Delhi District Court
State vs Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota on 13 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SH. SUDESH KUMARI, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE05 SHAHDARA, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
SESSIONS CASE No. 356/17 FIR No. 311/15 P.S. Harsh Vihar U/s 307/174A/34 IPC & 25/27 Arms Act.
State Versus Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota
S/o Sh Chhote Lal
R/o Mohalla Sarai Jhajan,
PS Sikenderabad,
Distt. Bulandshahar, U.P. (At present in JC) Date of institution : 10112017 Date of arguments : 13042018 Date of Judgment : 13042018 J U D G M E N T The accused has been sent up for trial by the prosecution on the allegations that on 09062015 at about 10.30 a.m. at Khadha near Babli ki Chakki, A Block Gali, Pratap Nagar, Saboli Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Harash Vihar accused Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota alongwith his co accused (Name, address not known and not arrested in the present matter) fired a bullet shot from a country made pistol on the person of the complainant Anil Sharma and thereby does an act with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if by his said act death of Anil Sharma had occurred accused would have guilty of murder. Accordingly, a case U/s 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and U/s State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 1 of 7 25/27 Arms Act PS Harsh Vihar was registered against the accused at PS Harsh Vihar and as accused did not appear before the court of Sh Pankaj Arora, Ld. M.M despite NBW as well as proceedings U/s 82 Cr.P.C. and ultimately after publication in Newspaper Hindustan Times and Amar Ujala accused was declared proclaimed offender and Section U/s 174A IPC was also added in the chargesheet and after completion of the investigation of the case, a chargesheet for the offence U/s 307 IPC, U/s 174A IPC/34 IPC and U/s 25/27 Arms Act was filed against the accused in the court of Ld. M.M. Shahdara who after compliance of provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C. committed the present case to the Court of Session which in turn has been assigned to this court for trial of the accused.
After the perusal of the chargesheet and hearing the arguments on charge vide order dated 24112017 it was observed that no offence U/s 25/27 of the Arms Act is made out against the accused as weapon of offence has not been recovered in the present matter. Accordingly, a charge U/s 307 Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 IPC and U/s 174A of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the accused on 24112017 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trail and the matter was adjourned for prosecution evidence.
Prosecution in order to establish its case against the accused examined 10 prosecution witnesses and thereafter the prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 13042018 observing that since the complainant as well as the eye witnesses have turned hostile so far offence U/s 307 IPC is concerned and so far offence U/s 174A IPC is concerned the accused has pleaded guilty. Statement of the accused recorded regarding plea of guilt so far offence U/s 174A IPC is State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 2 of 7 concerned.
Examination of the accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C. was dispensed with vide order dated 13042018 as there was no material incriminating evidence on record against the accused so far offence U/s 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC is concerned and so far offence U/s 174A IPC is concerned accused has pleaded guilty.
Final arguments heard. File perused.
PW1 is complainant Anil Sharma he has not supported the case of the prosecution against the accused and has turned hostile and has stated that he did not make any statement to the police but has stated that he sign the document Mark PW1/A at point A. PW1 has deposed that he was having a house at A Block Pratap Nagar Saboli, the same was building one story it was having two rooms, two kitchens and one sitting room and he had given the part of the house to some tenant and he had kept one room and one kitchen for himself. He has further deposed that he used to visit house after a month or two to collect rent and he used to stay at his room which he had kept vacant for himself. PW1 the complainant has stated that accused present in the court is brother in law (Sala) of Umesh son of his elder brother . He has further deposed that accused was kept as a tenant by his Bhabhi about two years back and he asked the accused to vacate the room and accused refused to do so. The complainant has stated that he told the accused that he had to vacate the room immediately upon which there was some altercation and scuffle and thereafter accused vacated the room. He has no where stated that accused fired a bullet shot from the country made pistol.
He was crossexamined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State but State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 3 of 7 nothing incriminating against the accused came on record and during the crossexamination by the Ld Addl. PP for the State the complainant PW 1 has specifically stated that he had not stated to the police that the person accompanying the accused took out a country made pistol and handed over the same to the accused and told the accused to kill the complainant and on which accused pointed out the country made weapon at him. The complainant has denied each and every suggestion put by the Ld Addl. PP for the State to the complainant PW1 during the cross examination of PW1 the complainant. Moreover, the alleged weapon of offence has not been recovered in the present matter.
PW2 is ASI Om Pal Duty officer who on receipt of rukka sent by ASI Bhola Ram through Ct Joginder on 09062015 recorded the FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar copy of which is Ex. PW2/A and he has proved his endorsement Ex. PW2/B on the rukka. He has further stated that he gave a certificate U/s 65 B of Indian Evidence Act which is Ex. PW2/C. PW3 Smt. Rajjo, eye witness she has also not supported the case of the prosecution against the accused. She has only deposed that on 09062015 at about 10/10.30 a.m. she was cooking food in her house and she heard shriks of Pandat ji (complainant). The complainant was shouting 'BachaloBachalo' she came outside of her house and other people also came out from their houses on hearing the hue and cry of Pandit Anil Sharma and Pandit Anil Sharma was running towards Babli Ki Chakki and she has stated that she had not seen anybody else running after him. She was crossexamined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State but nothing incriminating came on record against the accused and during the crossexamination of PW3 by the Ld. Addl P P for the State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 4 of 7 State she has deposed that she has not heard any noise of bullet being fired. She has further stated that she has not seen two person running away on the Motor Cycle in front of the house of Pandit Anil Sharma .
PW4 is Sh. Radha Raman who has deposed that on 09062015 he was present at his house and at about 10/10.15 a.m. he heard a thunder of a bullet he came out of his house and saw that Anil Sharma was running 'Maar Diya Maar Diya' and he saw two boys running on a Motor Cycle, and has stated that he does not know anything else. But PW4 Sh. Radha Raman has not identified the accused.
PW5 is Bhawar Singh @ Babli he has also not supported the case of the prosecution against the accused and has stated that he used to run Atta Chakki at Khadda Pratap Nagar, A Block and on 09062015 he was present at his Atta Chakki. Complainant Anil Sharma came to him and told him that someone had fired upon him from a country made pistol and he has also stated that complainant did not tell him the name of the person who fired upon the complainant. He was crossexamined by the Ld Addl. PP for the State but noting incriminating came on record against the accused.
Similarly, PW6 Rahul has also turned hostile and has stated that he does not know anything about the present case and he had heard only a noise of gun shot.
PW7 is Ct. Upender who alongwith ASI Bhola Ram took the accused to GTB Hospital in his custody and in the custody of Ct. Rohit and got the accused medically examined and thereafter accused led the police party to the place of occurrence and pointing out memo Ex. PW7/A was prepared.
PW8 is ASI Devender Singh who on 18102017 received the State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 5 of 7 further investigation of the present matter and recorded the statement of the member of the crime team and prepared the chargesheet and put up the same before the SHO PS Harsh Vihar which was subsequently filed in the court and he has also stated that he sent the recovered bullet lid to FSL.
PW9 is Ct. Rohit Kumar who joined the investigation of the present case alongwith ASI Bhola Ram. On 25082017 and 2608 2017 participated in the investigation of the case.
PW10 is Smt. Anita Sharma wife of the complainant. She has also not supported the case of the prosecution against the accused and has stated that accused was not vacating their rented premises and due to that fact there was some verbal altercation between the accused and her husband and has further stated that nothing else happened in her presence and she has stated that no police official ever met her or recorded her statement. PW10 was crossexamined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State at length but nothing incriminating came on record against the accused.
Since, the complainant PW1 as well as all the eye witnesses PW 3, PW4, PW5, PW6 and PW10 have not supported the case of the prosecution there is no incriminating evidence on record against the accused so far offence U/s 307 IPC is concerned. Accordingly, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota so far offence U/s 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC is concerned.
So far offence U/s 174A of IPC is concerned the accused has pleaded guilty.
In view of the above discussion, accused Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 6 of 7 is acquitted of the offence U/s 307 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code but is convicted U/s 174A Indian Penal Code. Let the convict be heard on the point of sentence today.
Digitally signed by SUDESH SUDESH KUMAR (SUDESH KUMARI) KUMAR Location: delhi ASJ05 Shahdara/Shahdara District Date: 2018.04.13 Karkardooma Courts/Delhi/13042018 12:31:48 +0530 Announced in the Open Court Dated 13042018 (Two copies attached) State vs. Sanjeev Joshi @ Tota FIR no. 311/15 PS Harsh Vihar Page 7 of 7