting in the car, which was parked outside her house, who had informed about the incident to her husband. Police arrived at the spot and recorded her statement and same is Ex PW1/A. During her examination, she has given the details of robbed articles.
53. PW1 has also identified accused Raju and accused Satbir, who was having knife in his hand. PW1 has further identified accused Veer Bahadur, who was having pistol alongwith accused Dhirendra, Jugnu, who were involved in the commission of dacoity.
Page 31 of 5554. PW1 has also deposed about her participation in TIP proceedings. She has also produced the recovered articles released on superdari before the court and identified the same, which were robbed from her house.
55. It is contended by ld defence counsel for the accused Raju that accused Raju is not involved in the commission of dacoity, as the same is clear from the evidence of PW1, who has stated in the examination in chief that at that time, their driver Raju was sitting in the car which was parked outside their house and Raju had telephonically called her husband. In the cross examination, she has stated that when police reached at her residence, Raju was standing outside her house but at the time of commission of offence, she said that he was sleeping in the car. Police arrested Raju at that time only after questioning him and when he was arrested from her house, one mobile phone was recovered from accused Raju, which shows that accused Raju is not involved in the commission of offence in any manner.
56. It is contended by ld. Defence counsel for accused Satbir that identity of the accused persons is also in dispute as according to cross examination of PW1, she was called to the police station to verify as to the persons, who had been arrested were the same and their names were divulged to her and then she put the certain as to the identity of the persons, who had pulled her hair.
57. It is further contended that PW1 has given contradictory statement Page 32 of 55 about the weapons of offence in possession of accused persons. In the examination in chief, PW1 has specifically stated that accused Satbir was having knife and accused Veer Bahadur was having pistol, whereas in the cross examination, she has stated that she does not remember as to who were the persons, who had knives in their hands. One person was having blade and another has pistol.
58. It is further contended that neither PW1 has been medically examined nor her son, for the allegations of causing injuries to them, so the same have not been proved in any manner.
59. It is further contended that according to the initial information on the basis of which DD was registered, theft had taken place.
60. It is further contended that accoding to statement of PW1 i.e., complaint was not read over to her after recording the same.
61. It is further contended that identification of jewellery is also in dispute as there was no identification mark on the jewellery, which shows that the same were belonging to complainant.
62. PW2 is Lalita is maid of PW1. She has stated that on the day of incident, accused persons entered the house and one of them put a knife on her neck and took her to the room of PW1. Thereafter, she did not depose further on the ground that she has not been paid her salary by the employer Page 33 of 55 for a number of months. She has been cross examined by Ld. Addl. PP for State, wherein she has stated that she cannot identified the accused persons as their faces were covered at the time of incident. PW2 has denied the suggestion that she has not identified the accused persons as she has been won over by the accused persons, as out of them, two persons run placement agency in Delhi as well as she want to exhort money from the complainant in this case.
63. In the cross examination, PW2 has denied that six persons had not come to the residence of her employer on the date of the incident.
64. It is contended by ld. Counsel for the accused persons that in view of deposition of PW2, accused persons, who committed dacoity in the house of complainant were having covered faces, so identification of accused persons before court by PW1 is doubtful and is based on the fact that the accused persons were shown to PW1 in the police station, which she has admitted in the cross examination.
65. PW5 is Ms. Babita. She is another maid of PW1. She has stated that 5 6 persons entered the house. One of them has put a knife on her neck and enquired about PW1. She alongwith children were tied and took PW1 to other room. They took all the articles as well as money. When the accused persons left, they had also tied Mona. PW5 has correctly identified the accused persons.
Page 34 of 5566. It is contended by ld. Defence counsel that to prove the employment of PW2 with the PW1, she has not produced her employment certificate or salary certificate.
67. It was also suggested to PW5 that on the day of incident, she was not in Delhi or that accused Raju, driver was not involved in the incident, which she has denied.
68. It is further contended that although PW5 has identified the accused persons but she has failed to disclose as to who was having knife which was put on her neck. She has also not stated that one of the accused was having pistol. So, contradiction about identity as well as about the person, who was having knife and who was having pistol is again doubtful. So, the witnesses have contradicted about the identity of accused persons as the same, who had committed dacoity in the house of PW1.
69. The prosecution has also not be able to brought and prove on record any meeting of minds that accused entered into criminal conspiracy to commit dacoity.
70. The contentions of Ld. Counsel for accused persons are forceful that PW1 has identified the accused before the court on the basis that accused were shown to her in the police station after their arrest and recovery and PW2, maid of PW1, has stated that the accused persons had covered their faces, whereas PW5 has identified all the accused persons but failed to Page 35 of 55 describe their roles. So, in view of contradictory depositions of PW1, PW2 and PW5, identity of the accused persons is doubtful. They have not been identified, beyond reasonable doubts, by the witnesses. Hence, prosecution has not been able to prove the offence u/s 120B IPC, 395 r/w Section 120 B of IPC and 397 IPC against the accused persons, for which the accused persons are acquitted.
Findings qua offence u/s 412 of IPC against accused Raju.
71. According to seizure memo Ex PW10/A, witnessed by HC Mahinder and HC Ghanshyam, Rs 40,000 and two gold chains were recovered from the possession of accused Raju.
72. The above robbed articles were identified by PW1 during investigation before Ld. MM in TIP proceedings and before court also, she has identified the said articles. Accused Raju has not claimed the ownership of said articles recovered from his possession.
73. According to PW10 HC Mahinder, on 29/03/2011, he joined the investigation of this case alongwith SI Pratap Singh. SI Pratap Singh had received the secret information about accused Raju and on receiving the same, they alongwith secret informer reached near the jhuggi of accused Raju at Maya Puri and secret informer pointed towards accused Raju, who was found standing near his jhuggi. Accused Raju was interrogated, who Page 36 of 55 made disclosure statement about his involvement in the present case alongwith other accused persons. He took out four bundles of hundred rupees each amounting to Rs 40,000, two gold chains from the box lying in the jhuggi and produced the same to the IO. SI Pratap Singh has seized the same vide seizure memo Ex PW10/A and same were sealed in separate plastic containers, which were marked as A1 and A2 and both were sealed with the seal of PS and seal after use was handed over to him. Accused was arrested vide memo Ex PW10/B and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex PW10/C. Accused Raju also made his disclosure statement, which is Ex PW10/D. 724 In the cross examination, PW10 has stated that from the iron box accused Raju took out the case property.
75. Second witness to the seizure memo Ex PW10/A is HC Ghanshyam, who has been examined as PW13. He has also deposed the same facts as deposed by PW10.
76. During the examination in chief of PW10, identity of case property has not been disputed by ld. Defence counsels. PW13 has identified the case property before the court, when produced by the superdar.
77. It is contended by ld. Defence counsel that according to cross examination of PW13, the witness has failed to disclose as to where secret informer met the IO as he came to know about the secret information and Page 37 of 55 he came to know only about secret information at Maya Puri chowk. Again, he has stated that the IO had apprised them about the secret information in the police station itself. He does not remember if the secret informer accompanied their team from the police station itself or not. So, fact of receiving of secret information and pointing out by secret informer of accused Raju are doubtful.
78. PW15 SI Pratap Singh, IO of the present case, has also deposed the same facts as deposed by PW10 and PW13. PW15 has also identified the case property before the court which were recovered in this case.
79. PW15 has also stated that case property was recovered from iron box, which was lying under a cot on the floor. So, all these three witnesses i.e., PW10, PW13 and PW15 have corroborated each other regarding recovery of robbed articles i.e., cash and jewellery and the contradictions as pointed out by ld. Defence counsels are minor in nature and are not effecting the testimony of witnesses.
80. In defence, accused Raju has examined himself as DW1 u/s 315 of Cr.P.C, wherein he has stated that he was working as driver with the complainant prior one year back from the date of incident and on 28.03.2011, he joined his duty with the complainant at about 9.00 a.m., he took the key of the car from complainant Ms. Mona Chadha. He opened the car and cleaned the same and then he asked Ms. Mona as to whether she has Page 38 of 55 to go anywhere in the car. Ms. Mona instructed him to wait outside the house and also stated that if she had to go somewhere she will informed him. He sit in the car and while sitting, he slept . At about 11.30 a.m. 12.00 noon maid of their owner namely Lalita came outside from the house and woke up him and informed him that a theft has taken place inside the house and he also should came inside the house. He immediately went inside the house of their owner and met Ms. Mona. Ms. Mona instructed him to call her husband Sh. Sachin Chadha. He dialed mobile number of Sh. Sachin Chadha through his mobile phone No.8601563499, but Sh. Sachin Chadha had not picked up his mobile phone. Then he dialed 100 number through his mobile phone on the asking of Ms. Mona Chadha. After that, he also received the call of Sh. Sachin Chadha and then he informed him regarding the incident, who stated to him that he is coming to house. Sh. Sachin Chadha came in the house after about 20 minutes of receiving the said call. Sh. Sachin Chadha had also make call to the police. Number of police officials came at the house. He was also present in the house at that time. Police officials took his mobile phone and also asked him to accompanying them. Ms. Mona had asked the police officials as to where they had taken him. Police officials had replied to Ms. Mona that they took him with them for enquiry purpose. Police officials took him at P.S. Kirti Nagar, detained him and also not allowed to go from there upto evening hours. Police made enquiries from him. His brother namely Dashrath was also called at the P.S. and after some time he left the police station on the assurance of police officials that he would be Page 39 of 55 also let off in the late hours. Police officials then took him to Tagore Garden in a building situated in front of Shri Sai Baba Mandir. Police officials kept him whole night in the said building and then took him to P.S. Kirti Nagar in the morning of 29.03.2011. In the morning hours, his brother Dashrath again came to P.S. Kirti Nagar. Police officials told to his brother that he may be released through Court order. Police officials produced him in the Court on 30.03.2011. He has been falsely implicated by the police in the present case. His driving license was also taken by the police when he was detained at P.S. Kirti Nagar. His mobile phone is still in the possession of police officials and the same has not been returned to him. His driving license returned to him by the police officials when he was released on bail from the present case and went to P.S.
81. In the cross examination, DW1 accused Raju has denied the suggestions that on 29/03/2011, when he was present outside his jhuggi, he was apprehended by the police officials at the instance of secret informer or on interrogation, he confessed his involvement in the present case or that he was arrested by the IO at about 3.20 pm or that he had disclosed that he had seen his employer Sachin Chadha bringing cash amount to his house or that he become greedy or that he had passed information about his employer to his associates namely Veer Bahadur or that accused Veer Bahadur told the entire things to his other co accused persons. He has also denied that cash amount and jewellery articles were recovered from his possession, which he has received as part of robbed articles. DW1 has also denied the suggestion Page 40 of 55 that on his pointing out, other co accused persons were apprehended and from them also cash and jewellery articles were recovered. So the main defence of the accused Raju is that at the time of incident, he was sleeping in the car, so he could not hear the noise of complainant and her son.
82. Sh. Dasrath has also been examined on behalf of accused Raju, who has stated that on 28.03.2011 at about 5.30 p.m., he received a phone call from P.S. Kirti Nagar and asked him to come at P.S. Kirti Nagar, so he reached at P.S. Kirti Nagar at about 6.00 p.m. The police officials made enquiries from him regarding his relation with Raju. He replied that Raju is his cousin (son of his mother's sister). Police made enquiry from him regarding his whereabouts. Police officials gave some papers to him and asked to sign the same. The said police officials also told him that he may again come at 9.00 p.m. and took Raju with him. Said police officials had also told him that they are waiting for their senior officials and they will released Raju after arrival of their senior officials. He signed the papers given by the police officials and then left the P.S. At about 9.00 p.m., he again went to the P.S. Kirti Nagar. Police officials present there stated to him that their senior officials had still not come so they cannot release Raju and they further stated to him that either he should wait while sitting in the P.S. or he may come on the next day morning. He remained in the P.S. for about 1 hour but when no senior officials came there so, he left the P.S. and went to his home.
Page 41 of 5583. DW2 has further stated that on the next day morning of 29.03.2011, he again went to P.S. at about 9.30 a.m. He met with police officials who informed him that no senior officials had still come in the P.S. and he was instructed to wait for the same. He remained in the P.S. for about 1 hour and then again left the P.S. The said police officials had asked him to come in the evening. He again went to PS in the evening at about 4.00 p.m. Police officials stated him that Raju will not be released by them and they will produced Raju in the court. Later on he came to know that Raju had been falsely implicated in the present case. Mobile phone, driving license and wallet containing some important documents of his cousin Raju was also taken by the police. This fact has been told to him by Raju.
84. According to the cross examination of DW2, he had signed on plain papers in the police station on 28/03/2011 under fear of police but he had not made any complaint to any senior police officer or any other authority regarding obtaining of his signatures on blank papers or regarding wrongful apprehension of his cousin Raju by the police. No complaint was given to the effect that accused Raju was in police station since 28/03/2011. DW2 has denied the suggestion that accused Raju was arrested from jhuggis on 29/03/2011 at about 3.20 pm and information about his arrest was given to him. He has admitted his signatures on Ex PW10/B i.e., arrest of accused Raju but he has stated voluntarily that he has signed the same on 28/03/2011 in the police station.
Page 42 of 5585. It is further contended by ld. Defence counsel that in view of statement of PW1 Mrs Mona, police arrested accused Raju only after questioning him i.e., on 28/03/2011 and arrested accused Raju from her residence and recovered mobile phone from accused Raju, which itself shows that accused Raju was arrested by the police on 28/03/2011 and false arrest memo has been prepared, showing his arrest on 29/03/2011.
86. In support of his contentions, ld. Counsel for accused Raju has relied upon the following judgments:
1. Surinder Kumar Khanna vs Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, AIR 2018 SC page 3574;
2. State vs Chote Lal & Ors., 1999, Cri.L.J, 3411, DHC;
3. Ramesh vs State of Haryana, Crl. Appeal no. S1263SB of 2004 date of decision 07/01/2016 and
4. S. Arul Raja vs State of Tamil Nadu, (2010) 8 SCC, page 233.
87. On the other hand, ld. Addl. PP for State has contended that neither accused Raju in his defence evidence as DW1 nor DW2 Sh. Dasrath has been able to explain about the possession of cash and jewellery, which has been recovered from the possession of accused Raju. Police officials could not have those articles with them, belonging to the complainant, to plant against accused Raju. Even nothing has been suggested that complainant Page 43 of 55 was having any motive to falsely implicate the accused Raju in this case, so contentions of ld. Counsel for accused are not forceful in any manner.
88. The contentions of ld. Counsel for accused are not forceful, in any manner. From the deposition of witnesses, prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of cash and jewellery articles from accused belonging to the complainant, beyond reasonable doubts. Accused has not claimed the ownership of the recovered articles. The articles were robbed in dacoity. Hence, prosecution has been able to prove the offence u/s 412 of IPC against the accused, for which he is held guilty and convicted for the same.
Findings of offence u/s 412 IPC against accused Veer Bahadur
89. Seizure memo of recovery of cash and jewellery from accused Veer Bahadur is Ex PW10/E, witnessed by HC Mahender.
90. PW10 HC Mahinder has stated that after the arrest of accused Raju and recovery of robbed cash and jewellery from him, accused Raju led them at Jhuggi Chunna Bhatti. He has further stated that accused Veer Bahadur, Satbir and Atiq were sitting in the jhuggi and they apprehended all the three accused persons. Accused Veer Bahadur was overpowered by him. Accused Veer Bahadur made disclosure statement that he was having one bag, which was found containing Rs 4 lacs of currency notes and some Page 44 of 55 jewellery i.e., one thick gold chain, one more golden chain having pandel, two gold small bangles of child, two rings i.e., one of gold and another of silver and two diamond and silver bangles and the same were seized vide seizure memo Ex PW10/E. The said items were kept separately in a plastic container and same were given serial number B1 and B2 and were sealed with the seal of PS and seal after use was handed over to him. Accused Veer Bahadur was arrested vide memo Ex PW10/F and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex PW10/G. He also made his disclosure statement vide memo Ex PW10/H. One air gun was also recovered from the possession of accused Veer Bahadur and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex PW10/I and sketch of the same was prepared vide memo Ex PW10/J and same was also kept in a cloth parcel duly sealed with the seal of PS.
91. PW10 has further stated that all the accused persons have also pointed out the place of dacoity and the pointing out memos are Ex PW10/K and Ex PW10/L. PW10 has identified the accused persons and identity of case property has not been disputed.
92. It is contended that serial number of the currency notes, which were recovered from the possession of accused Veer Bahadur were not noted down in the seizure memo Ex PW10/E. So, recovery from the accused is doubtful. It was also suggested to PW10 that accused Veer Bahadur was lifted from his house and was taken to the police station and all the Page 45 of 55 documents were prepared there and nothing was recovered from the possession of accused.
93. PW15 SI Pratap Singh has also deposed the same facts, as deposed by PW10 about the recovery of alleged cash and jewellery articles from the possession of accused Veer Bahadur.
94. It is contended by ld. Counsel for accused Veer Bahadur that no public witness has joined to the proceeding and all the public persons were available in the area. It is further contended that site plan of the jhuggi from where robbed articles were recovered was also not prepared.
95. The contentions of ld. Counsel for accused are not forceful, in any manner. From the deposition of witnesses, prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of cash and jewellery articles from accused belonging to the complainant, beyond reasonable doubts. Accused has not claimed the ownership of the recovered articles. The articles were robbed in dacoity. Hence, prosecution has been able to prove the offence u/s 412 of IPC against the accused, for which he is held guilty and convicted for the same.
Finding qua offence u/s 412 IPC against accused Satbir
96. According to seizure memo Ex PW13/D, cash amount of Rs 2,10,050/ including jewelleries were recovered from the possession of Page 46 of 55 accused Satbir, witnessed by HC Ghanshyam. HC Ghanshyam has been examined as PW13. He has stated that accused Raju, after his arrest, led them towards jhuggi no. B195, Chunna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, where he pointed out towards accused persons namely Veeru, Satbir and Atiq. They were apprehended. He over powered accused Satbir. Accused Satbir was interrogated and arrested in this case and his personal search was prepared and he made disclosure statement vide memos Ex PW13/A to Ex PW13/D and as per disclosure statement of accused Sabir, Rs 2,10,050/ one gold kara, one gold Ganesh idol, and rupees ten silver coin in the shape of note, two gold rings, two golden tops with diamonds, four artificial buttons with artificial chain and two artificial jhumki were recovered from the box lying inside the jhuggi. Accused Satbir also got recovered one knife from underneath the said box and the same were taken into possession. The currency notes and jeweelery articles were kept in separate jars and both were sealed by the IO with the seal of PS and pullandas were given serial nos C1 and C2 and were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW13/D. Sketch of the knife was prepared and same is Ex PW13/E and kept in a plastic jar and sealed with the seal of PS and taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW13/F.
97. It is contended that material of knife was not mentioned in the sketch of knife. It is further contended that witnesses have contradicting about the time taken in completing the proceedings and also as to where the proceedings were completed.
Page 47 of 5598. In defence, DW6 Smt Seema has been examined, who has stated that she is mother of accused Satbir. Anita alongwith her family members used to visit her house and she remained in her house for more than 46 hours daily. On the day of incident i.e., 27/03/2011 accused Satbir alongwith his wife and children went to the house of his inlaws and returned back from there on 28/03/2011 in the night time. On 29/03/2011 accused Satbir went to his work place at about 9 am. On 29/03/2011 Anita came to her house at about 121.00 pm and she went away at about 5 pm. At that time, her daughter in law and her grand children were also present in the house. On 29/03/2011 no police officer had came to her house. On the same day, at about 78 pm she came to know that her son was apprehended by the police in the police station. So, she alongwith Anita and her daughter in law went to PS and she enquired from the police station about the apprehension of her son. She returned back to her house as police officers turning them out of the police station.
99. In defence, DW7 Ms. Suman has been examined. She has stated that on 27/03/2011, he was at her maternal home at Jawahar Camp, Kriti Nagar, Delhi. Her husband Satbir went on duty at Uttam Nagar, Delhi from her matrimonial house at Chuna Bhatti. On the aforesaid date, her husband came at her parental house at about 8 pm to take her back and in that night, they stayed at her parental house. On the next day i.e., 28/03/2011 at about 9 pm they went back to their house at Chuna Bhatti. On 29/03/2011, her husband has left for his work at about 9 am and in the evening, she came to Page 48 of 55 know that her husband was apprehended by the police.
100. According to examination in chief of DW7, on 29/03/2011 her husband had left for his work and in the evening, she came to know that her husband was apprehended by the police. On that day, no police official visited their house at any point of time. Thereafter she alongwith her mother in law Smt Seema and Anita aunty had gone to PS to enquire about his detention. Police officials asked them to approach court for his release.
101. It is contended by ld. Defence counsel that in view of deposition of DW7 and DW6 Smt Seema, who has stated that on 29/03/2011 accused Satbir went to his work place at about 9 am and on that day, at about 121 pm Anita came to her house and she went away at about 5 pm. At that time, her daughter in law and her grand children were also present in the house. On 29/03/2011 no police officer had came to her house. On the same day at about 78 pm she came to know that her son was apprehended by the police in the police station. So, she alongwith Anita and her daughter in law went to PS and she enquired from the police station about the apprehension of her son and she returned back to her house as police officers turned them out of the police station and has been falsely implicated in this case. In the cross examination, DW6 has denied the suggestion about the recovery of cash and jewellery from the possession of accused Satbir on 29/03/2011.
102. In he cross examination of PW13, it is suggested that accused persons Page 49 of 55 were lifted from different place/house and have been falsely implicated in this case, which has been denied. It was also suggested to PW13 that recovery has been planted. Nothing has been suggested to PW14 that on 29/3/2011, accused Satbir was on his work and was not present in his jhuggi. No evidence has been brought on record to prove that accused Satbir was on work on that day. So, the defence of the accused Satbir that he was not present at his jhuggi is after thought and is not in consonance with cross examination of PW13 and PW15.
103. The contentions of ld. Counsel for accused are not forceful, in any manner. From the deposition of witnesses, prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of cash and jewellery articles from accused belonging to the complainant, beyond reasonable doubts. Accused has not claimed the ownership of the recovered articles. The articles were robbed in dacoity. Hence, prosecution has been able to prove the offence u/s 412 of IPC against the accused, for which he is held guilty and convicted for the same.
Findings qua offence u/s 412 IPC against accused Jugnu
104. According to Seizure memo Ex PW8/D and Ex PW15/C, cash amount, jewellery articles and mobile phone, which were belonging to complainant PW1, were recovered from the possession of accused Jugnu. Accused Jugnu has not claimed the ownership of these articles, recovered Page 50 of 55 from him. The said seizure memo has been witnessed by HC Ravinder, who has been examined as PW8. He has stated that on 28/03/2011, he joined the investigation with SI Partap Singh after receiving DD No. 17 A by him and thereafter they reached at B78, Mansarovar Garden, Kirti Nagar, Delhi, where IO recorded the statement of complainant and prepared rukka on the same. IO also called Crime Team and photographer at the spot. He took the rukka to PS Kirti Nagar and handed over the same to duty officer and duty officer got recorded the present FIR. After registration of the case, duty officer handed over original rukka and computer copy of FIR to him and he delivered the same to the IO at the spot. They searched for the accused persons but did not find any clue about them. IO recorded the statements of Babita, Lalit, ASI Ajit Singh and supplementary statement of complainant. IO recorded his statement on 28/03/2011.
105. PW8 has further stated that on 28/04/2011, he joined the investigation with SI Partap Singh. SI Partap Singh might have received secret information through informer and thereafter he alongwith SI Partap Singh and secret informer reached jhuggi Chuna Bhatti, Harizan Camp where accused Jugnu was apprehended from the jhuggi on the pointing out of secret informer. This witness has identified accused Jugnu before the court. Accused Jugnu was interrogated and thereafer he was arrested by the IO vide arrest memo Ex PW8/A. Personal search of accused Jugnu was taken vide memo Ex PW8/B and formal search of the accused Jugnu was taken by the IO in his presence. Accused Jugnu had handed over two mobile phones, Page 51 of 55 one of make Nokia and other of Samsung after taking out from the pocket of his pant, which he was wearing at that time. Disclosure statement of accused Jugnu Ex PW8/C was also recorded by the IO. Accused had disclosed that he had kept concealed the jewellery articles and cash amount, which had come in his share from the robbed articles and cash at his jhuggi and he could get the same recovered. Thereafter accused Jugnu led them to his jhuggi and got recovered cash amount of Rs 40,000/ . Accused also got recovered one ring, one ear tops of diamond, one white pearl. The cash amount and jewellery articles were sealed in a separate pullanda with the seal of PS and these articles were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex PW8/D. Thereafter accused led them to the place of occurrence and pointed out the place of occurrence. IO prepared pointing out memo Ex PW8/E. IO recorded his statement on the same day.
106. According to the cross examination of PW8, the secret informer was aware of address of accused and he had taken them directly to the same. He pointed out towards the jhuggi of accused from 2025 yards away and the accused was found standing at the door of his jhuggi . Thereafter secret informer left the spot and he apprehended accused Jugnu. All the documentation were done inside the jhuggi of accused excluding pointing out memo. Only suggestion has been given to PW8 that he was not the part of the team or that he had not gone to recover the stolen articles or that accused Jugnu was not apprehended in his presence. It is also suggested to him that documents were not prepared in his presence.
Page 52 of 55107. PW15 has deposed the same facts, as deposed by PW8 regarding recovery of cash and jewellery from the possession of accused Jugnu. So, nothing came out to disbelieve the testimony of PW8 and PW15 in respect of cash and jewellery recovered from the possession of accused Jugnu.
108. In defence, accused Jugnu has examined Sh. Raj Kumar as DW3, who has stated that he is carpenter by profession and working in furniture shop at Lakkad Mandi, Kirti Nagar in the year 2011 and he knew accused Jugnu, who was his helper at that time and he worked with him for 89 years.
109. DW3 has further stated that on 28.04.2011, he was present in Lakkad Mandi at about 10.30 a.m. 11.00 a.m. two person in civil dress came to him, might be from police and they asked him get done some repairing work. He sent accused Jugnu with both those persons for repair work for furniture in PS Kirti Nagar but accused did not come back on that day, so, he also reached at PS Kirti Nagar in the evening. He made enquiries about his helper Jugnu but no satisfactory answer was given. He did not see Jugnu in the PS. Thereafter, he reached at the house of his helper Jugnu and informed his mother that Jugnu was sent to P.S. Kirti Nagar for some repair work but thereafter, he did not return. Thereafter, he left for his home.
110. In view of examination of DW3, accused Jugnu has tried to prove that he has been falsely implicated in this case and also that no recovery was Page 53 of 55 effected from him, as deposed by DW3 but no suggestion has been given in the cross examination of PW8 to the extent that accused Jugnu was sent by DW3 for repairing work of furniture at PS Kirti Nagar. So, the defence as raised by accused Jugnu is not forceful in any manner and is an after thought. Hence, cannot be believed upon in any manner.
111. The contentions of ld. Counsel for accused are not forceful, in any manner. From the deposition of witnesses, prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of cash and jewellery articles from accused belonging to the complainant, beyond reasonable doubts. Accused has not claimed the ownership of the recovered articles. The articles were robbed in dacoity. Hence, prosecution has been able to prove the offence u/s 412 of IPC against the accused, for which he is held guilty and convicted for the same.
Findings qua the offence u/s 412 IPC against accused Dhirendra
112. According to the seizure memo Ex PW9/A, one gold finger ring was recovered from possession of accused Dhirendra. The said seizure memo was witnessed by Ct Sanjeev, who has been examined as PW9. He has stated that on 31/03/2011, while he was posted as constable at PS Kirti Nagar, at about 12 noon SI Partap Singh called him at PS Kirti Nagar in his room as he was having some secret information about the accused persons. Thereafter he alongwith SI Partap Singh left the police station and reached at Page 54 of 55 B195, Chuna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar jhuggies. At the instance of secret informer, he alongwith SI Partap Singh entered in the jhuggi and from the jhuggi, accused Dhirender was apprehended and interrogated by the IO. He confessed his guilt of the present case and took out ring from his right hand finger and produced the same to the IO and stated that it is the same ring, which was looted and given by accused Veeru to him. IO seized the same vide memo Ex PW9/A. Same was kept in a plastic jaar, which was sealed in a cloth parcel sealed with the seal of PS. Accused Dhirender was arrested vide arrest memo Ex PW9/B. His personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex PW9/C. Accused Dhirender also led the police party to the place of occurrence and pointed out the same vide memo Ex PW9/D. The disclosure statement of accused Dhirender is Ex PW9/E. He has identified accused Dhirender before the court. Thereafter they returned back to the police station. Accused got medically examined from the hospital through another constable. He deposited the case property in the mal khana. This witness has identified the gold ring gents having diamond, which was recovered from the possession of accused Dhirender as Ex PW9/Article1.
113. According to his cross examination, first of all, accused was apprehended and then he produced the ring and thereafter he confessed his involvement in the present case and his disclosure statement was recorded. During his cross examination, PW9 has further stated that IO had prepared related documents at the jhuggi and they were in civil dress. PW9 has denied the suggestion that IO had not conducted any proceedings at Jhuggi no. B Page 55 of 55 195 or that he did not join the investigation of this case at any point of time or that he had signed the documents at the instance of IO at PS.
114. PW15 has also deposed the same facts as deposed by PW9 regarding the recovery of gold finder ring from the possession of accused Dhirendra.
115. Accused Dhirendra has not claimed the ownership of the ring.
116. The contentions of ld. Counsel for accused are not forceful, in any manner. From the deposition of witnesses, prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of cash and jewellery articles from accused belonging to the complainant, beyond reasonable doubts. Accused has not claimed the ownership of the recovered articles. The articles were robbed in dacoity. Hence, prosecution has been able to prove the offence u/s 412 of IPC against the accused, for which he is held guilty and convicted for the same.
(Announced in open
Court on 19.12.2018) (Virender Kumar Goyal)
ASJ04, West District,
Tis Hazari Court, Delhi