Delhi District Court
State vs Manoj Kumar on 5 November, 2024
IN THE COURT OF MS. DIVYA ARORA:
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-04: NORTH-WEST:
ROHINI COURTS: NEW DELHI
FIR No. 254/2007
U/s. 466/468/474/120-B IPC
State v. Manoj Kumar & ors.
P.S. Shalimar Bagh
Date of Institution: 21.06.2007
Date of Judgment : 05.11.2024
JUDGMENT
(a) Serial Number of the case : 529807/2016
(b) Date of commission of offence : 22.04.2007
(c) Name of the complainant : HC Rohtash
(d) Name of Accused, his : (1) Manoj Kumar parentage & residence S/o Santosh Kumar R/o M-917, Mangol Puri, Delhi (2) Yoginder Pratap S/o Ram Nath R/o: E-1/140, Sultan Puri, Delhi
(e) Offence complained of : u/s 466/468/474/120-B IPC
(f) Plea of Accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final order : Acquitted BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR THE DECISION
1) This is a judgment regarding the trial of accused persons namely Manoj Kumar S/o Santosh Kumar, and Yogender Pratap S/o Ram Nath, charged under Sections 466, 468, and 474 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 1 of 18 (IPC). The primary allegations against the accused persons are that they forged certain driving licenses (DLs) purportedly made by a public servant in his official capacity and were found in possession of these forged DLs with the intention of using them as genuine.
2) Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court, both the accused persons were summoned by the Court and the accused persons were admitted to bail after they entered appearance. Copy of the charge-sheet alongwith the documents were supplied to both the accused in compliance of provisions of Section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
3) After consideration of submissions, notice was framed against the accused for the commission of offence under 466/468/474/120-B IPC upon the accused persons namely Manoj Kumar S/o Santosh Kumar, and Yogender Pratap S/o Ram Nath to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4) To prove its case, the prosecution commenced its evidence.
5) PW-1 HC Joginder Singh deposed that that on 22/4/07 while he was posted as duty officer at PS. Shalimar Bagh, on receipt of rukka brought by Ct Naresh Kumar sent by Sh. Naresh Kumar, he recorded the case FIR no. 254/07 u/s 420/468/466/474/120B IPC. Copy of FIR is Ex.PWI/A. The endorsement on the rukka is Ex.PW1/B (OSR).
FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 2 of 18
6) PW-2 Ct. Naresh deposed that on 22.04.2007, he alongwith SI Naresh Kumar and HC Joginder Singh went to Club Road, Shalimar Bagh at about 5.00 pm. There they met HC Rohtash and he apprised the IO Naresh Kumar of facts of the case. At about 6.00 pm on same day, they apprehended Jaspal (one sardar boy) who was wearing a black T-Shirt, at the instance of HC Rohtash. HC Rohtash indicated Jaspal to them, by the indication of waiving his hand over his hand. HC Attar Singh was also alongwith them. The DL was taken from the possession of Jaspal by the IO which was earlier given to Rohtash and the same was taken. IO gave the rukka to him and sent him to PS for registration of FIR and after some time came back to the spot alongwith copy of FIR and original rukka. IO prepared various documents on the spot after came back with the copy of FIR on the spot. IO arrested the accused and took his disclosure statement. Ct. Naresh further deposed that IO gave the accused in his custody and thereafter they alongwith accused went to H. No. A-240, Anadpur Dham Karala Road, Delhi and upon the pointed out of the accused IO arrested two persons sitting in the room namely Manoj and Yogender @ Karan Kumar. He also identified both the accused persons in the court.
7) PW-3 HC Manoj Kumar deposed that as per the rojnamcha register, DD No. 6 dated 22.04.2007 and DD No. 12 dated 03.04.2007 were not recorded by him in the rojnamcha register and the same was recorded by one Ct. Surender. DD no. 6 and 12 was given by him to the IO after writing the FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 3 of 18 contents of the DD Entries on one paper and the same is Ex.PW3/A.
8) PW-4 HC Rotash deposed that on 22.04.2007, he alongwith HC Attar Singh was on patrolling duty in the area of Shalimar Bagh. During the patrolling they reached Jhulelal Mandir, where at about 1.30 pm, one secret informer came and informed him about the preparation of forged driving license of one sardar who would be wearing black T-shirt and standing on Club Road, Shalimar Bagh. Thereafter, they reached at Club road and met with said sardar to whom he said that he was working a private job and had lost his license and that he had come to know he could get his license prepared. The said sardar asked for Rs. 1000/- and for his documents, i.e., one photo, one slip with his name and address and one slip with his signatures which he gave to him. After he gave the documents to said sardar, he left and while they waited at the spot as he had given the time for four hours. At about 5.00 pm, SI Naresh, HC Jogender and Ct. Naresh came at Club Road, Shalimar Bagh and took their positions. He told them that when he stroke his head with his hand then they should come to him. At about 5.30 pm, the said sardar returned at Club Road and he handed over the driving license Ex.PW4/A to him. Then he stroke his head with his hand, all the staff came there and caught the said sardar. He handed over the said license to SI Naresh. IO SI Naresh seized the said DL bearing no. P0802200754855 vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/B. Diclosure from said Sardar who disclosed that he had got it prepared from his friends from FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 4 of 18 Aanad Dham Colony, Karala. He had given a tehreer Ex.PW4/C to SI Naresh. IO prepared site plan Mark A. Ct. Naresh returned at the spot after getting the FIR registered and handed over the original teheer and copy of FIR to IO SI Naresh. IO arrested the accused Jaspal vide arrest memo Ex.PW7/B. Thereafter, he alongwith other staff reached at Anandpur Dham, Karala, Delhi which was told by the accused to them in a government vehicle. IO knock the door of the said plot and one boy opened the door and they alongwith the IO went inside, and in one room, accused Manoj was working in computer and accused Karan using the printer in the said room. IO recovered five fake DL and three bank passbooks from the said room. Thereafter, IO inquired from the accused Manoj regarding the recovered fake DL and Passbooks, upon which accused told them that they were working the same since long. IO arrested the accused Manoj and Karan vide arrest memos which are Ex.PW8/C and Ex.PW8/D. IO also conducted personal search of both the accused vide memos Ex.PW5/D and Ex.PW5/E. IO seized fake DL and fake Passbooks vide seizure memo which are Ex.PW5/F. He identified the fake Passbooks Ex.Z-2 and Ex.Z-3, fake DL Ex.Z-4, Ex.Z-5, Ex.Z-6, Ex.Z-7 and Ex.Z-8. Thereafter, IO seized Monitor, CPU, keyboard, mouse, scanner and Extension Cord with the use of which, they used to prepare forged driving licence, vide seizure memo which is Ex.PW8/B. IO seized the Note of Rs. 1000/-, one receipt and one photo vide seizure memo which is Ex.PW8/A. Lamination machine, steel scale, seizors, two cutters (one small and one big), glue stick, one FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 5 of 18 small bottle of fevicol, one black card board piece, polythene sheet, seven lamination plastic covers, white colour hard sheet and yellow colour paper from their room which were being used by them for making forged licences, vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/K. IO recorded the disclosure statements of accused Manoj which are Ex.PW8/E and Ex.PW8/F. IO recorded the disclosure statements of the accused Yogender Pratap @ Karan Kumar which are already Ex.PW8/G and Ex.PW8/H. IO also recorded the disclosure statements of accused Jaspal Singh which are already Ex.PW5/C and Ex.PW7/A. Thereafter, IO deposited the case property in the concerned Malkhana. After that they all alongwith accused persons went to BSA Hospital for the medical examination of the accused persons. Thereafter, they all came back to office of Special Staff, North-West District. He identified the accused persons namely Yogender Kumar @ Karan and Manoj in the court. He also identified the case property i.e. DL which were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/B. He also identified one DL and same is Ex.ZA. He can identify the case property which were seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/A, Ex.PW8/B and Ex.PW8/C. He also identified one photograph, one paper slip which bears the name of Rohtash Singh S/o Sh. Gopi Ram and same is Ex.PW8/J and Ex.Z9, he also identified one note of Rs. 1000/-. He also identified the case property i.e. Note of Rs. 1000/- which is Ex.PW8/I and the receipt is Ex.PW8/J and Ex.Z9, and Photographs is Ex.PW8/K. He further identified the computer monitor, CPU, Key Board, Printer, Mouse, Wire Extension stating that these were the same articles FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 6 of 18 which were seized by the IO vide Ex.PW8/B. He also identified one Laminating Machine, one Scale, One iron scissors, red colour cutter, black colour cutter, two glue sticks, one small box of fevicol, Hard sheets and yellow colour papers and one polythene sheet and lamination plastic cover in the Court. Same are Ex.ZC (colly). He also identified the accused in the Court.
9) PW 5 Inspector Naresh Kumar deposed that on 22.04.2007, he received one DD entry no. 12 Ex.PW3/A regarding the information that one person was involved in making forged driving licence and thereafter, he alongwith HC Joginder and Ct. Naresh went to the spot i.e. Shalimar Bagh Club where HC Rohtash and HC Atar Singh were present who told him that they had given Rs. 1000/- to a person whose name they told as Jaspal Singh and that person would bring forged driving licence in the name of Rohtash. Further, they told him that they had given one slip with the particulars / details of Rohtash and also photographs to Jaspal Singh, and Jaspal Singh would reach there shortly. Thereafter, at about 6.00 pm, Jaspal Singh reached there at Shalimar Bagh Club gate and handed over the driving licence to HC Rohtash. Thereafter, HC Atar Singh gave signal to him. Thereafter, he alongwith staff apprehended that person namely Jaspal Singh. Thereafter, the accused Jaspal Singh was interrogated by him. He seized the driving licence which was given by the accused to HC Rohtash vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/B and the above said driving licence is Ex.X-1. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of HC Rohtash which is Ex.PW4/C, FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 7 of 18 thereafter, he prepared tehrir Ex.PW5/A, and handed over the same to Ct. Naresh for registration of FIR, who accordingly went to PS and after the registration of FIR, he returned back to the spot and handed over the original tehrir to him. He prepared the site plan at the instance of HC Rohtash which Ex.PW5/B. He recorded the disclosure statement of accused which is Ex.PW5/C. He arrested the accused and conducted his personal search. Copy of arrest memo of accused Jaspal Singh is Ex.PW7/B (OSR). Thereafter, he alongwith HC Joginder, HC Attar Singh, HC Rohtash, Ct. Naresh and accused Jaspal Singh went to Anantpur Khas, Karala, Delhi where they found that one person whose name was revealed as Manoj and another person whose name was revealed as Karan, were working on computer in their room. they reached there upon the directions of accused Jaspal Singh. Thereafter, they inquired Karan and Manoj and they disclosed that Manoj used to prepare forged DL through computer and Karan used to cut and laminate the same. Thereafter, he arrested both of them vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/C and Ex.PW8/D. Both the said accused were personally searched vide memos Ex.PW5/D and Ex.PW5/E. Thereafter, Jaspal Singh disclosed that the above mentioned slip and currency note of denomination of 1000/- were handed over to Manoj. Thereafter, the said slip and currency note were recovered from the possession of accused Manoj which were seized by him vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/A. Thereafter, five driving licences and three passbooks were recovered from the possession of accused Manoj which were seized by him vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/F. He identified FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 8 of 18 the said five driving licences and the said three passbooks, and the said passbooks are Ex.Z-2 and Ex.Z-3 and the said DLs are Ex.Z-4, Ex.Z-5, Ex.Z-6, Ex.Z-7 and Ex.Z-8. Thereafter, he seized the monitor, CPU, keyboard, mouse, scanner and extension cord with the use of which they used to prepare forged driving licences vide seizure memo which is Ex.PW5/B. Disclosure statement of the accused Manoj and Karan which were recorded by him which are Ex.PW8/E and Ex.PW8/G respectively. He also seized one lamination machine, one scale, seizors, two cutters (one small size and one large size), glue stick, one black colour card board piece, fevicol, polythene sheet and seven lamination plastic covers from their room which were being used by them for making forged licences, vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/K. Thereafter, recovered case property and the accused persons were taken to police station where the case property was deposited in malkhana and the accused persons were put in the lockup after their medical examination. Thereafter, he again recorded the disclosure statement of accused persons which are Ex.PW8/F, Ex.PW8/H and Ex.PW7/A. Accused Jaspal was found as Juvenile, therefore, he was produced before concerned JJB. He also identified the accused Manoj and Karan in the court. He also identified the case property i.e. one currency note of denomination of Rs. 1000/- with serial no. 406873, one slip containing particulars of Rohtash Singh, one photograph of Rohtash and specimen signature of Rohtash. The said currency note is Ex.PW8/I, the said photograph is Ex.PW8/K, the above said slip is Ex.PW8/J and specimen signature of Rohtash is Ex.Z-9. Further he FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 9 of 18 identified two glue sticks, one iron seizors, one red colour cutter, one black colour cutter, one scale, one small box of fevicol, yellow colour paper, hard sheet, polythene sheet and lamination plastic cover in the Court. Same are now Ex.P-1 (colly). He also identified one scanner make HP, Keyboard, mouse, one extension cord, connecting wire, one lamination machine. Same are Ex.P2 (colly). He also identified six lamination covers, one CPU make LG in the Court which are Ex.P-3. Further, he identified computer monitor make LG which is Ex.P-4.
10) PW-6 Inspector Tilak Chand Bisht deposed that on 16.05.2007, he was posted as Sub Inspector at Special Staff at North-West District, Delhi and on that day, investigation of the present case was marked to him and case. Thereafter, on 21.05.2007, he sent five recovered licences to the North-West licencing authority for verification and one recovered licence to the West Zone licencing authority for verification vide his letters Ex.PW6/A and Ex.PW6/B. On the next day, he got the reports of the same which are Ex.6-A and Ex.6-B. Remarks of the licencing authority made on his letter Ex.PW6/A are in red circle which is Ex.6-C. Thereafter, he prepared the charge-sheet and filed the same in the court. He filed a separate charge-sheet for JCL Jaspal in JJB-1.
11)PW-7 Sh. Paramvir Singh Asstt. Ahlmad in the Board of Ms. Bhavna Kalia, Ld. PM, JJB-01, Sewa Kutir, Kingsway camp, Delhi has brought the original case file bearing FIR no. 254/07 PS Shalimar Bagh u/s 420/466/468/474/120 B IPC FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 10 of 18 for CCL "J". He checked and compared the carbon copy of the two disclosure statements of Jaspal Singh with the original of the same present in the case file which he brought that day and one of the said disclosure statement is Ex.PW-5/C (OSR) and second disclosure statement is Ex.PW7/A (OSR). Photocopy of the arrest memo of Jaspal Singh is Ex.PW7/B (OSR).
12) PW-8 SI Attar Singh deposed that on 22.04.2007, he was posted at Special Staff, North-West as Head Constable and on that day, he alongwith HC Rohtash reached at Jhule Lal Mandir, Shalimar Bagh where HC Rohtash was told by a secret informer that one boy standing at Club Gate, Near Shalimar Bagh and he indulged in getting forged driving licence made. Thereafter, HC Rohtash told that fact to Inspector Special Staff. Therefore, Inspector Special Staff insisted that the information be gathered qua that aforementioned boy. Thereafter, they alongwith secret informer went to the Club Gate, Shalimar Bagh and secret informer pointed out a boy wearing black T-shirt was the one who get made forged driving licence. HC Rohtash conversed with that boy and explained that his driving licence has been misplaced and insisted if driving licence could be made. The said boy told that he can get issued driving licence for the amount of Rs. 1000/-. He told his name as Jaspal Singh and stated that Rs. 1000/- shall be charged and driving licence would be provided in 3-4 hours. HC Rohtash gave him Rs. 1000/- and issued a receipt of Rs. 1000/-. The aforementioned incident was told to Inspector Special Staff.
FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 11 of 18 On that day, at about 5.00 pm, SI Naresh Kumar, HC Joginder and Ct. Naresh reached there in government vehicle. HC Rohtash narrated the whole incident to SI Naresh Kumar, HC Joginder and Ct. Naresh. At about 6.00 pm, the accused Jaspal came there and spoke that he had got issued driving licence from the authority concerned with particulars Rohtash S/o Gopi Ram. Thereafter, the accused was apprehended and interrogated. On interrogation, accused Jaspal told that he got issued driving licence from accused Karan and Manoj. Disclosure statements were written therein which is already Ex.PW5/C and Ex.PW7/A. Driving licence was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/B. Note of Rs. 1000/- was also seized vide seizure memo ExPW8/A. Tehrir was prepared by SI Naresh and handed over the same to Ct. Naresh for registration of FIR. Ct. Naresh went to PS Shalimar Bagh where he got the present case FIR registered which is Ex.PW5/A. He returned back at the spot and handed over the copy of FIR to SI Naresh. As per disclosure statement of accused Jaspal, it was revealed that the forged driving licence were made at Anand Pur Dham Karala Village. They reached at Anand Pur Dham Karala Village and entered into a room which contained computer, printer and some boxes driving licences and some passbooks were also there. Aforementioned computer, printer, driving licences and passbooks were seized through seizure memo by SI Naresh. In that room, accused Manoj and Karan were found present and they were arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/C and Ex.PW8/D respectively. He identified the accused Manoj and Karan in the court.
FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 12 of 18 Disclosure statements of accused Manoj were recorded which are Ex.PW8/E and Ex.PW8/F and disclosure statements of Karan were also recorded which are Ex.PW8/G and Ex.PW8/H. Case case property was brought to PS and deposited in malkhana. He identified the case property i.e. one Note of Rs. 1000/- with exact serial number and receipt was also found in the name of Rohtash Singh. The said currency note is Ex.PW8/I and receipt is Ex.PW8/J. The photo is Ex.PW8/K. He also identified computer, monitor, CPU, keyboard and printer, mouse, wire extension, one laminator machine, one scale, one iron scissors, red colour cutter, black colour cutter, two glue sticks, one small box of fevicol, Hard sheets and yellow colour paper, one polythene sheet and Lamination plastic cover. The Said articles are Ex.PW8/B. He also identified five driving licences in the name of Mahesh Kumar, Karan Kumar, Manoj Kumar, Jogender Kumar which has been recovered and seized by the IO SI Naresh Kumar. The driving licences are Ex.Z-4 to Ex.Z-8. He also identified the passbooks of different banks in the name of Swaraj, Sohan and Diwakar. Same are Ex.Z-1 to Ex.Z-3. He also identified the accused persons in the court.
13) PW-9 Sh. Jitender Maan, Data Entry Operator, Wazirpur Authority, Transport Department, Delhi has produced the report before the Court, which is Ex.PW9/A. As per the report, no record was found on their portal regarding the driving licence number mentioned in the said report. The said report bears the signature of District Transport Officer Sh. Magan Singh at point A. FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 13 of 18
14) The prosecution evidence was thereafter closed upon request of the Ld APP for the State whereafter statement of accused was recorded under Section 281 read with Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 wherein the entire incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons who maintained their innocence stating that they had been falsely implicated. Nothing has been recovered from them.
15) Final arguments as advanced by Ld. APP for the State and by Ld. counsels for the accused persons have been carefully considered along with the evidence on record.
16) The prosecution alleges that the accused forged driving licenses and other related documents and intended to use them fraudulently as genuine documents. It is further alleged that these licenses are purportedly created by a public servant in his official capacity. The prosecution submitted various documents and witness testimonies in support of these allegations.
17) Ld. counsel for the accused argued that the prosecution failed to produce any independent public witnesses to corroborate the alleged activities of the accused. Secondly, there were inconsistencies in the statements of prosecution witnesses regarding how they reached the spot i.e. Shalimar Bagh Club, casting doubt on the credibility of their testimonies. He further argued that HC Jogender who allegedly accompanied other witnesses i.e. PW-2, PW-4 and FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 14 of 18 PW-5 to the spot was never examined, leaving a critical gap in the prosecution's narrative. Lastly, no notice or intimation was provided to the individuals whose names were purportedly mentioned on the forged licenses, raising concerns about procedural fairness.
18) It is a settled legal position that the presence of public witnesses lends credibility to the prosecution's case, particularly in cases involving allegations of forgery. Prosecution witnesses PW2, PW5 and PW8 have admitted that there were public persons present at the spot, to whom no notice for joining the investigation was served. In this case, the absence of any public witness weakens the prosecution's case. [Reference: Pradeep Narayan Madgaonkar & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, (1995) 4 SCC 255].
19) further, The inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses regarding how they reached the spot create reasonable doubt as to the sequence of events. PW-4 has stated in his cross examination that he alongwith other staff reached at the spot via government vehicle. However, PW-8 has stated that they reached at the spot by bus. Further PW-2 has stated that they reached at the spot by a private vehicle. Additionally, PW-3 has stated that DD No. 6 dated 22.04.2007 and DD no. 12 dated 03.04.2007 were not recorded by him in Roznamcha Register as the same were recorded by Ct. Surender. Prosecution never examined Ct. Surender and he was never FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 15 of 18 cited in list of witnesses. Courts have consistently held that contradictions in testimonies that touch upon the material facts can be grounds for doubt. (Reference: State of U.P. v. M.K. Anthony, AIR 1985 SC 48).
20) The prosecution failed to examine HC Joginder, who was reportedly present with other officials at the spot. Non- examination of a key witness who was part of the investigative team undermines the prosecution's case. (Reference: Bir Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, AIR 1979 SC 1387).
21) Additionally, the failure to notify or involve the individuals named on the forged licenses adds to the procedural infirmities, as it deprived the investigation of an important verification of the alleged forgery.
22) Lastly, the prosecution further failed to authenticate the recovered licenses, as no fingerprint analysis was conducted to link the accused with these documents. Additionally, PW6, who handled the case file transfer, testified that the recovered licenses were received in an unsealed condition. This procedural lapse raises doubts about the chain of custody, making it uncertain whether the same licenses that were allegedly recovered from the accused were indeed those sent for verification to the licensing authority. Courts have emphasised that maintaining an unbroken chain of custody is FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 16 of 18 crucial for evidentiary reliability. (Reference: State of Rajasthan v. Daulat Ram, AIR 1980 SC 1314).
23) The prosecution's failure to establish a reliable chain of custody for the recovered licenses, creates substantial doubt regarding the authenticity and possession of these licenses by the accused. Additionally, the absence of public witnesses, contradictory testimonies, non-examination of a key witness, and lack of procedural diligence collectively weaken the prosecution's case.
24) Given the absence of public witnesses, contradictory testimonies, non-examination of key witnesses, and lack of procedural diligence, the court finds that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused persons beyond a reasonable doubt. Forgery and conspiracy charges, especially those invoking the serious implications of Section 120B, require clear and convincing evidence, which is lacking in the present case.
Order:
25) In light of the above, the accused persons namely (1) Manoj Kumar S/o Santosh Kumar, and (2) Yogender Pratap S/o Ram Nath are hereby acquitted of all charges under Sections 466, 468, 474 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in the present case.
FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 17 of 18
26) The accused persons are directed to furnish personal bond in a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety in like amount in compliance of provisions of Section 437-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and is directed to be present before the Ld. Appellate Court as and when notice is served upon them.
27) File be consigned to the Record Room after necessary compliance.
Announced in the Open Court on 05.11.2024. Divya Digitally signed by Divya Arora Date: 2024.11.05 Arora 14:41:51 +0530 (DIVYA ARORA) Judicial Magistrate First Class-04/North West District Rohini Court/New Delhi Certified that this judgment contains 18 pages and each page bears my signature.
Divya Digitally signed
by Divya Arora
Date: 2024.11.05
Arora 14:41:57 +0530
(DIVYA ARORA)
Judicial Magistrate First Class-04/North West District Rohini Court/New Delhi FIR No. 254/2007 (Shalimar Bagh) State Vs. Manoj & ors. Page No. 18 of 18