Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

State vs . : Kartar Singh @ Rinku on 28 May, 2013

    IN THE COURT OF SH. SUDHANSHU KAUSHIK, METROPOLITAN 
      MAGISTRATE­02, SOUTH­EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS 
                          NEW DELHI 

                                         State Vs.   :    Kartar Singh @ Rinku
                                         FIR No.     :    52/13
                                         U/s         :    356/379 IPC
                                         PS          :    Okhla Industrial Area

Date of Institution:                                 02.05.2013
Date of Judgment reserved for:                       28.05.2013
Date of Judgment:                                    28.05.2013


                             Brief details of the case
    A.   Sl. no.  of the case                        110/2/13
    B.   Offence complained of
          or proved                                  U/s 356/379 IPC
    C.  Date of Offence                              27.01.2013
    D.  Name of the complainant                      Ms Jyoti
                                                     D/o Sh D.S.Rawat 
                                                     r/o­ A­8/C, Sindhiya House, 
                                                     Connaught Place, New Delhi

    E.   Name of the accused                         Kartar Singh @ Rinku
                                                     s/o Sh Nanak Chand
                                                     r/o House no 43, Ali Vihar, 
                                                     Sarita Vihar, New Delhi

    F.    Plea of the accused                        Pleaded not guilty.
    G.    Final order                                Acquitted
    H.    Date of Order                              28.05.2013
                                       Judgment

              On   the   accusation   of   using   criminal   force   upon   Ms   Jyoti 

(hereinafter   referred   to   as   complainant)   in   committing   theft   of   her 

leather bag containing cash amount of Rs 400/­ and personal belongings, 

FIR no. 52/13                                                                     1/4
 accused Kartar Singh @ Rinku was sent up to face trial for committing 

offences punishable under Section 356/379 IPC. 

                   Brief facts as unfolded during the trial

2.            The case of prosecution is that on 27.01.2013, at around 6.30 

pm, at Approtech road, Maa Anandmai Marg, near Metro Pillar no 174, 

while   complainant   was   returning   back   from   her   office,   accused   came 

from back side and snatched her bag containing the abovesaid articles. 

He pushed the complainant before fleeing away from the spot alongwith 

the stolen bag. Matter was reported to the police and present FIR bearing 

no   52/13   under   Section   379/356   IPC   was   registered   at   PS­Okhla 

Industrial Area. 

3.            The prosecution's case proceeds further that on 17.03.2013, 

accused,   after   being   arrested   in   case   FIR   no   431/09   under   Section 

379/411/34

IPC, made disclosure about committing theft at various places including the one in respect of which the present FIR was registered. He refused to participate in Test Identification Proceedings. Efforts were made to recover the stolen bag but it did not yield any result. On completion of investigation, chargesheet was put to the Court. Copies of the chargesheet were supplied to the accused and charges under Section 356/379 IPC was framed against him to which he pleaded 'not guilty' and claimed trial.

Witnesses examined FIR no. 52/13 2/4

4. Only one witnesses was examined i.e. PW­1 Ms Jyoti. She narrated the entire episode but turned hostile on the point of identity of accused. She mentioned that accused was not the person who snatched her bag. She categorically mentioned during her cross­examination by Ld APP that the person who committed theft of her bag was of a shorter height than accused. The entire story of prosecution rested upon the testimony of this witness. Admittedly, the stolen bag was not recovered. In the absence of recovery, the disclosure statement of accused was of no consequence, the same being inadmissible because of the bar created under Section 25 of The Indian Evidence Act. The fact that complainant failed to identify the accused completely demolished the prosecution's case. Complainant was the sole cited eye witness of the alleged incident. There was nothing on record to connect the accused with the alleged offence apart from his identification by the complainant. It was felt that there was no point in proceeding ahead with a dead trial which would have never resulted in conviction. In such circumstances, prosecution evidence was closed.

5. Since, no incriminating evidence came against accused, therefore, recording of the statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C has been dispensed with. Accused Kartar Singh @ Rinku stands acquitted of the charges under Section 356/379 IPC.

6. Bail Bonds stand cancelled. Sureties stand discharged. FIR no. 52/13 3/4 Endorsement placed on the documents of the sureties be cancelled and the same be returned to them, if retained on record.

7. File be consigned to record room after necessary compliance. Announced in open Court (SUDHANSHU KAUSHIK) On this 28.05.2013 MM­02, South­East District Saket Courts, Delhi FIR no. 52/13 4/4 Dated: 22.08.2012 To, Sh Kamal Kumar, Former Director, National Police Academy.

Through Ld District Judge & ASJ/IC, Saket Court Complex, New Delhi.

Sub: Dully filled up questionnaire forwarded in terms of circular no 18903-18959/F-3, General Branch/South, 2012 dated 05.07.2012.

Respected Sir, This is to submit that the undersigned is forwarding the duly filled up questionnaire as desired by your good self. The delay and the inconvenience caused is deeply regretted. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, Sudhanshu Kaushik MM-02/SE/SC/ND 22.08.2012 FIR no. 52/13 5/4