Delhi District Court
State vs Pawan Kumar Giri on 13 March, 2026
IN THE COURT OF Ms. SAUMYA CHAUHAN,
ASJ (FTC)-02, WEST DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI
COURTS, DELHI
CNR no. DLWT01-007455-2016
FIR no. 40/2016
SC No. 58115/2016
State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri & Anr.
PS: Raja Garden Metro
Under Section : 394/397/307/411/34 IPC
Date of commission of offence 11.04.2016
Date of Committal in the Court of 04.10.2016
Sessions
Name of the complainant Sh. Kunal Kishore S/o
Mahesh Choudary.
Name of accused and address 1. Pawan Kumar Giri S/o
Mool Chand Giri R/o
H.No. 249, Gali no.6, Shiv
Puri, Sector-9, Vijay Nagar
Gaziabad, U.P. Permanent
address : Village, Bharana
PS Narsana Dist..
Bulandsher, U.P.
2.Sonu Kumar S/o Ramesh
Singh (since deceased and
proceedings abated vide
order dated 13.09.2021).
Offence complained of or proved U/s 394/307/201/397/34
IPC
Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
Final Order Acquittal
Date of judgment 13.03.2026
FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 1 of 35
JUDGMENT
BRIEF FACTS
1. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 11.04.2016, DD no. 4A was received at PS Raja Garden Metro regarding robbery after injuring one person at the control room, Rajendra Place metro station. The injured Kunal Kishore was taken to Ganga Ram Hospital in PCR Van where he was given medical treatment. IO recorded the statement of injured/complainant Kunal Kishore, who stated that on 11.04.2016 at about 05:40 AM, he was on duty in Control room, Metro Station Rajendra Place. Somebody knocked on the door. He saw two boys wearing pollution mask standing at the door of the Control room. He opened the door and they entered the room on the pretext of making a complaint. One of boys grabbed him from behind and the other boy i.e. accused Pawan Giri stabbed him with a knife multiple time. He became unconscious. After regaining consciousness, he found that Rs.12 Lakhs and one bag containing his pan card, I-card, voter I-card and cheque book were stolen.
FIR & INVESTIGATION
2. On basis of the statement of the complainant, present FIR was registered under Section 394/397/34 IPC. During investigation, CCTV footage of the CCTV cameras installed at the metro station were obtained by the IO. The details of the metro card used by the accused persons were also taken out by the IO. The complainant identified the accused Pawan Kumar Giri on seeing the photographs of FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 2 of 35 stills of the CCTV footage. On 13.04.2016 accused Pawan Giri was apprehended from his shop and Rs.7,65,000/- were recovered from his possession. At his behest, co- accused Sonu Kumar (since deceased and proceedings abated) was also arrested and the bag of the complainant alongwith cash amount of Rs.2,90,400/- were recovered from his possession. Both the accused persons were arrested and sent to JC.
3. After investigation was completed, chargesheet was filed in the court under Section 394/397/307/411/201/34 IPC. After completion of proceedings U/s 207 Cr.P.C., Learned Metropolitan Magistrate committed the case to Learned Sessions Court.
FRAMING OF CHARGE AND EVIDECNE:
4. On 29.04.2017, charge was framed against both the accused persons under Section 394/307/201/34 IPC. Further, charge under Section 397 IPC was also framed against accused Pawan Kumar Giri. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. It is clarified that this judgment is only qua the accused Pawan Giri. The other accused Sonu Kumar expired during the trial and proceedings against him were abated vide order dated 13.09.2021.
6. To prove the charges against the accused, the prosecution has examined 27 witnesses in total.
FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 3 of 357. PW-2/Sh. Kunal Kishore i.e the complainant deposed that on 11.04.2016 he was working as Station Controller, DMRC and was posted at Rajendra Place Metro Station. At about 05:22 a.m. he was present in the Control room of Rajendra Place Metro Station situated at platform no.2. Someone knocked at the door of the control room and when he looked through the glass of the door, he saw two persons wearing pollution mask were knocking at the door. He opened the door and the said persons told him that they wanted to make a complaint regarding over-charging for tickets. They asked him to give them the complaint book. The witness told them that the complaint book was available with the customer care centre, situated at the concourse. When he turned back to lock the control room for accompanying them to the concourse, one of them held his neck and the other one took out a knife. He was shocked and realized that they had told him a fake and concocted story. In the meantime, the person having knife started stabbing him with the knife and he sustained stab injury on his head. He grabbed the knife with his hands and his hands also got injured. In the meantime, the other person kept holding and pressing his neck and he fainted and fell down as he felt difficulty in breathing due to the injuries and pressing of his neck. At about 05:40 a.m., he started regaining consciousness and found himself lying in the Control room feeling severe pain in his hands and right side of his chest due to injuries. He went to the wash room situated adjacent to the control room and saw in the mirror that blood had oozed from his head and was spread over FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 4 of 35 his face and his face had become reddish black. He saw one CISF staff in the washroom and called him. At the same time, ticket operating machine operator Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwari came and both of them took him to the control room. Information was given to Karol Bagh station controller about attempt to murder on Station Controller of Rajendra Place, Metro Station. Karol Bagh Station controller came to Rajendra Place Metro Station and Ajay Kumar Tiwari dialed 100 number. He found that his bag was missing, containing his DMRC-I Card, Voter ID Card, shirt of uniform of Metro and SBI cheque book. Thereafter, he checked the cash box in which an amount of Rs.11.5 lacs was lying prior to the aforesaid attack but the said box was empty. Prior to the aforesaid incident, cash of Rs.12,00,000/- approx. was lying in the Control room. He was taken to Gangaram hospital by the PCR and was admitted in the ICU. Police recorded his statement Ex.PW2/A. His T-shirt and vest were taken by the doctor.
8. PW-2/Kunal Kishore further deposed that on 13.04.2016 police officials had shown him two photographs. He identified one person from the said photographs as Pawan Goswami, who earlier used to work as ticket operating machine operator at Metro station and was dismissed from department due to complaint against him. He also told the IO that Pawan Kumar Giri was the same person who had inflicted injuries upon him with knife. He also told the IO that during the scuffle, the accused Pawan Kumar Giri had also sustained injury in his hand. PW-2 further deposed FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 5 of 35 that he had identified his bag in the TIP vide TIP proceedings Ex.PW2/B. He identified the accused Pawan Kumar Giri before the court. He identified his clothes i.e. T-shirt (Ex.P1) and vest (Ex.P2) which he was wearing at the time of the offence. His American Touristor bag is Ex.P3.
9. During cross-examination, PW-2 stated that in the intervening night of 10-11.4.2016 he was on night duty from 10 pm to 7 am. He was alone in the said room. He stated that the accused Pawan Kumar Giri was a contractual employee in DMRC. One day while he was sitting with station manager, two lady passengers had complained against the accused regarding misbehaviour. The station master had asked him to look into the matter and if accused was at fault, then to issue memo to him. Accordingly, he went to accused's cabin and discussed the matter. Accused started misbehaving with him. Thereafter, he issued memo to the accused.
10. He admitted that the accused Pawan was known to him beforehand by name as well as by face. He admitted having stated to the police in his statement Ex. PW2/A that he could identify both the boys (assailants) if shown to him. He admitted that he had not mentioned the name of the two assailants to the police in his statement Ex PW2/A. He had not given the description i.e. height, built, colour complexion or any other distinctive feature of the assailant. PW-2 admitted that there are CCTV cameras FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 6 of 35 covering whole of the area of metro station. There is only one CCTV camera covering the station control room. He had not seen anyone opening the cash box, almirah or the taking the money from the control room, as he was unconscious at that time.
11. PW-3/HC Basudev Rai, CISF deposed that on 10.04.2016 he was posted at Rajendra Place Metro Station. At about 05:40 a.m., he visited the washroom and saw DMRC Controller in pool of blood. He immediately went downstairs and came back to the wash room with two officials Ct. S.K.Sahu and Ct. C.P.Panwar. DMRC controller and Mr. Tiwari were also present there. They all took DMRC controller to the control room and TOM operator Mr. Tiwari opened the lock of the control room. Blood was scattered on the floor. He asked TOM operator Mr. Tiwari to call at 100 number, PCR officials came and took DMRC controller to the hospital.
12. PW-4/Sh. Ajay Kumar Tiwari, deposed that on 11.04.2016 he was TOM operator at Rajendra Place, Metro Station. On that day after reaching at Rajendra Place Metro Station, he went to washroom, where he saw Mr. Kunal Kishore, with blood smeared on his face. CISF staff were also present there. They told him that two masked persons had stabbed Kunal Kishore and robbed cash from him. He called senior officer of next station after the call was not picked up by station manager and also called on 100 FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 7 of 35 number. PCR van arrived and they took Kunal Kishore to Ganga Ram hospital.
13. PW-4/Sh. Ajay Kumar Tiwari further deposed that during investigation on 12.04.2016 he was shown photographs of two boys by IO at PS Rajouri Garden Metro. He identified the accused Pawan Giri, who was earlier working as TOM operator but was dismissed from the services due to several complaints against him. The said photographs are Mark PW4/A and Mark PW4/B and the accused Pawan Kumar Giri was identified by him as the person encircled at point A to A1.
14. During cross-examination, PW-4 deposed that there are total 11 to 12 gates at Rajendra place metro station for entry and exit purposes. Every person who enters the metro station is frisked by CISF officials, including metro staff. He admitted that the entire metro station including their offices are under CCTV camera surveillance. He stated that the injured Kunal Kishore did not disclose the built/physical features of the offenders to him, nor he told him that he could identify the said offenders.
15. PW-5/IO Retired SI Shiv Kumar deposed that on 11.04.2016, DD No. 4A was marked to him, upon which he alongwith Ct. Deepak reached the Control room, platform no.2. Rajendra Palace, Metro Station, South Side. They found blood scattered inside the control room. The victim/injured Kunal Kishor was already removed to FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 8 of 35 Ganga Ram hospital by PCR van. He left Ct. Deepak at the spot and went to Ganga Ram hospital where they found the injured Kunal under treatment vide MLC No. 2309. The doctor had opined nature of injury to be 'grievous stab injuries'. However, the injured was fit for statement. Accordingly, he recorded the statement of complainant/injured Kunal. Thereafter, he returned to the spot. Crime team had also reached at the spot and inspected the place of occurrence and crime team photographer took the photographs of the place of occurrence. He prepared rukka Ex. PW5/A and handed it over to Ct. Deepak to get the FIR registered. Ct. Deepak got the FIR registered and came back to the spot and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to him. He prepared rough site plan Ex.PW-5/B at the instance of TOM operator Ajay Kumar Tiwari.
16. PW-5 further deposed that he lifted the blood lying at the spot with the help of cotton gauze as well as the earth control and kept them in separate pullandas. The said pullandas were sealed with the seal of SK and were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/C. He also seized the clothes of the injured from the doctor at Gangaram hospital in a sealed pullanda vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/D. He checked the CCTV cameras installed at the spot. The CCTV cameras revealed the footage of both the offenders. He also checked the metro card on the basis of CCTV footage and it was found that the metro cards were issued on 08.04.2016 from Kaushambi metro station and by using FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 9 of 35 the said metro cards, accused persons travelled from Rajiv Chowk to Karol Bagh and thereafter, returned to Kaushambi Metro station. He took the printouts of the photographs from the CCTV footage and showed it to the complainant. The complainant identified one photo to be of accused Pawan Kumar Giri.
17. PW-5 further deposed that on 13.04.2016, accused Pawan Kumar Giri was apprehended and arrested from shop A-358, Shiv Puri, Sector-9. Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad, U.P vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/E. He made disclosure statement Ex.PW5/G and got recovered a cash sum of Rs.7,65,000/- from under the counter of the said shop which were kept in a black colour bag. The currency notes were counted and were kept in the same bag. The bag was sealed with the seal of SK and was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PWS/H. Accused Pawan Kumar also pointed out the place of commission of offence vide pointing out memo Ex.PW5/1.
18. PW-5 further deposed that on 11.04.2016, accused Sonu Kumar (since expired) was also apprehended and arrested at the instance of accused Pawan Kumar. A cash sum of Rs. 2,90,400/- was recovered from his house. The money and bag were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/J. The bag in which cash sum of Rs.2,90,400/- was kept was also seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/M. FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 10 of 35
19. PW-5 further deposed that both the accused persons refused to participate in judicial TIP. He deposed that during PC remand, the accused persons pointed out the place of offence as well as the chemist shop from where they had purchased the masks. He recorded the statement of shopkeeper Damru Jha. He obtained the finger prints of accused persons and got conducted the Judicial TIP of the bag of the complainant. He also prepared the rough site plans Ex.PX1, Ex.PX2 and Ex.PX3. He also seized the metro card of accused Sonu Kumar vide memo Ex.PX4.
20. In cross-examination, PW-5 stated that he had recorded the statement of complainant at about 8.10 am on the same day. The injured had not disclosed the name of the assailants in his statement, nor he disclosed the description of assailants including height, colour, age etc. or any other feature in his statement. However, he stated that he could identify the assailants if shown to him. He further stated that he obtained the printouts of the photographs of CCTV footage of Kaushambi Metro station and had shown the photographs to the complainant.
21. PW-5 admitted that there were other shops surrounding the shop of the accused Pawan Giri. Accused was apprehended while he was in the process of opening the shop. He had not collected any documentary/oral evidence to prove that the accused Pawan Kr. Giri was owner/tenant of shop no. A-358. He did not got prepared any FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 11 of 35 videography or took any photograph of the recovery of money at the said shop.
22. PW-6/Ct. Deepak Kumar had accompanied PW-5/SI Shiv Kumar to the spot on 11.04.2016 on receiving DD no.4A. He corroborated the testimony of PW-5/IO and deposed on the same line. He deposed that IO had given him the rukka, which he took to PS Raja Garden Metro and got the FIR registered. Thereafter he returned to the spot and handed over the original rukka with copy of FIR to IO SI Shiv Kumar. He further corroborated the testimony of PW-5 regarding the investigation conducted on 11.04.2016. He identified the gauge piece as Ex.PX5; two sunmica ply collected from the spot as Ex.PX6 and one sunmica ply collected from the spot as Ex.PX7.
23. PW-8/ASI Hari Singh and PW-9/Ct. A. Sriniwas deposed that they had joined the investigation with IO/SI Shiv Kumar on 13.04.2016. Both these witnesses have corroborated the testimony of PW-5/IO and deposed on the same lines. They had signed the documents prepared by the IO at the spot i.e. arrest memo, personal search memo, disclosure memo and seizure memos etc.
24. In cross-examination, both PW-8 and PW-9 admitted that IO had not recorded the statement of any public witness to establish that the said shop belonged to accused. They admitted that there were shops surrounding the shop of FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 12 of 35 accused, however, no public witness was made witness to the memos prepared in this case.
25. PW-1/ASI Dev Dutt, duty officer deposed that on 11.04.2016 at about 9.10 a.m., Ct. Deepak handed over the rukka to him sent by S.I. Shiv Kumar. On the basis of rukka, he got the present FIR registered under Section 394/397/34 IPC through CIPA (Common Integrated Police Application) Operator. His endorsement on rukka is Ex.PW-1/A and FIR is Ex.PW-1/B. The certificate U/Sec.65-B Indian Evidence Act is Ex.PW-1/C.
26. PW-1 further deposed that on 09.05.2016, he was looking after the work of MHC(M). On that day, as per the direction of IO, three sealed parcels were handed over to W/Ct. Lalita for depositing at FSL Rohini vide Road Certificate No.31/21/16. After depositing the same, W/Ct. Lalita handed over the acknowledgment to him. He further deposed that on 11/04/2016, SI Shiv Kumar deposited four sealed parcels, one sealed with the seal of KV SINGH CMO of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, and other three parcels sealed with the seal of SK alongwith one sample seal and two seizure memos in the malkhana vide entry at serial no. 69 and 70 in register no. 19. Same are Ex. PWI/D and Ex. PW1/E.
27. PW-1 further deposed that on 13/04/2016, IO/SI Shiv Kumar deposited four sealed parcels sealed with the seal of SK; and the articles recovered during personal search of FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 13 of 35 accused Pawan Kamar and Sonu Kumar in the malkhana. He also deposited four seizure memos of currency notes of amount of Rs 7,65,000/- and Rs.2,90,400/, one mobile phone and of one bag vide separate entries in register no. 19 at serial no.71 to 74. Same are Ex. PW1/F to Ex. PW1/I. The entries at serial no. 75 and 76 regarding the personal search articles of the accused persons are Ex. PW1/3 and Ex.PW1/K. He further deposed that on 07/05/2016, the amount of Rs 7,65,000/- and Rs 2,90,400/- was released to Sh. Sunil Kumar Gupta, Station Manager, Rajindra Place Metro. He further deposed that on 09/05/2016, he handed over four sealed parcels to W/Ct. Lalita vide RC No. 31/21/16 for depositing the same in the FSL Rohini. The RC no.31/21/16 (OSR) is Ex.PW1/1. After depositing the above said parcels in FSL, Ct Lalita gave acknowledgment receipt to him. Same is Ex.PW1/M.
28. PW-7/Sh. Atender Singh Mann, Senior Customer Care Assistant, Metro Bawan, Security Department deposed that on 11.04.2016 IO had enquired from him regarding the card used on 11.04.2016 at about 05:15 a.m. at AFC gate Rajendra Prasad Metro Station. After checking the record, he sent the details to the SHO PS Raja Garden Metro on his mobile. The card no.76655245 which was one of the cards used at AFC gate Rajendra Place Metro Station was issued on 08.04.2016 from Kaushambhi Metro Station. He also sent the footage of Kaushambhi Metro Station showing the photographs of the person to whom the card was issued. Hard copy of the details along with FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 14 of 35 certificate under Section 65 B of Indian Evidence Act with forwarding letter is Ex.PW7/A.
29. PW-10 /Dharmu Jha deposed that on 08.04.2016 he was working at chemist shop namely New Delhi Muskaan Medicos situated at premises no.154/44 WEA Sarasvati Marg, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. He was present there at about 12:00 noon when accused persons purchased two masks of Rs.10/- from him. He identified both the accused persons on 19.04.2016 when police had brought them in police custody to his shop. He also identified the accused Pawan Giri before the court.
30. PW-11/Inspector Devender Singh, Crime Team Incharge, deposed that on 11.04.2016 he alongwith Crime Team photographer Ct. Amit and finger print expert ASI Ranjeet went to the place of occurrence ie. metro control room of Rajendra Place metro station. They met with IO/SI Shiv Kumar. He inspected the place of occurrence and prepared crime team report Ex.PW11/A. The finger print expert had also lifted the chance prints from the place of occurrence.
31. PW-12/HC Amit, Photographer, Crime Team, West deposed that he had taken eight photographs of the spot. Same are Ex.PW12/B (colly.) and the negatives are Ex.PW12/A.
32. PW-13/Dr. R. V. Singh had examined the injured Kunal Kishor and prepared MLC Ex.PW13/A. He deposed that FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 15 of 35 he sealed the clothes of the injured and handed over the same to the IO vide memo Ex.PW5/D. He gave opinion regarding nature of injury as 'grievous'.
33. PW-14/ACP Devender Kumar, Nodal Officer in ACDS, CPCR, IP Estate, New Delhi deposed that on 26.04.2016, on the request of IO, he generated the PCR form bearing serial no. 11APPR1612230068 and handed it over to the IO. The said PCR form is Ex. PW14/A and certificate under Section 65-B Indian Evidence Act is PW14/B.
34. PW-15/WHC Lalita Kumari, deposed that on 09.11.2016, she took one sealed plastic jar along with sample seal and FSL form from Malkhana of PS Raja Garden Metro Station and deposited the same at FSL office.
35. PW-16/HC Prem Kumar, duty officer deposed that he recorded DD no. 4A (Ex.PW16/A) on receiving call regarding stabbing and robbing of the controller at Rajendra Place.
36. PW-17/Sunil Kumar Gupta, Senior Station Manager/LMC, Delhi Metro deposed that he had provided the service deficiency memo of Pawan Kumar S/o Mool Chand dated 31.12.2015 to the IO. Certified copy of the same is Ex.PW17/A. He had also got released the cash amount of Rs.10,55,400/- on superdari vide the security bond Ex.PW17/B and panchnama Ex. PW17/C. FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 16 of 35
37. PW-18/ASI Parmanand deposed that on 11.04.2016 he was posted on PCR vehicle. At about 06:30 a.m., on receiving a call from control room that the controller of Rajendra Place Metro Station had been stabbed and also reported about theft, he along with gunman reached the said metro station and took the injured (Controller) to Ganga Ram hospital and got him admitted there.
38. PW-19/SI Amit Kumar, CISF Control Room deposed that on 11.04.2016 he provided the CD of CCTV footage dated 11.04.2016 of the period from 05:10 a.m. to 06:10 a.m. of Rajendra Place Metro Station to the police. The CD of MSC no.1087 is Ex.PX. The said CD was played in the court and two boys wearing face masks while carrying a pitho bag each on their shoulder, were seen entering the room of controller and also seen coming out of the said room. One of them was carrying an extra black colour bag on his front side. They were seen running while coming out from metro station.
39. PW-20/SI D Lokesh, CISF Control Room deposed that on 11.04.2016 he provided the CD of CCTV footage of Rajendra Place Metro Station to the police in three CDs having MSC no.1089, MSC No.1090 and MSC No.1091. The CD bearing no.MSC No.1089 was played and two boys are visible while entering metro station from the side of Kaushambi on 08.04.2016 at timing 15:25:45 and the face of one of the boy was observed as matching with the accused. At about 19:34:05, one of the boys having FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 17 of 35 resemblance with the accused Pawan Kumar Giri was seen going out of Kaushambi metro station alongwith another boy. The said CD also dated 08.04.2016 is Ex.PY. In CD bearing no.MSC No.1090, dated 08.04.2016, two boys were seen coming out from the metro at Karol Bagh Metro Station at about 16:28:48 but their faces were not visible. At about 16:56:11, two boys were seen entering the Karol Bagh Metro Station. The face of one boy was observed to have resemblance with accused Pawan Kumar Giri. The said CD is Ex.PY1.
40. In CD bearing no.MSC No.1091, dated 11.04.2016, two boys carrying a pitthu bag each on their shoulder were seen. They entered in the room of the Controller. They were also seen coming out from the said room and one of the boy was carrying an extra black colour bag on his front side and both the boys while coming out from the metro station are seen running. The face of the said boys was not visible as they are covering their face with the face mask. The said CD is Ex.PY2.
41. PW-21/Amit Singh, Chief System Analyst, Department S & T, DMRC deposed that notice u/s 91 Cr.P.C. dated 18.04.2016 (Ex.PW21/A) was served upon the Chief Security Commissioner by the IO. The Chief Security Commissioner gave reply (Ex.PW21/B and Ex.PW21/C) vide the internal entries (Ex.PW7/A colly) on Ex.PW21/A. IO served another notice u/s 91 Cr.P.C. dated 16.05.2016 (Ex.PW21/E) and the internal entries of the department of FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 18 of 35 the same is Ex.PW21/E. He further stated that entry transaction of Rajendra Place Metro Station as per the query of the specific card at serial no.6 at point A in Ex.PW21/F. As per the entry, the holder of the specific card entered in the metro station at about 05:18:54 on 11.04.2016. The certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act in this regard is Ex.PW7/A. He further deposed that entry transaction of Rajendra Place Metro Station is as per the specific query sought by IO regarding exit from 05:00a.m. to 05:30 a.m. His department's replies and the relevant entries in this regard are Ex.PW21/G. The certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act is Ex.PW7/A. He further deposed that his department had supplied the details of metro card nos.76655245, 56029709 and 76655244. Same are Ex.PW21/H, Ex.PW21/I and Ex.PW21/J respectively. The certificate under Section 65-B of Indian Evidence Act is Ex.PW7/A. The Metro card no.76655244 is Ex.PW21/J.
42. In cross-examination, PW-21 admitted that there is no entry of the card no.76655244 on 11.04.2016.
43. PW-22/Sh. Saurabh Kumar, Senior Customer Relation Assistant DMRC deposed that he had given the cash register dated 13.04.2016, as per which cash amount of Rs.11,48,230/- was missing from the station control room. Same is Ex.PW22/A. FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 19 of 35
44. PW-23/Inspector Sudhir Bhalla, Finger Print Expert, PS Kamla Market deposed that on 26.04.2016 he received chance prints Mark Q1 to Q3 from West District Crime Investigation team and a letter from SHO Raja Garden Metro alongwith the computer-generated specimen finger/palm prints of accused Pawan Giri and of accused Sonu Kumar S/o Ramesh Singh. After comparing the same, he prepared the report Ex.PW23/A. In cross- examination, he admitted that no chance prints of accused persons were found.
45. PW-24/Sh. Swami Nath deposed that he was working as Supervisor in Varsed Detectives & Securities (P) Ltd. He had supplied the application form/bio data of the accused, working as TOM Operator (Mark PW24/X) in the said company.
46. PW-25 SI/Exe. Rohit Ranjan deposed that on 08.04.2016 he was posted at Metro Control, Barakhamba Road, Delhi and he had requisitioned from the competent authority of Delhi Metro to handover CCTV footage dated 08.04.2016 of Rajiv Chowk from 15:57/16:01 hours to 16:18/16:21 hours by camera no.7587, 7589, 7602, 7583, 7596 and 7595 in DVD and had given the same to SI Shiv Kumar in DVD bearing MSC no.1095 (Ex.PW25/Article-1) with certificate under Section 65 B of Indian Evidence Act, which is Ex.PW25/A. FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 20 of 35
47. PW-26/Ms. Seema Nain, Assistant Director, Biology, RFSL deposed that on 05.05.2016, 03 sealed parcels in connection with the present case were received from FSL Rohini and contents of the same were examined by PW-26/Ms. Seema Nain, FSL Expert vide her report Ex.PW26/A as per which, on DNA examination, DNA profile generated from blood in gauze (Ex.P1 and Ex.P2) was found similar with the DNA profile generated from two pieces of plywood described as blood stained floor ply (Ex.3a and Ex.3b).
48. PW-27/Sh. Ajay Kumar Malik, the then Learned MM had conducted the TIP proceedings of the bag recovered from the possession of the accused Sonu Kumar on 10.05.2016. He deposed that the complainant correctly identified the case property i.e. the bag in the TIP. The TIP proceedings are Ex.PW2/B.
49. After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused denied the entire prosecution case and stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
50. No evidence in defence was led by the accused despite opportunity. As such, the matter was listed for final arguments.
FINAL ARGUMENTS
51. Learned counsel for the accused as well as learned Additional PP for state have made detailed verbal FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 21 of 35 submissions.
52. Ld. Counsel for accused has submitted that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the prosecution has failed to prove the allegations against the accused. It has been submitted that the identification of the accused by PW-2/Kunal Kishore is doubtful as in his statement Ex.PW2/A, he stated that the assailants were wearing masks. Then how he identified the accused on seeing his photographs. Also, no knife has been recovered from the possession of the accused. No metro card was recovered from the possession of the accused and the metro card having no.76655244 was recovered from the possession of the co-accused Sonu (since deceased). However, there is no evidence on record to prove that this card was used by either of the accused persons on 11.04.2016.
53. Ld. Counsel has further submitted that the incident of robbery has not been captured by any of the CCTV cameras. He has further submitted that there is no CCTV footage to prove that the accused had entered or exited the metro station of Rajendra Place on the day of incident i.e. 11.04.2016. The assailants seen in the CCTV footage dated 11.04.2016 are not identified as they were wearing masks.
54. Ld. Counsel has further submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove that the cash amount of Rs.7,50,000/- was FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 22 of 35 recovered from the accused. No public person was made witness to the alleged recovery, nor any photography or videography of the said recovery was conducted by the IO. Further, there is no proof on the record that shop no.A 358, Sector-9, Shivpuri, Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad belongs to the accused.
55. Per contra, Ld. Addl. PP for the state has submitted that the prosecution has successfully proved the charges against the accused. It has been submitted that PW-2/complainant has fully supported the prosecution story. His testimony has remained consistent and there are no major contradictions in the same. He duly identified the accused Pawan Giri in the photographs Mark PW4/A and Mark PW4/B as well as before the court. The defence has failed to demolish his testimony during cross examination. Further, the stolen cash amount of Rs.7,50,000/- was recovered from the possession of the accused only 2 days after the incident, and the accused failed to give account of that. PW-10 /Dharmu Jha has also proved that the accused persons had purchased pollution mask from them on 08.04.2016. Also, the accused is clearly visible in the CCTV footage dated 08.04.2016, on which date he got the metro card number 76655245 issued in his name and both the accused travelled from Rajiv Chowk to Kaushambi Metro Station and they purchased the pollution mask from a shop in Karol Bagh.
56. Ld. Additional PP has further submitted that in the CCTV FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 23 of 35 footage of 11.04.2016, it can be clearly seen that both the accused entered the Control Room and when they came out after some time, the co-accused Sonu was carrying an extra bag in the front, which he was not carrying earlier. This bag was duly identified by the complainant/PW-2 in judicial TIP as well as before the court. Also, after some time, the complainant is seen coming out of the same room in an injured condition. Hence, prosecution has proved the charges against the accused and he is liable to be convicted.
COURT FINDINGS
57. I have heard the final arguments addressed on behalf of the accused persons and the State and perused the entire record carefully.
58. The accused Pawan Kumar Giri has been charged for offence of robbery punishable under Section 394/34 IPC read with Sectidon 397 IPC. 'Robbery' is defined under Section 390 IPC. As per the said provision, theft/extortion becomes robbery when a person during theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away the property obtained by theft, causes the person death or hurt or wrongful restraint or fear of instant death, instant hurt or instant wrongful restraint.
59. Section 394 IPC and Section 397 IPC are aggravated forms of offence of robbery. Section 394 IPC is attracted when hurt is caused voluntarily in committing robbery or while attempting to commit robbery. This section is FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 24 of 35 applicable to the person who has actually caused the hurt as well as the other accused persons who have not actually caused the hurt but were jointly concerned in causing hurt. Section 397 IPC is attracted when the accused had used a deadly weapon while committing the robbery.
60. Section 307 IPC prescribes punishment for offence of attempt to murder. Same is reproduced verbatim as under:-
"Section 307. Attempt to murder-Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.
Attempts by life convicts-When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death."
61. The accused has also been charged for offence under Section 201 IPC, which prescribes punishment for offence of causing the disappearance of evidence of an offence or giving false information to screen the offender from legal punishment.
62. It is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence. Further, it is a settled proposition of criminal law that in order to successfully bring home the guilt of the accused, FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 25 of 35 prosecution is supposed to stand on its own legs and it cannot derive any benefits whatsoever from the weakness, if any, in the defence of the accused. Accused is entitled to the benefit of every reasonable doubt in the prosecution story and any such doubt in the prosecution case entitles the accused to acquittal.
EYE-WITNESS
63. In the case at hand, the star witness of the prosecution is the complainant Kunal Kishore, who has been examined as PW-2. He has narrated the entire incident in a detailed and lucid manner. He deposed that two assailants were wearing pollution mask. He also deposed that when he was shown the photograph of accused Pawan Kumar Giri on 13.04.2016, and he identified him as Pawan Goswami who was earlier working at their metro station as TOM operator. He also told the IO that the said accused inflicted injuries on him with a knife. However, he failed to identify the other accused stating that he was wearing a pollution mask and was unknown to him.
64. It is the contention of the Ld. defence counsel that the complainant had stated in his complaint Ex.PW2/A that he could identify the accused persons if shown to him. However, in the same statement as well as in his testimony before the court he stated that both the accused persons were wearing pollution mask. Then how he could have identified the accused. A person can identify a person only FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 26 of 35 if he has seen him/her or if that person has a distinctive feature or physique/built.
65. A perusal of the statement Ex.PW2/A dated 11.04.2016 transpires that the complainant had told the IO that both the accused persons were wearing pollution mask. However, in the same statement, he also stated that he could identify the accused persons if shown to him. This is a contradictory statement in itself. Either the complainant has seen the accused persons and hence he stated that he could identify the accused persons; or he did not see the face of the accused persons as they had covered their face with pollution mask. Only one of the two things is possible. Now, if the complainant had seen the accused persons, he could have stated in the statement Ex.PW2/A itself that one of the accused was his earlier colleague i.e. the accused Pawan Giri or that the face or physique or appearance of the said assailant seemed familiar. However, he did not state so. He had not given any description of the accused persons like their height, built or complexion or any distinctive feature. However, on 13.04.2016, when the IO showed him the photograph of the accused, PW-2 identified him as his ex-colleague Pawan Giri and also as the person who had assaulted him. There is no explanation how the complainant identified the accused even though he had earlier stated that the assailants were wearing pollution masks.
FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 27 of 3566. Also, the IO never showed the CCTV footage of 08.04.2016 and 11.04.2016 to the complainant during investigation. He only showed him photographs Mark PW4/A and 4/B, which are screenshots of the CCTV footage dated 08.04.2016. The said CCTV footage was also not played at the time of recording of testimony of PW-2/complainant.
67. Hence, this court is of the considered opinion that the identification of the accused Pawan Giri by the PW-2/complainant is not beyond reasonable doubt and it is clouded by suspicion.
CCTV FOOTAGE-
68. The prosecution has heavily relied upon the CCTV footage dated 08.04.2016 and 11.04.2016 of the metro stations. However, in the CCTV footage dated 08.04.2016, two persons, out of which one appears to be the accused, are seen entering the Kaushambi metro station and also on the escalator inside the metro station. They are also seen exiting the metro station at Karol Bagh. However, in the CCTV footage dated 11.04.2016 only one clip of the CCTV camera installed outside the control room, where the incident had taken place has been played during recording of prosecution evidence. In the said CCTV footage, two persons are seeing wearing masks and carrying bags on their shoulder. However, only their backside and side profile is visible and their faces cannot be seen from the front. There is no other FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 28 of 35 footage of any other CCTV camera of the concerned metro station on that day.
69. This is quite strange that no other CCTV footage of 11.04.2016 was obtained by the IO, even though admittedly the whole area of metro station is under surveillance by CCTV cameras.
70. The presence of the accused in the metro station on 08.04.2016 cannot be linked in any manner with the alleged incident which has taken place on 11.04.2016.
METRO CARDS-
71. The other evidence which the prosecution has relied upon is the metro cards bearing no.76655245, 76655244 and 56029709. It has been submitted that these cards were used by the accused persons on the morning of the date of incident on 11.04.2016 and also on 08.04.2016. It has been alleged that these metro cards were issued to the accused persons on 08.04.2016 itself. However, the prosecution has failed to establish the link/chain between the accused persons and the said metro cards. No metro cards was recovered from the possession of the accused. One metro card having no.76655244 was recovered from the possession of the accused Sonu. However, the said metro card is admittedly not used on 11.04.2016. PW-21 has admitted that there is no entry of card no.76655244 on 11.04.2016. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove the link between the accused and metro cards FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 29 of 35 bearing no.76655245, 76655244 and 56029709.
72. Also, the chance prints lifted from the spot did not match with the fingerprint of the accused as per the report PW23/A.
73. Another submission made by Ld. Additional PP that the bag which was stolen from the spot was recovered from the possession of co-accused Sonu and was duly identified by the complainant/PW-2 in the judicial TIP as well as before the court. However, as already observed PW-2 has failed to identify the accused Sonu as one of the assailants stating that he is unable to identify the accused as he was wearing pollution mask at the time of offence.
74. In view of the above discussion, the court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the allegations against the accused beyond reasonable doubts. This court is of the considered opinion that the identification of the accused by complainant is not beyond reasonable doubt. This court is further opinion that the prosecution has failed to establish the chain of circumstances to establish the guilt of the accused for offence under Section 394/307/201/34 IPC and Section 397 IPC.
75. Ld. Additional PP for State has submitted that the accused was found in possession of Rs.7,50,000/- on FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 30 of 35 13.04.2016 i.e. two days after the date of incident i.e. 11.04.2016 he has failed to explain how he came to possess such a big amount. She has prayed that even though no charge under Section 411 IPC has been framed against the accused, accused is liable to be convicted under Section 103 Delhi Police Act 1978.
76. As per Section 103 Delhi Police Act if a person is found in possession of a property which is suspected to be stolen or fraudulently obtained, and that person fails to explain his possession qua the said property, is presumed that it is a stolen property and the said person is liable to be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend for three months or fine which may extend to Rs.100/- or with both.
77. However, in the present case, the recovery of cash amount of Rs.7,50,000/- from the accused is also not beyond doubt. Firstly, the IO failed to obtain the details of ownership of the shop from where the said amount was allegedly recovered. It is the story of the prosecution that the said shop belonged to the accused. However, there are no ownership document of shop no. A-358, Shiv Puri on the judicial record. Further, the said shop is stated to be in a commercial area and it as admitted by PW-5 IO/SI Shiv Kumar and PW-8/ASI Hari Singh that there were other shops nearby and public persons were available at the spot. However, despite availability of the public persons, the IO failed to join them in the recovery FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 31 of 35 proceedings.
78. In the case titled as "Roop Chand v. State of Haryana"
1990(1) CLR 69, it was observed that such explanations that the public persons refused to join the proceedings are unreliable. In case of "Pradeep Narayana V. State of Maharashtra" AIR 1995 SC 1930, it was held that failure of police to join witness from locality during search creates doubt about fairness of the investigation, benefit of which has to go to the accused.
79. It is a settled law of criminal jurisprudence that the accused "must be proved" to have committed the offence and not "may be proved". At this juncture, this court thinks it appropriate to refer to the judgment in "Digambar Vaishnav v. State of Chhattisgarh AIR 2019 SC 1367, wherein it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court that conviction cannot be based on surmises and conjectures or suspicion, howsoever grave it may be. Strong suspicion, strong coincidences and grave doubt cannot take the place of legal proof. The onus of the prosecution cannot be discharged by referring to very strong suspicion and existence of highly suspicious factors to inculpate the accused. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced below, "16. This Court in 'Jaharlal Das v. State of Orissa', (1991) 3 SCC 27, has held that even if the offence is a shocking one, the gravity of offence cannot by itself overweigh as far as legal proof is concerned. In cases depending highly upon the circumstantial FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 32 of 35 evidence, there is always a danger that the conjecture or suspicion may take the place of legal proof. The court has to be watchful and ensure that the conjecture and suspicion do not take the place of legal proof. The court must satisfy itself that various circumstances in the chain of evidence should be established clearly and that the completed chain must be such as to rule out a reasonable likelihood of the innocence of the accused. In order to sustain the conviction on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the following three conditions must be satisfied:
i.) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established;
ii.) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; and iii.) the circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else, and it should also be incapable of explanation on any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused.
17. In Varkey Joseph v. State of Kerala, 1993 Suppl (3) SCC 745, this Court has held that suspicion is not the substitute for proof. There is a long distance between 'may be true' and 'must be true' and the prosecution has to travel all the way to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
18. In Sujit Biswas v. State of Assam, (2013) 12 SCC 406, this Court, while examining the distinction between 'proof beyond reasonable doubt' and 'suspicion' has held as under:
"13. Suspicion, however grave it may be, cannot take the place of proof, and there is a large difference between something that "may be" proved, and something that "will be proved". In a criminal trial, suspicion no matter how strong, cannot and must not be permitted to take place of proof. This is for the reason that the mental distance between "may be" and "must be" is quite large, and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions. In a criminal FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 33 of 35 case, the court has a duty to ensure that mere conjectures or suspicion do not take the place of legal proof. The large distance between "may be"
true and "must be" true, must be covered by way of clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence produced by the prosecution, before an accused is condemned as a convict, and the basic and golden rule must be applied. In such cases, while keeping in mind the distance between "may be" true and "must be" true, the court must maintain the vital distance between mere conjectures and sure conclusions to be arrived at, on the touchstone of dis- passionate judicial scrutiny, based upon a complete and comprehensive appreciation of all features of the case, as well as the quality and credibility of the evidence brought on record. The court must ensure, that miscarriage of justice is avoided, and if the facts and circumstances of a case so demand, then the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused, keeping in mind that a reasonable doubt is not an imaginary, trivial or a merely prob- able doubt, but a fair doubt that is based upon reason and common sense."
FINAL DECISION
80. In view of the above discussion and in light of the afore-
discussed judgments, this court if of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the allegations against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
81. Hence, the accused Pawan Kumar Giri S/o Sh. Mool Chand Giri is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 394/397/307/201/34 IPC.
82. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signedby SAUMYA SAUMYA CHAUHAN CHAUHAN Date: 2026.04.01 16:27:07 +0530 Announced in the open court (Saumya Chauhan) today i.e. 13th March, 2026 ASJ/FTC)-02, West Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 34 of 35 Certified that this judgment contains 35 pages and each page bears my signatures.
Digitally signed by SAUMYA SAUMYA CHAUHAN
CHAUHAN Date:
2026.04.01
16:27:22 +0530
(Saumya Chauhan)
ASJ(FTC)-02, West
Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi
13.03.2026
FIR no.40/2016 State Vs. Pawan Kumar Giri Page 35 of 35