Delhi District Court
State vs Mehtab Malik on 10 February, 2026
IN THE COURT OF SH. GURVINDER PAL SINGH
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET COURT, NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLST01-001900-2024
SC No. 161/2024
State versus Mehtab Malik
S/o Sh. Habbu Malik
R/o H. No. D-177,
Billaspur Camp,
Molar Bandh, Village,
New Delhi
E-FIR No. : 000417/2017
Police Station : Sangam Vihar
Under Sections : 380/411/413 IPC
Date of institution : 16.10.2020
Date of arguments : 08.01.2026
Date of pronouncement : 10.02.2026
Appearances:
Sh. Gurbhej Singh Guraya, Ld. Chief Public Prosecutor for State.
Sh. Raj Kishore Baghel, Ld. Counsel for accused.
JUDGMENT
Following is the factual matrix of relevant material facts of the case of prosecution. On 19/05/2017 through web application first informant Parvez Alam, son of Sh. Mohd. Alam lodged e-FIR reporting of theft of box containing cash and mobile IMEI No. 911546355719568, 91154635571576 in the period from 07:00 hours to 08.00 hours on 19/05/2017 at G-12/291 A, Sangam Vihar by unknown person. E-FIR No. SED-SV-000417 dated 19/05/2017 was registered. Investigation Digitally signed by was entrusted to ASI Sushil Kumar at Police Station Sangam GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:49:10 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 1 / 15 Vihar. ASI Sushil Kumar reached at G-12/291-A, Sangam Vihar, New Delhi at home of first informant and recorded statement of complainant under Section 161 Cr.P.C, wherein he joined investigation and at instance of first informant/complainant, site plan of place of incident was prepared by IO ASI Sushil Kumar. On 23/06/2017, SI Jitender received secret information from secret informer of two persons coming with stolen articles opposite Air Force Station near Monkey Park, MB Road, New Delhi, who can be apprehended on raid. SI Jitender with staff reached at the place of secret information and on the pointing out of secret informer, two persons with motorcycle were apprehended, amongst whom the name of one person was Mehtab Malik, son of Habbu Malik, resident of H. No. D-177, Billaspur Camp, Molar Bandh, Village, New Delhi of age 30 years. Motorcycle number DL1SQ2884 with key was recovered. Three mobile phones i.e., Micromax, X090 while colour; Lenovo A7010 black colour and Micromax Q355 black colour stated to be stolen were recovered from accused Mehtab Malik. Amongst the articles so recovered; aforesaid Micromax X090 was found to be one reportedly stolen in this case. Aforesaid articles were seized by IO ASI Sushil Kumar vide seizure memo. Disclosure statement of accused Mehtab Malik was recorded. Accused Mehtab Malik was arrested. IO ASI Sushil Kumar with staff, at instance of accused Mehtab Malik, reached D-177, Bilaspur Camp, Molarbandh Village, Delhi. Efforts were made by IO ASI Sushil Kumar to join public witnesses from passers-bye but none agreed. For want of time and considering the circumstances, no refusing person was given notice. Accused Mehtab Malik pointed out towards Jhuggi No. 177, saying it was his room. With the aid Digitally signed by of key recovered with motorcycle from Mehtab Malik; said GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:49:38 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 2 / 15 room/hut number 177 was opened and from one single bed, one black and red colour bag on which Hi Speed was written was checked and it was found containing IMEI changer tool kit, laptop, chords, 48 mobile phones of different companies and make; two laptop make Dell black colur and Lenovo black colour. The details of the mobile phones were mentioned in list and said all articles were seized. Supplementary disclosure statement of accused Mehtab Malik was recorded. From another plastic box in said room, 13 mobile phones of different companies, make were also recovered and some of them were broken and they were seized vide separate memo. ASI Sushil Kumar prepared site plan of place of recovery and seizure. IO ASI Sushil Kumar also recorded statements of Ct. Ravi, Ct Pankaj, who had joined the investigation. Accused Mehtab Malik was produced in Magisterial Court and got sent to judicial custody. After discussions with senior officers during the course of investigation, Section 413 IPC was added. The IMEI numbers noted from the mobile phones were got sent to the service provider mobile companies for further investigation for which charge-sheet finds mention that supplementary charge-sheet will be filed. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed in Magisterial Court. Accused Mehtab Malik was enlarged on bail on 24/08/2017. After completion of requirement of mandate of Section 207 Cr.P.C; Court of Metropolitan Magistrate framed charge against accused for the offences under Sections 380/411/413 IPC, which was read over and explained to accused, who after understanding the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Later thereto, on taking note of the fact that offence under Section 413 IPC was exclusively triable by the Court of Digitally signed by Sessions; the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-04, South, Saket, GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:50:07 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 3 / 15 New Delhi vide order dated 28/02/2024 committed the case to the Court of Sessions.
2. My Ld. Predecessor framed charge against accused for offences under Sections 380 IPC; 411 IPC and 413 IPC on 30/04/2024, which was read over and explained to accused, who after understanding the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. On 05/06/2025 accused admitted following document, detailed in the following chart; vide statement before my Ld. Predecessor:
Chart for Admitted Document by accused Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Ex A-1 Previous Involvement Report SCRB Delhi of accused.
Accused stated he was acquitted in these cases.
4. In order to connect the accused with the offences charged, prosecution had examined in all five witnesses. Following are the (1) Chart for Witnesses Examined; (2) Chart for Exhibited Documents and (3) Chart for Material Objects/Muddamals; with specified details:
Chart for Witnesses Examined Prosecution Name of Witness Description Witness No. PW1 Inspector (the then Organizer of raiding party SI) Jitender Malik PW2 Parvez Alam Complainant PW3 HC (the then Ct.) Accompanied IO in investigation Pankaj Kumar PW4 ASI (Retired) First Investigating Officer Sushil Kumar PW5 HC Ram Narayan Maal Khana Mohrar in Police Station Sangam Vihar Digitally signed by GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 4 / 15 2026.02.10 10:50:42 +0530 Chart for Exhibited Documents Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested by Ex PW1/A DD No. 30A dated 23/06/2017 PW-1 Ex PW1/B Seizure memo of the recovered mobile phones PW-3 i.e., (1) Micromax X090, white colour without PW-4 SIM, IMEI Nos. 911546355719568, 911546355719576; (2) Lenovo A7010, black colour, IMEI Nos. 867802024122930, 867802024122948 without SIM and (3) Micromax Q355, black colour, without SIM IMEI Nos. 911423700807391, 911423701307391 Ex PW2/PX Online complaint of complainant PW-2 Ex PW2/A Site plan PW-4 Ex PW3/A Arrest memo of accused PW-3 Ex PW3/B Personal search memo of accused PW-4 Ex PW3/C Supplementary disclosure statement of accused Ex PW3/D Seizure memo of mobile phones, hand bag Ex PW3/E Seizure memo of Laptops Dell and Lenovo Ex PW3/F Seizure memo mobile phones Ex PW3/G Seizure memo of motorcycle bearing registration no. DL1SQ2884 Ex PW3/H Seizure memo of Tool Kits, IMEI Changer, Pattern lock breaker devices etc. Ex PW3/I Site plan of the place of recovery of mobile phones Ex PW3/J Site plan of place of arrest of accused and recovery of mobile phones Ex PW4/A Disclosure statement of accused PW-4 Ex PW4/B Charge-sheet Ex PW5/A Entry at serial number 1687 in register no. 19 of PW-5 year 2017 regarding deposit of 64 mobile Digitally phones of different companies and other signed by GURVINDER instruments GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:51:14 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 5 / 15 Chart for Material Object/Muddamal Material Description of the Exhibit Proved by/Attested Object No. by
1. White colour mobile phone make PW-1 Micromax, Model No. X090 Ex PW1/P1 Black colour mobile phone make PW-2 Micromax Ex PW1/P2 Black colour mobile phone make PW-3 Lenovo Ex PW1/3
2. 61 mobile phones of different PW-3 companies Ex PW3/P1 to Ex PW3/61 One black red colour bag which was containing 48 mobile phones, 2 laptops and 7 tool kits Ex PW3/P62 Laptop make Lenova Ex PW3/P63 Laptop make Dell Ex PW3/P64 Tool Kits Ex PW3/P65 to Ex PW3/P66
5. All incriminating evidence and material was put in the form of questions to accused by my Ld. Predecessor in his recorded statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C, wherein accused pleaded innocence and false implication. Accused denied to enter upon his defence and/or to lead defence evidence.
6. I have heard the arguments of Sh. Gurbhej Singh Guraya, Ld. Chief Public Prosecutor for State, Sh. Raj Kishore Baghel, Ld. Counsel for accused and have perused the record including the charge sheet, documents, evidence and given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions put forth. Digitally signed by GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 6 / 15 PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:51:42 +0530
7. Sh. Gurbhej Singh Guraya, Ld. Chief Public Prosecutor for State prayed for conviction of accused for the offences under Section 411 IPC and Section 413 IPC on the following premise/grounds. The witnesses of the prosecution have proved on record that accused retained the stolen mobile phone of first informant/complainant and said stolen mobile phone was the one amongst those recovered from the possession of accused on 23/06/2017 and IMEI numbers of said mobile phone of complainant was matching. Accused was also found dishonestly retaining number of other stolen articles including mobile phones in his possession at the time of arrest and from his place of abode and was thus habitually dealing in stolen articles having reason to believe the same to be stolen properties.
8. Sh. Raj Kishore Baghel, Ld. Counsel for accused vehementally argued for acquittal of accused on the following premise/grounds. This is a case of false implication of accused. E-FIR Ex PW2/PX is regarding theft of mobile phone and cash kept in a box by first informant/complainant wherein even the make and model of the mobile phone has not been so provided. In the course of investigation, investigating agency did not seize any document of ownership of mobile phone alleged/reported to have been stolen and belonging to first informant/complainant. The case property has been planted upon the accused. Despite having ample time, officers of investigating agency did not join any independent witness of nearby locality in apprehension of accused; search of accused; recovery from accused; recovery from the jhuggi stated to be of accused. Accused is innocent.
Digitally Accused is stated to be pillion rider on the motor cycle. Driver of signed by GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:52:03 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 7 / 15 the motor cycle has not been arrested in this case. No information was given to officers of Police Station Badar Pur with respect to recovery affected from its area. Complainant did not prove any document of ownership of alleged stolen mobile phone in the course of his deposition. Prosecution has not proved on record any First Information Report of theft of any of the articles/mobile phones alleged to be recovered from or at instance of accused from his person or from the Hut No. 177. Prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accused deserves acquittal, which has been prayed for.
9. PW1 Inspector (the then SI) Jitender Malik testified that while working as SI on 23/06/2017 at Police Station Sangam Vihar, he received secret information from secret informer, who informed that two boys, who deal in stolen mobile phones would come on motorcycle at Monkey Park and PW1 informed SHO about said information and made entry in DD No. 30A, Ex PW1/A. Said information was shared by PW1 with SI Rohit, HC Ramkesh, PW3 HC (the then Ct.) Pankaj, Ct. Ravi and Ct. Mukesh. PW1 organized raiding party with aforesaid police officials. PW1 alongwith police party and secret informer went to Monkey Park and waited for accused persons. At around 3.30-4 pm two boys came on a passion bike at the Monkey Park and on the pointing out of secret informer, those two persons were stopped. After pointing out the two persons on the bike, secret informer left the spot. PW2 asked the names of those two persons. Said bike was being driven by Praveen Sharma and accused Mehtab Malik was pillion rider on the said bike. In search of accused Mehtab Malik, three mobile phones i.e., (i) Digitally signed by white colour mobile phone make Micromax, Model No. X090 GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:52:28 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 8 / 15 +0530 having IMEI No. 911546355719568 and 911546355719576, Ex PW1/P1; (ii) black colour mobile phone make Micromax having IMEI No. 911423700807391 Ex PW1/P2 and (iii) black colour mobile phone make Lenovo, bearing IMEI No. 867802024122930 Ex PW1/3; were recovered. Accused Mehtab Malik could not produce the bills of said mobile phones. On checking of mobile phone Ex PW1/P1, it was found having IMEI 911546355719568 and 911546355719576 and it was ascertained that it was stolen case property of present case FIR. PW1 informed PW4 ASI Sushil Kumar about the recovery of said mobile phone. PW4 ASI Sushil reached the spot. PW1 handed over the said three mobile phones including the phone in the present case along with accused persons to PW4. PW4 prepared seizure memo Ex PW1/B of the recovered mobile phones. Said other person Praveen Sharma was found to be wanted in case FIR No. 110/2017, Police Station Sangam Vihar and IO of said case was informed and he also reached the spot and did his investigation in that case. In search of Praveen Sharma, one stolen mobile phone of case FIR No. 110/2017, Police Station Sangam Vihar was recovered. PW1 handed over the bike make Passion recovered from the possession of accused to Investigating Officer. Statement of PW1 was recorded by PW4. In the course of cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsel; PW1 admitted that passerbyes were going on the road at the time of apprehension of accused and when the search of accused was taken. PW1 also admitted that the place of apprehension and search of accused was a busy road and there was movement of public on said road.
Digitally
10. Complainant PW2 Parvez Alam testified that on signed by GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:52:48 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 9 / 15 19/05/2017 he was at his home and residing on the first floor, whereas his father resided at the ground floor at G-12/291A, Sangam Vihar, Delhi. Father of PW2 had gone outside after leaving the door open at ground floor. At about 12/01:00 pm on 19/05/2017; someone came in the home of PW2 and had stolen the cash, Registration Certificate of two wheeler, which were kept in a Godrej small locker and mobile phone, make of Micromax X090. Father of PW2 came back to home and saw that someone had stolen the above-said cash, Registration Certificate and mobile phone. Father of PW2 immediately called PW2 from first floor. PW2 came down and saw that the Godrej small locker and mobile phone were missing. PW2 made complaint Ex PW2/PX online at Cyber Cafe. Later on, police visited the home of PW2 and enquired about the incident and prepared the site plan Ex PW2/A at instance of PW2. PW2 handed over the box of mobile phone in which it was bought as a new phone to the police. PW2 stated that mobile phone Ex PW1/P1 was the same which was stolen.
11. PW3 HC Pankaj Kumar testified that on 23/06/2017 while he was posted at Police Station Sangam Vihar, he was called by PW1 SI Jitender Malik in his room as he had some secret information regarding the appearance of the persons, who dealt in stolen mobile phones and after changing their IMEI numbers; they sell them at Monkey Park, near Vayusenavad Air Force Station. PW3 was the part of the raiding party organized by PW1 and apprehension of accused Mehtab Malik as well as other person Praveen and alleged recoveries from them. PW3 stated that PW4 arrested accused vide memo Ex PW3/A. Digitally signed by GURVINDER Personal search of accused was conducted vide memo Ex GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:53:13 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 10 / 15 PW3/B. Disclosure statement Mark A and supplementary disclosure statement Ex PW3/C of accused was recorded. PW3 deposed that accused led the police party to his home at Bilaspur Camp, Molarband and got recovered one black red colour bag Ex PW3/P62 from his bed, which was found containing 48 mobile phones of different companies and two laptops i.e., one of Dell and one of Lenevo, which were seized vide memos Ex PW3/D and Ex. PW3/E. PW3 also deposed that accused also got recovered 13 mobile phones of different companies kept in a plastic box on the slab (taand) of his room, which were seized vide memo Ex PW3/F. Motorcycle bearing registration no. DL1SQ2884 was seized vide seizure memo Ex PW3/G. 7 Tool Kits were seized by PW4 vide memo Ex PW3/H. Site plan Ex PW3/I of place of recovery of mobile phone was prepared by PW4. Site plan Ex PW3/J of place of arrest of accused persons near Monkey Park was also prepared by PW4. PW3 stated that mobile phones recovered from black colour bag and plastic box recovered from the room of accused Mehtab Malik are Ex PW3/P1 to Ex PW3/P61. Two laptops i.e., one make of Lenova and other make of Dell are Ex PW3/P63 and Ex. PW3/P64. Tool kits, which were recovered from the room of accused are Ex. PW3/P65 and Ex. PW3/P66. PW3 in cross examination elicited that no public person joined the investigation, though they were called. PW3 further stated that no videography and photography of the recovery proceedings were done.
12. PW4 ASI Sushil Kumar, Investigating Officer, also elicited in cross examination that he did not make any videography of recovery proceedings of the mobile phones. In Digitally signed by cross examination PW4 further elicited that he had asked public GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:53:34 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 11 / 15 persons to join the investigation during recovery of case property but none agreed to join. Also PW4 elicited that he had only arrested accused Mehtab Malik and he did not arrest other person Praveen as he was not involved in the present case. PW4 also stated in cross examination that he had asked complainant/PW2 to hand over the bill of his mobile phone but PW2 told to PW4 that he lost the bill somewhere.
13. PW5 HC Ram Narayan proved the entry at serial number 1687, Ex PW5/A, in register number 19 of Maal Khana regarding deposit of the mobile phones and other instruments, allegedly recovered from accused Mehtab Malik.
14. Prosecution has not proved any fact on record of accused having taken any movable property of first informant/ complainant PW2 Parvez Alam out of his possession or from his place of abode with dishonest intention and without his consent; so as to bring home the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt for commission of offence charged for offence under Section 380 IPC.
15. E-FIR, Ex PW2/PX finds mention of box containing cash and mobile phone to be stolen. The IMEI numbers 911546355719568, 911546355719576 of alleged stolen mobile phone are mentioned in Ex PW2/PX. E-FIR finds no mention of the make, model and colour of the stolen mobile phone instrument. It is the deposition of PW2 inter alia that he had handed over the box of the stolen mobile phone to police. No such box of the alleged stolen mobile phone was seized by any Digitally signed by officer of the investigating agency nor produced in Court. In GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:53:59 +0530 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 12 / 15 terms of illustration (g) of Section 114 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, it is accordingly presumed that the evidence in the form of the aforesaid box of mobile phone alleged to be stolen, which could be produced by investigating agency and has not been produced in the course of trial; would, if produce, be unfavourable to prosecution/investigating agency, who withheld it. No bill/receipt of the alleged stolen mobile phone was given by PW2 Parvez Alam to officers of investigating agency nor was produced in Court nor proved in accordance with procedure established by law. In this fact of the matter, mobile phone i.e., Micromax X090, white colour, Ex PW1/P1 has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt by prosecution to be owned by complainant PW2 Parvez Alam. With respect to remaining mobile phones, laptops or other articles, alleged to have been recovered from the possession of accused Mehtab Malik; prosecution has not proved on record that any amongst those articles was reportedly stolen nor it has been able to prove that these were owned by any specific person(s) as neither any lodged First Information Report of theft of such articles has been filed nor proved nor any document of ownership of these articles have been filed nor proved. Accordingly, prosecution has miserably failed to prove on record of accused having dishonestly received or retained any stolen articles out of any articles alleged to have been recovered from his possession. Prosecution has also miserably failed to prove that accused habitually dealt or received any stolen property. Despite admitted availability at elbow of officers of investigating agency neither at the place of apprehension of accused nor at the place of abode of accused; any independent public person was joined in apprehension of accused; search of accused; search of the home of accused; Digitally signed by GURVINDER GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:54:21 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 13 / 15 +0530 seizure of the articles there from. No two respectable inhabitants of locality of place of abode of accused were asked to join the search and seizure at home of accused nor any notice in writing was served upon any refusing person(s) despite admitted availability of ample time nor any action as per law was taken for offence under Section 187 IPC against any person refusing to join investigation on being called for. The mandate of Section 100(4) of Cr.P.C for calling upon two or more independent and respectable inhabitants of the locality in which the place to be searched is situated or any other locality if no such inhabitant of the said locality is available or is willing to be a witness to the search; to attend and witness the search; was put to winds by the officers of investigating agency. It brings the presented case of prosecution under cloud of doubt, with respect to the alleged seizure(s) of the articles, alleged to have been stolen.
16. In view of foregoing discussions, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against accused Mehtab Malik beyond reasonable doubt for the offences charged. Accordingly, accused Mehtab Malik is held not guilty and acquitted for the offences charged. Case property be confiscated to State after expiry of period of appeal or as per order of Appellate Court, whichever is later.
17. Bail bond of accused Mehtab Malik stands cancelled and his surety stands discharged. Original documents, if any, be released to the rightful owner(s) after getting the endorsement, if any, cancelled.
18. Accused Mehtab Malik is directed to furnish bail bond Digitally signed by GURVINDER under Section 437A Cr.P.C. in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one GURVINDER PAL SINGH PAL SINGH Date:
2026.02.10 10:54:44 SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 14 / 15 +0530 surety in the like amount for a period of six months.
19. After due compliance, file be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally signedAnnounced in the open Court GURVINDER by GURVINDER PAL SINGH today i.e., 10th February, 2026 PAL SINGH Date: 2026.02.10 10:55:02 +0530 (Gurvinder Pal Singh) Principal District & Sessions Judge South District, Saket Court, New Delhi (DK) SC No. 161-2024 State vs. Mehtab Malik P.S Sangam Vihar Page 15 / 15