Delhi District Court
State vs . Shaan Sarin on 1 February, 2023
CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020
IN THE COURT OF SH. KAPIL KUMAR
CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (WEST)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
In the matter of :
State Vs. Shaan Sarin
FIR No. 658/2019
P.S Punjabi Bagh
JUDGMENT
1. ID No. of case 1078/2020
2. Date of institution 30.01.2020
3. Name of the complainant Ms. Kiran Pal Advertisement
Inspector/Advtt. Deptt. On
behalf of the
Commissioner/SDMC Punjabi
Bagh West Delhi.
4. Date of commission of offence 23.11.2019
5. Name of accused Shaan Sarin
S/o Sh. Vijay Sarin
R/o H. No. BG7/62, Paschim
Vihar Delhi.
FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 1 of 7
CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020
6. Offence complained of U/s 3 of Delhi Prevention of
Defacement of Property Act.
7. Plea of accused Pleaded not gulity
8. Date of reserving the judgment 01.02.2023
9. Final order Acquitted.
10 Date of such judgment 01.02.2023
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR
THE DECISION OF THE CASE
1. It is alleged against the accused that on 23.11.2019 at Club Road, West Punjabi Bagh, he got affixed one display/advertisement Board of "M/s Cartoony Planet" on the electricity pole and while doing so he defaced public property. Hence, accused was charge sheeted under section S.3 of the Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act 2007 (henceforth referred to as 'DPDP Act').
2. In compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C, copy of the chargesheet and the documents annexed therewith were supplied to accused and he FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 2 of 7 CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020 was served with notice u/sec 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007 (in short 'DPDP Act') to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined following witnesses in favour of its case: 3.1 PW 1 HC Rishi Raj deposed that on 23.11.2019, he received a complaint from MCD department. On the basis of the said complaint, he reached at the spot and found that one flex board was tagged with the electricity pole. He deposed that he did not click the photographs of the flex board nor seized the same.
3.2 PW 2 Kiran Pal Advertising Inspector MCD deposed that on 19.11.2019, he had given a complaint regarding defacement of the property to SHO PS Punjabi Bagh which is Ex.PW2/A regarding unauthorized display of commercial advertisement on the basis of which the present FIR was registered.
4. Since the most material witnesses of prosecution were examined, the prosecution evidence was directed to be closed.
FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 3 of 7 CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020
5. Statement of accused under section 294 Cr.PC also recorded whereby he admitted the following documents without admitting the contents of same :
Copy of FIR is Ex.A1. Endorsement on rukka as Ex.A2. Certificate under section 65 (B) Evidence Act is Ex.A3. DD No. 34 A Ex.A4.
6. Statement of the accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C. r/w 281 Cr.PC was recorded wherein all the incriminating evidence was put to him for seeking his explanation. He stated that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the present case.
7. This Court has heard Ld. APP for the State and Ld. Counsel for accused. Court has carefully perused the case file in light of the submissions advanced by the respective sides.
Findings are as under : FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 4 of 7 CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020
8. It is argued on behalf of accused that the board was not put by him. It was argued that accused was not seen by anyone while pasting the posters / board on the public property.
9. In order to establish its case, the prosecution was required to prove the following ingredients:
(a) Any act had been committed amounting to 'defacement' as defined in S. 3 of DPDP Act
(b) Such defacement was of the 'public property' and
(c) The act in question had been committed by the accused
10. So far as the first and second ingredients are concerned, there is no doubt that board / posters found affixed on the electricity pole tantamounts to defacement of public property as defined u/sec 2 of DPDP Act.
11. Now, the question in consideration before this court is whether FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 5 of 7 CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020 or not the board / posters in question were affixed by the accused on the electricity pole.
12. The investigating officer HC Rishi Raj when examined as PW 1 deposed that he did not take the photographs of the flex board which was found affixed on the electricity board nor he seized the board. There is no explanation of this big laxity on the part of the IO.
13. The entire case was dependent upon the alleged flex board allegedly affixed on the electricity pole. There is no photograph as to the fact that the flex board was affixed on the electricity pole. Even the flex board was not seized. The most crucial evidence has not been seized by the IO.
14. This is beyond comprehension as to how without the photographs of the flex board and the seizure memo of the flex board there can be any case of defacement of the public property. It was imperative upon the IO to seize the flex board so that the same could FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 6 of 7 CNR NO. DLWT02-001992-2020 be brought in the court during the evidence.
15. In the absence of the photographs of the flex board and the flex board itself the case of the prosecution has no legs to stand.
16. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the case of the prosecution has several glaring gaps hitting the case of the prosecution at its roots. The prosecution is not able to discharge its burden of proof beyond reasonable doubts. Accordingly, accused Shaan Sarin is acquitted from the present case. Section 437 A complied with. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by KAPIL KAPIL KUMAR
KUMAR Date:
2023.02.01
15:26:07 +0400
Announced in the open court (Kapil Kumar)
on 01.02.2023 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
West District,Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
FIR No.658/2019 PS Punjabi Bagh State Vs. Shaan Sarin Page- 7 of 7