Delhi District Court
State vs Ganesh Sharma on 26 September, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANKIT GARG, LD. JMFC-08 PATIALA
HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
Cr. Case no. 3852/2024
PS Naraina
State vs. Ganesh Sharma
FIR no.360/2023
JUDGMENT
Date of the Commission of offence 15.12.2023 Date of Institution of the case 27.07.2024 Date of reserving the judgment 26.09.2025 Date of pronouncement of judgment 26.09.2025 Name of the Complainant HC Rajesh Kumar PIS no.
28102736 PS Naraina, Delhi.
Name of Accused, their Parentage Sh. Ganesh Sharma S/o Sh.
Gulab R/o House no. W-29, Sonia Gandhi Camp, Naraina, Indl. Area, New Delhi.
Offences complained of or proved 33/38 Delhi Excise Act Plea of accused Plead not guilty Final order Acquittal Digitally signed by ANKIT ANKIT GARG GARG Date:
2025.09.27 15:47:34 +0530 BRIEF FACTS AND REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE CASE
1. Briefly stated, the allegations of the prosecution are that on or around 15/12/2023, at approximately 11:00 PM, accused was found in possession of 50 quarters (180 ml each) of illicit liquor labeled "For Sale in Haryana Only" near Y-Block, Loha Mandi, Naraina and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 33 and 38 of the Delhi Excise Act.
INVESTIGATION AND NOTICE
2. Investigation was conducted into the allegations. Upon completion thereof, charge sheet was filed. Accused was summoned. Compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C was done by providing copy of the charge sheet and annexed documents to the accused.
3. Upon finding a prima facie case against the accused person, a formal charge for the offence punishable U/s 33/38 Delhi Excise Act was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
4. In order to substantiate the allegations, 03 witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution.
4.1 PW1 HC Girwar has appeared before the court and his deposition is reproduced as under:
ANKIT GARG Digitally signed by ANKIT GARG Date: 2025.09.27 15:47:39 +0530 On 21.02.2024 I was posted as HC. at PS Naraina, On that day, I obtained the sealed seized sample vide RC no. 24/21/24 dated 21.02.2024 along with form M-29, from the concerned MHC(M) on the direction of IO. Thereafter, I deposit the same before Excise Liberty ITO. The receiving in this regard was handed over by me to concerned MHC(M). The said receiving is now mark 'X' wit-ness has also brought the original no. 21 wherein the record of above stated RC is mentioned which is Ex. PWI/A bearing my signature at point A (OSR). There was no tempering done with the sample while the same is in my custody.
XXX by Sh. Sumit Pallav Ld. Counsels for accused.
I do not remember if I had made DD entry at the time of departuring PS to the excise office ITO. I do not remember if I had given receiving in register no. 19 with MHC(M) at the time of collecting the samples from MHC(M). I do not remember the name of the official to whom I had deposited the samples and took the receiving. It is wrong to suggest I had neither collected the samples of the present case nor deposited the same in the excise office. It is wrong to suggest I am deposing falsely.
4.2 PW2 HC Rajesh Kumar has appeared before the court and his deposition is reproduced as under:
On 15.12.2023, I was posted as HC at PS Naraina. On that day I along with Ct. Panna Lal were on Patrolling duty. During my duty hours at about 10:20 PM, we reached near Naraina Vihar, Railway Station Platform, where we found that one person was suspiciously moving and he was carrying white color plastic of white color on his shoulder. We apprehended him and found that the plastic katta contained 50 quarter Digitally signed by ANKIT ANKIT GARG GARG Date:
2025.09.27 15:47:43 +0530 bottles of ADS Mota Masaledar Desi Sharab for sale in Haryana only. I took out one of the Spirit as sample and marked as S1 and sealed the remaining 49 quarter bottles in the same katta with my seal i.e. RK. I completed the formalities, filled the Form M-29, prepared the tehrir and interrogated the accused. The site plan was prepared by me which is exhibit as Ex.PW2/A bearing my signature at point A. The seizure memo was prepared by me which is Ex.PW2/B bearing my signature at point A. The interrogation report was prepared by me and the same is Ex.PW2/C bearing my signature at point A. The sample was sent to Excise lab and the result of the same was received. The said result is Ex.PW2/D. The tehrir was prepared by me and same is Ex.PW2/E bearing my signature at point A. I can identify the accused if shown to me. The identity of accused is not disputed during trial shown to me. I can identity the said alleged car and the case property if At this stage, MHC(M) has produced one sample of the case property in unsealed condition. Witness has correctly identified the same.
XXXX by Sh. AK Sheoran, Ld. counsel for accused. It is correct that spot is a public place however, no public persons were available at the spot. No videography or photographs were taken of the vehicle, illicit liquor at the spot by the IO or me. It is correct that no seal handing over memo was prepared by the IO. It is wrong to suggest that no liquor was recovered from the alleged person. It is wrong to suggest that the recovered liquor was planted on the said person and the present accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is wrong to suggest that the FIR is antedated and documents are tempered. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely.
ANKIT GARG Digitally signed by ANKIT GARG Date: 4.3 PW3 Ct. Panna Lal has appeared before the court and his deposition is reproduced as under:
On 15.12.2023, I was posted as Ct. at PS Naraina. On that day I along with HC Rajesh Kumar were on Patrolling duty from 8 PM to 8Am. During my duty hours at about 10:20 PM, we reached near Naraina Vihar, Railway Station Platform, where we found that one person was suspiciously moving and he was carrying white color plastic of white color on his shoulder. We apprehended him and found that the plastic katta contained 50 quarter bottles of ADS Mota Masaledar Desi Sharab for sale in Haryana only. HC Rajesh took out one of the Spirit as sample and marked as S1 and sealed the remaining 49 quarter bottles in the same katta with my seal i.e. RK. HC Rajesh completed the formalities, filled the Form M-29, prepared the tehrir and interrogated the accused. The site plan was prepared by HC Rajesh which is already as Ex.PW2/A bearing my signature at point B. The seizure memo was prepared by HC Rajesh which is already Ex.PW2/B bearing my signature at point B. The interrogation report was prepared by HC Rajesh and the same is already Ex.PW2/C bearing my signature at point B The tehrir was prepared by HC Rajesh. The seizure memo was prepared which is already Ex.PW2/B bearing my signature at point B. I can identify the accused if shown to me. Witness has correctly identified the accused. The case property has already been identified by PW2, hence, further identification is dispensed with and is not disputed by Ld. counsel for accused.
XXXX by Sh. AK Sheoran, L.d. counsel for accused. It is correct that spot is a public place however, no public persons were available at the spot. No videography or photographs were taken of the vehicle, illicit liquor at the spot by the IO or me. It ANKIT GARG Digitally signed by ANKIT GARG Date: 2025.09.27 15:47:52 +0530 is correct that no seal handing over memo was prepared by the IO It is wrong to suggest that no liquor was recovered from the alleged person. It is wrong to suggest that the recovered liquor was planted on the said person and the present accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is wrong to suggest that the FIR is antedated and documents are tempered. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
5. Statement of accused u/s 294 Cr.P.C. recorded, Statement of Y. Singh Chemical examiner, DO HC Rajender and MHC(M) were admitted and same were dropped from the list of witnesses.
6. After prosecution evidence was concluded, statement of accused person was recorded U/s 313 Cr.P.C. read with Section 281 Cr.P.C. wherein he stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
7. The accused chose not to lead any evidence in their defence and the same was closed.
8. Final arguments were led on behalf of both the parties.
9. I have heard the final arguments put forth by the Ld. APP for the state and by Ld. Defence Counsel. I have also perused the material available on record.
ANKIT GARG Digitally signed by ANKIT GARG Date: 2025.09.27 15:47:56 +0530
10. As per the case of prosecution, on 15.12.2023, PW2 deposed that he was on patrolling duty along with Ct. Panna Lal and they upon suspicion apprehended the accused who was carrying white color plastic katta and upon checking found 50 quarter bottles make ADS Mota Maseldar Desi Sharab for sale in Haryana only. The quarter bottles were seized and then police officials were informed by the officials.
11. In order to establish allegations against the accused, prosecution has relied upon the testimony of PW1 to PW3. Admittedly, no public person was associated at the time of recovery of alleged case property. It is admitted case that the spot from where the alleged recovery was effected from the possession of the accused person was a public place but IO did not make any efforts to join any public person as a witness to the search the premises allegedly belonging to the accused person. Admittedly, no notice was given to the public persons to join the search as mandated in section 100 (4) Cr.P.C. The testimony of official witness does not find corroboration from any independent source. In my view, the non-joining of public witness is fatal to the prosecution case, particularly when no reasonable explanation has been given by the prosecution for non joining of public witnesses. In the case of Chanan Singh Vs. State 1986 Crl. Rev. No.720 (P&H) 94, it was held that it was obligatory on the part of the police to join independent witnesses and the statement of official witness that witnesses refused to join investigation was rejected as an afterthought.
ANKIT GARG Digitally signed by ANKIT GARG Date: 2025.09.27 15:48:01 +0530
12. It is well settled proposition that non joining of public witness creates doubt over the fairness of the investigation by police. Even Section 100 (4) CrPC casts statutory duty upon the official conducting search to join two respectable persons of the society, which is not done in the present case. In the case of Pawan Kumar Vs. The Delhi Administration, 1989 Crl LJ 127 Delhi, it has been held as under:-
"Admittedly, there is no impediment in believing the version of the police officials but for that the prosecution has to lay a good foundation. At least one of them should have deposed that they tried to contact the public witnesses or that they refused to join the investigation. Here is a case where no effort was made to join any public witness even though number of them were present. No plausible explanation from the side of the prosecution is forthcoming for not joining the independent witnesses. It may be that there is an apathy on the part of the general public to associate themselves with the police raids or the recoveries but that apart, at least the IO should have made an earnest effort to join the independent witnesses. No attempt in this direction appears to have been made and this, by itself, is a circumstance ANKIT GARG Digitally signed by ANKIT GARG Date: 2025.09.27 15:48:05 +0530 throwing doubt on the arrest or the recovery of the knife from the person of the accused."
13. The cardinal principle of criminal law cannot be forgotten that the prosecution has to prove the case against accused beyond reasonable doubt. The standard of proof is not preponderance of probabilities but proof beyond reasonable doubt. It is well settled legal proposition that the any benefit of doubt goes in favour of the accused.
14. The prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, accused Ganesh Sharma is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section u/s 33/38 of Delhi Excise Act.
This judgment contains 09 pages each page signed by the undersigned. Digitally signed by ANKIT ANKIT GARG the undersigned. GARG Date:
2025.09.27 15:48:10 +0530 Pronounced in the open (Ankit Garg) Court on 26.09.2025 JMFC-08,PHC, ND