Delhi District Court
State vs Naresh Kumar on 13 May, 2025
Page 1 of 8
IN THE COURT OF ASHISH KUMAR MEENA
JMFC-01, SAKET COURT (SOUTH) NEW DELHI.
FIR NO.: 157/2023
U/S: 188/488 IPC & 461 DMC ACT
PS: Maidan Garhi
STATE
VS.
(1). HIMANSHU SARDANA, S/O SH. VIRENDER KUMAR,
R/o C-747, JVTS Garden, Chhattarpur, New Delhi.
(2). NARESH KUMAR, S/O SH. HARI CHAND,
R/o H. No. 588, Dera Village, New Delhi.
(3). MANMOHAN KUMAR, S/O SH. RAMNATH,
R/o C-548, JVTS Garden, Chhattarpur, New Delhi.
..... ACCUSED PERSONS
1. Sr. No. of the case : 4493/2023
2. The date of offence : 07.03.2023
3. The name of the complainant : DC SDMC
4. The plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
5. Argument heard on : 05.05.2025
6. The date of order : 13.05.2025
7. The final order : Convicted
JUDGMENT
1. As per the complainant of concerned Deputy Commissioner, South Zone, MCD, Delhi ("DC, MCD"), FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors.
Digitally signed by ASHISHASHISH KUMAR MEENA KUMAR Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13 15:18:44 +0530 Page 2 of 8 (1).Himanshu Sardana, (2).Naresh Kumar and (3).Manmohan Kumar ("Accused Persons") are facing trial for the allegations that on 07.03.2023, at time unknown, at the property/land adjoining to A172, Chhatarpur Enclave-II, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS-Maidan Garhi, the accused persons, in furtherance of common intention, being the owner/builder of the aforesaid property, have tampered/break open the seal which was affixed on the aforesaid property by officials of MCD, South Zone. Furthermore, the accused persons have trespassed and raised construction on the said property, and thereby committed the offences punishable u/s 188/448 IPC r/w 461 of DMC Act, 1957.
2. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet U/s 173 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the IO. Consequently, accused persons were summoned after taking cognizance of offence. The accused persons were charged u/s 188/448 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to substantiate the allegations, prosecution examined two witnesses. PW-1 Sh. Prince (the then JE) has deposed that on 20.01.2023, he was posted as JE, BLDG, South Zone, SDMC in the area of Saidullajab Ward, New Delhi. On the said day, he was on routine action programme. He reached at property no. adj. A-172, Chhatarpur Enclave, Phase-II and took sealing action against the said property as unauthorized construction has been carried out on this property. This property was marked to him for sealing proceeding. He sealed two flats at top floor and one room at stilt floor front side. He affixed the seal on the above-mentioned part of the property. He took Digitally signed by ASHISH FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors. ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13
15:18:50
+0530
Page 3 of 8
photographs of seal which were affixed on the property vide Ex.P1. Thereafter, he prepared watch and ward document and put it up before the concerned AE. While routine inspection on 07.03.2023, he again visited the said property and found that seals which were affixed on 20.01.2023 were tampered. He reported the matter to his higher officials for taking necessary action against the culprits. As per his report in departmental noting, an FIR was lodged against the accused u/s 188 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act. Later on, IO called him to identify the property in question. He went to the spot alongwith IO and pointed out towards the property. IO had prepared site plan at his instance vide Ex.PW1/A. IO had recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. The witness was duly cross-examined by the accused.
4. PW-2 HC Ashok (IO of this case) has deposed that on 28.03.2023, he was posted as HC at PS-Maidan Garhi, New Delhi. On that day a complaint was received by MCD u/s 448/188 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act for lodging of FIR and same was marked to him by the SHO. He endorsed the same and got the FIR registered on 25.04.2023 vide endorsement Ex.PW2/A. He gave notice to DC, South Zone, SDMC for providing the certified copies of relevant documents pertaining to this case vide Ex.PW2/B. After two or three days, he again visited the MCD office and received all the relevant document pertaining to this case. He called JE Sh. Prince to join the investigation by making phone call. Thereafter, he met with JE on 08.05.2023 at property i.e. adj. A-172, Chhatarpur Enclave, Phase-II, New Delhi and JE pointed out towards the property in question and told him that this is the property where he affixed the seal and which was found tampered. At the instance of JE, he prepared the site plan Digitally signed FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors. ASHISH by ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13 15:18:57 +0530 Page 4 of 8 of the property. Thereafter, he recorded statement of JE u/s 161 Cr.P.C. During investigation, he gave notice u/s 91 Cr.P.C. (Ex.PW2/C) to the accused as he was known to accused as a prior FIR u/s 332/461 DMC Act was also registered against the said accused. He collected property document from the accused vide Ex.PW2/D. Accused pointed out towards the property. He prepared point out memo vide Ex.PW2/E. He recorded disclosure statement of accused vide Ex.PW2/F. He gave notice u/s 41A Cr.P.C to the accused persons namely Manmohan Kumar, Himanshu and Naresh Kumar vide Ex.PW2/G, Ex.PW2/H and Ex.PW2/I. He bound down all the accused persons. He wrote letter to DC, South Zone, SDMC for seeking permission u/s 195 Cr.P.C. and 467 DMC Act vide Ex.PW2/J. He got permission, completed the whole investigation and prepared the charge-sheet u/s 188/448 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act and submitted it before the concerned Court. The witness was duly cross-examined by the accused.
5. Vide separate joint statement under Section 294 Cr.P.C., the accused persons have admitted the present FIR, Certificate under Section 65 B of Indian Evidence Act supporting the FIR, Complaint u/s 466A DMC Act and Complaint u/s 467 DMC Act.
In view of the same, remaining witnesses were dropped from the list of witnesses. Accordingly, prosecution evidence concluded.
6. On completion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused persons were recorded u/s 281 Cr.P.C r/w 313 Cr.P.C, wherein all the incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons, to which they stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case. They have stated that they are innocent Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors. MEENA Date:
2025.05.13 15:19:04 +0530 Page 5 of 8 and all the exhibits are false and manipulated. Further, the accused persons wished not to lead defence evidence.
7. Final arguments heard. Case file perused.
8. Short point for determination before this court is as under:
''Whether on 07.03.2023, at time unknown, at the property/land adjoining to A172, Chhatarpur Enclave-II, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS-Maidan Garhi, the accused persons, in furtherance of common intention, being the owner/builder of the aforesaid property, have tampered/break open the seal which was affixed on the aforesaid property by officials of MCD, South Zone. Furthermore, the accused persons have trespassed and raised construction on the said property, and thereby committed the offences punishable u/s 188/448 IPC r/w 461 of DMC Act, 1957."
9. It is argued by the Ld. APP for the state that the ocular and the documentary evidence on record has proved the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt. Ld. APP for the state submitted that there is sufficient material available on record to convict the accused persons and hence prayed for conviction of accused persons as per the evidence produced by the prosecution witnesses.
10. It is argued by the Ld. Counsel for the accused persons that the accused persons are innocent and falsely implicated in Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH KUMAR FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors. KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13
15:19:29
+0530
Page 6 of 8
the present matter. Further, it is submitted that the prosecution has no evidence against the accused persons, hence, they are liable to be get acquitted from all charges.
11. Final argument heard. Record Perused.
12. In the present case accused is charged under Section 188/448 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act. Thus, the prosecution is required to prove that the property in question was sealed and subsequently the said seal was tampered by the accused. Thus, the prosecution is required to prove the factum of following points.
a. Factum of sealing proceedings.
b. Factum of re-sealing proceedings.
c. Factum of the accused persons tampered with the
said seal.
13. As per the complaint of DC, South Zone, MCD Ex.A3, the property in question was booked for unauthorized construction on 17.10.2022. Thereafter, the property was sealed on 20.01.2023 by Inspecting Officer/JE Prince. However, the said seal affixed was found to be tampered by JE Prince on 07.03.2023. In this regard, the prosecution has examined inspecting officer PW-1 JE Prince who has not only proved the complaint of the DC, South Zone, MCD, but has also shown the conduct of the accused persons. He has deposed that on 20.01.2023, he sealed two flats at the top floor and one room at stilt floor from front side. He has also placed photograph of sealing action vide Ex.P1 (colly). Thereafter, on 07.03.2023, he visited the property and found that Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors. KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13
15:19:35
+0530
Page 7 of 8
the seal affixed by him has been tampered. Thus, he reported the matter to concerned department. Consequently, present FIR was registered. The statement of PW-1 Prince is duly proved by the documentary evidence produced by prosecution. Prosecution has placed Ex.P1 (colly) that shows that the property in question was actually sealed by Sh. Prince. During inspection, the seal affixed on 20.01.2023 was found to be tampered. PW-1 has also proved the factum of tampering of seal. It is to be noted that the witness has been thoroughly cross-examined by the accused persons, however, the testimony of PW-1 has remain intact and inspire the confidence of this Court.
14. It is further to be noted that there is no dispute regarding the fact that the accused persons are the builder of property in question. In this regard, the accused persons have handed over the property document pertaining to property in question to the IO, which is already placed on record. PW-2 IO/HC Ashok has thoroughly investigated the present matter. He collected the said property document vide Ex.PW2/D. He also prepared pointing out memo vide Ex.PW2/E, leaving no ambiguity regarding the identification of property in question. It is to be noted PW-2 IO/HC Ashok also been thoroughly cross-examined, but no contradiction has been found in the statement of the said witnesses.
15. In view of the above discussions, the prosecution has remain successful to prove the factum of sealing proceeding. The prosecution has proved that the seal affixed on 20.01.2023 has been tampered by the the accused persons.
16. Thus, in the backdrop of aforesaid discussion, facts and Digitally signed by ASHISH FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors. ASHISH KUMAR MEENA KUMAR Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13 15:19:42 +0530 Page 8 of 8 circumstances and material available on record, the prosecution has proved the charges u/s 188/448 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubts. Accordingly, accused persons namely (1) HIMANSHU SARDANA, s/o Sh. Virender Kumar, (2) NARESH KUMAR, s/o Sh. Hari Chand and (3) MANMOHAN KUMAR, s/o Sh. Ramnath are hereby convicted for the offence punishable u/s 188/448 IPC r/w 461 DMC Act.
17. Let the copy of judgment be given free of cost to the convicts.
18. Let the convicts be heard on point of sentence.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.05.2025. IT IS CERTIFIED THAT THE PRESENT JUDGMENT RUNS INTO EIGHT PAGES AND EACH PAGE BEARS SIGNATURE OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
Digitally signedASHISH by ASHISH KUMAR KUMAR MEENA Date:
MEENA 2025.05.13 15:19:49 +0530 (ASHISH KUMAR MEENA) JMFC-01/SAKET COURT(SOUTH), NEW DELHI/13.05.2025 FIR No:157/2023 PS:Maidan Garhi State Vs. Naresh Kumar & Ors.