Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

State vs . Manoj on 21 September, 2012

          IN THE COURT OF SH. RAGHUBIR SINGH ADDITIONAL CHIEF
               METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-02 (NORTH) DELHI

Case No. 409/CB/10
Unique Case ID No. : 02401R0591092010

State Vs. Manoj
FIR No. : 108/09
PS : Maurice Nagar
U/s. 3(1) Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act 2007

Date of institution: 24.4.2010
Date of Arguments: 21.9.2012
Date of Judgment: 21.9.2012

JUDGMENT

 a)     Serial No. of the case              02401R0591092010
 b)     Date of commission                  22.8.2009
        of the offence
 c)      Name of the complainant            ASI Parkash Chand No. 2521/N, PIS-
                                            28770133, PS Maurice Nagar, Delhi-7
 d)      Name of the accused person,      Manoj, S/o Sh.Shayam Chand,

and his parentage and address. WZ-646/2/3, Fateh Nagar Village, B-1, Janak Puri, Delhi

e) Offence complained or proved U/s. 3(1) Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act 2007

f) Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty and claimed trial

g) The final order Acquitted

h) Date of such order 21.9.2012 BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION OF THE CASE:

1. The Prosecution story runs to the effect that on 22.8.2009, ASI Prakash Chand alongwith Ct. Lavi Tomar was on patrolling duty and at about 12.00 noon both these officials were at the main gate of Arts Faculty, Delhi University when they noticed that inside the gate and in the lawn some posters FIR No. 108/09 PS: Maurice Nagar Page 1 of 3 had been affixed on the cemented bench and on the left side thereof, a picture of Vivekanand Ji was printed. On the right side of the picture a photo of another person was there on the said posters and it was written thereupon "Join ABVP, Manoj Chaudhary e-mail: manojchaudhary 0001 @ yahoo.in". A logo was also there in Hindi as - 'Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad Ekta, Gyan, Sheel'. Further, the person who pasted the poster on the benches of the Arts Faculty, D.U. for his own publicity; has thereby defaced the faculty of D.U. He thus committed an offence u/s 3(1) Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act 2007. A photograph of the said poster was snapped with a personal camera and thereafter, the poster was taken into possession by the IO. Further, on 09.9.2009, the accused was arrested after calling him telephonically and he was later on released on police bail. Hence, the present prosecution.

2. Cognizance of the offence was taken vide the very order dated 26.4.2010. The accused was summoned and on appearance, was supplied with complete set of documents. Notice u/s 251 CrPC for the offence u/s 3(1) DPDP Act 2007 was served upon the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. The prosecution got examined three witnesses including the IO ASI Prakash Chand. PE stood closed vide order dated 30.4.2012. Statement of the accused u/s. 313 r/w S 281 Cr.PC has been recorded today itself. During the course of SA the accused has denied the incriminating evidence put to him. However, he opted not to lead evidence in defence.

4. File perused. Counsels heard. The facts and material on record do impel to conclude in favour of the accused and against the prosecution. The following are the reasons/findings in this regard:-

i) In the present case IO ASI Prakash Chand and Ct. Lavi Tomar are the officials who had noticed the alleged poster affixed on a bench in the Arts Faculty of the D.U. However, during their cross examination it has clearly come on record that during the course of investigation nothing could be revealed so as to find out as to where from the posters in question were got printed, who got the same printed as well as who pasted the said posters etc. etc. The allegations are merely based upon the fact/assertion that the posters in question were having photo of the accused printed thereupon. Thus, the prosecution has entirely failed to establish that the accused had got the posters in question printed and had pasted the same in violation of the given provision of the Act of 2007.

ii) Perusal of the chargesheet/final report u/s 173 CrPC itself reveals that in the name of investigation the only thing shown having been done is that the accused was called in the PS telephonically and was arrested in connection with the present case. It has nowhere been reflected as to how the IO satisfied himself that the person so called to appear in the PS had infact committed the offence in question.

5. On the basis of the findings/reasons reflected herein above, the accused is hereby acquitted of the charges levelled against him. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Court                              (RAGHUBIR SINGH)
today on 21.9.2012                               Additional Chief Metropolitan
                                                   Magistrate-02/North/Delhi


FIR No. 108/09 PS: Maurice Nagar                                             Page 3 of 3
 FIR No.108/09
PS Maurice Nagar

21.9.2012
Present:        Ld.APP for State 
                Accused is present on bail with cl.

Arguments heard. Vide separate and detailed judgment of this day, accused stands acquitted. At this stage, accused has furnished fresh bail bond u/s 437 A CrPC (in the sum of Rs.10,000/­ with one surety in the like amount). Same is hereby accepted as per the provision. His previous surety stands discharged and the previous bail bonds stand cancelled.

File be consigned to record room.

(RAGHUBIR SINGH) ACMM­02/North/21.9.2012 FIR No. 108/09 PS: Maurice Nagar Page 4 of 3