Delhi District Court
State vs Aman @ Ammu on 29 January, 2025
DLNW010020872019
Presented on : 10-02-2019
Registered on : 28-02-2019
Decided on : 29-01-2025
Duration : 5 years, 11 months,
19 days
IN THE COURT OF
ASJ/SPECIAL JUDGE(NDPS)
AT NORTH WEST, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
(Presided Over by Sh. Vikram)
SC/215/2019
Annexure 'A'- List of witnesses
Annexure 'B'- List of exhibits
STATE
Through Police Station Officer Vijay Vihar
NORTH WEST DELHI
VERSUS
1. AMAN @ AMMU
S/o Sh. Chattarpal
R/o House No. 954,
Village Rithala, Delhi
2. BIKESH @ BK
S/o Late Sh. Laxman
R/o H-2/B, Sharma Colony,
Budh Vihar, Phase-II, Delhi.
3. SANDEEP @ DEDA
S/o Sh. Satish
SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 1 of 14
Digitally signed
by VIKRAM
VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29
16:49:14 +0530
R/o J-24D, Sharma Colony,
Budh Vihar, Phase-II, Delhi.
4. MUKESH @ RAJNI
S/o Sh. Kunjram
R/o Jhuggi No. 252, A Block,
Holambi Kalan, Metro Vihar, Delhi.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ld. substitute Addl. PP for State : Ms. Monika Aggarwal
Ld. counsel for accused Aman @ Ammu : Sh. Rakesh Kumar &
& Mukesh Rajni Ms. Rita Thakur
Ld. counsel for accused Bikesh @ BK : Sh. Sanjay Kumar &
Sh. Shiv Kumar
Ld. counsel for accused Sandeep @ Deda : Sh. B.S. Gautam
FIR No. : 691/2018
Police Station : Vijay Vihar
Under Section : 302/34, 174A IPC
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 29-01-2025)
1. Facts of the prosecution case in brief are that complainant Vishnu and deceased Ravi, R/o of U.P were residing in Delhi and working under Raju thekedar and residing at his house. On 03.11.2018, at about 08:00 p.m, when complainant and deceased Ravi, were returning to his house, Ravi was little bit ahead from complainant. 3-4 boys coming from the opposite side started quarreling with Ravi because elbow of Ravi had hit one of them. Those boys started beating Ravi. Complainant tried to stop them and requested them not to beat Ravi but they continued and one of them took out a knife and stabbed Ravi on his chest twice. Ravi started bleeding profusely and those boys ran away. Ravi SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 2 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29 16:49:24 +0530had fallen on the road itself, therefore, complainant ran towards the house of Raju thekedar and told about the incident to his workmate and when he returned to the spot with workmates, Ravi was already shifted to the hospital by PCR. The complainant and the workmates of the complainant went to the hospital and found that Ravi had expired.
2. Police received the information vide DD No. 75A on which PW11 along with other police staff went to the spot and found that the spot blood stained. As he did not meet to any eye witness, he went to the hospital and collected the MLC PW11 met complainant in the hospital and recorded his statement and on his statement got the FIR registered. Further investigation was taken over by PW14.
3. During investigation, on secret information, on 12.11.2018, accused Bikesh @ BK and Aman @ Ammu were apprehended and from Aman @ Ammu, a knife was recovered which was confessed to be used in commission of crime. The knife was seized. The accused Aman and Bikesh confessed that co accused Sandeep @ Deda and Mukesh @ Rajni were also involved in the incident, however, they were not found. Accused Bikesh and Aman refused to participate in TIP but complainant identified them in PS. Meanwhile, PM report was also received as per which, cause of death was hemorrhagic shock. The knife recovered from Aman was sent to doctor concerned who opined that the injury could be possible by knife examined. Therefore, on the basis of investigation, the chargesheet for offence under SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 3 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date: 2025.01.29 16:49:32 +0530 section 302/34 IPC was filed against accused Aman @ Ammu and accused Bikesh @ BK.
4. The investigation qua accused Sandeep @ Deda and Mukesh @ Rajni was pending. They were declared P.O and were subsequently arrested. Mukesh and Sandeep also participated in TIP, therefore, they too were chargesheeted for offence under section 302/34 IPC.
5. Vide order dated 16.04.2019, accused Aman @ Ammu and Bikesh @ BK were charged for offence under section 302/34 IPC. Charge under section 302/34 and 174A IPC was settled against accused Sandeep @ Deda on 27.11.2021 and similarly, charge under section 302/34 and 174A IPC were settled against accused Mukesh @ Rajni on 06.03.2024. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Prosecution witnesses:
6. To prove its case, prosecution examined 14 witnesses. The accused persons admitted documents qua remaining witnesses, therefore, they were dropped. A gist of testimonies of witnesses examined, is as under:
6.1 PW1 Jagat Singh proved the dead body identification memo Ex. PW1/A. 6.2 PW2 proved the crime team report Ex. PW2/A. SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 4 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date: 2025.01.29 16:49:38 +0530 6.3 PW3 proved scaled site plan Ex. PW3/A. 6.4 PW4 proved PCR form 1 Ex. PW4/A. 6.5 PW5 Proved DD No. 75B Ex. PW5/A. 6.6 PW6 proved DD No. 68B Ex. PW6/A. 6.7 PW7 proved FIR Ex. PW7/A and endorsement on rukka Ex. PW7/B. 6.8 PW8 proved DD No. 91A Ex. PW8/A. 6.9 Pw9 proved the MLC Ex. PW9/A. 6.10 Pw10 is the complainant and he proved his statement Ex.
PW10/A and the photographs of the spot Ex. PW10/B. PW10 was however, declared hostile as he failed to identify the accused persons, therefore, he was subjected to cross examination but nothing incriminating came out.
6.11 PW11 is the first IO. His testimony is already discussed discussed in brief facts. He proved rukka Ex. PW11/P1, seizure memo of exhibits lifted from the spot as Ex. PW11/P2 and the seizure memo of exhibits from dead body, taken after postmortem, as Ex. PW11/P3 to Ex. PW11/P5.
SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 5 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM Date: VIKRAM 2025.01.29 16:49:44 +0530 6.12 PW12 proved the order declaring accused Mukesh @ Rajni as P.O as Ex. PW12/A, formal arrest memo of Mukesh @ Rajni Ex. PW12/B, personal search memo Ex. PW12/C, disclosure statement Ex. PW12/D, application for TIP of Mukesh Ex. PW12/E and the pointing out memo Ex. PW12/F. 6.13 PW13 proved arrest memo of accused Sandeep @ Deda Ex. PW13/A, disclosure statement Ex. PW13/B, application for TIP Ex. PW13/C and pointing out memo Ex. PW13/D. 6.14 PW14 is the main IO, who took investigation after registration of FIR. Besides the documents already proved, PW14 proved site plan Ex. PW14/A, dead body identification memo Ex. PW14/B, inquest report Ex. PW14/C, request for postmortem with brief facts EX. PW14/D and Ex. PW14/E, dead body handing over memo Ex. PW14/F, sketch of knife EX. PW14/G, seizure memo of knife Ex. PW14/H, arrest memo and personal search memos of accused Aman and Bikesh Ex. PW14/I-1 to Ex. PW14/I-4, their disclosure statements Ex. PW14/J-1 and Ex. PW14/J-2, pointing out memo fo the spot Ex. PW14/K, application for TIP Ex. PW14/L and viscera report Ex. PW14/M.
7. After completion of prosecution evidence, accused persons were examined under section 351 BNSS and all the incriminative material put to them. Accused persons claimed their innocence and false implication, however accused persons opted not to lead evidence in defence.
SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 6 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29 16:49:50 +05308. Final arguments heard. File perused.
9. Prosecution had only one witness to the incident i.e., PW10, who failed to identify the accused persons. This witness was examined thrice and all three times, he did not identify any of the accused stating that it was night time. All three times, this witness was cross examined but nothing came out.
10. Rest of the prosecution case is based on disclosure statements and discovery and only discovery in this case is one knife allegedly recovered from accused Aman @ Ammu claimed to be used while committing the crime. The accused Aman @ Ammu was allegedly arrested from a public park but no public person was joined in the investigation. There is no independent witness either of the recovery or the seizure of knife. The seizure memo Ex. PW14/H nowhere shows if there were any traces of blood of the deceased and FSL result Ex. PW14/M shows that this knife was not sent to FSL for tracing any blood. Therefore, not only the recovery of the knife is doubtful but the fact that this knife was used in commission of crime, is not at all proved.
11. Mere opinion of doctor that the injury on the body of deceased could have been caused by similar or such knife is not sufficient to conclude that injury on the body of deceased were caused by knife Ex. MO7.
12. Other than that, no material collected during investigation connect the accused persons with the commission of offence SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 7 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29 16:49:56 +0530under section 302/34 IPC.
13. So far as charge under section 174A IPC qua accused Sandeep @ Deda and Mukesh @ Rajni is concerned, recently in Amandeep Gill Vs. State of NCT of Delhi, CRL.M.C. 5219/2017 & CRL. M.A. 20512/2017, while following the law declared by Hon'ble Supreme Court in C. Muniappan & Ors. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2010 AIR (SC) 3718, Hon'ble High Court set aside the order on charge under Section 174A IPC observing that there was no complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance of the offence under Section 174A IPC. Hon'ble High Court held that:
"19. Before assessing the various opinions, the pivot on which our analysis would rest is the decision of the Supreme Court in C. Muniappan (supra), which is binding on this Court. For offences under Section 188 IPC, the Supreme Court reiterated that there must be a complaint by a public servant CRL.M.C. 5219/2017 16 of 21 whose lawful order has not been complied with, which must be in writing, since the provisions of Section 195 C.r.P.C were mandatory. It was stated that Court cannot assume cognizance of the case without such complaint and the trial/conviction was, therefore, void ab initio. Accordingly, it underscored that the law does not permit taking cognizance of an offence under Section 188 IPC, in view of the bar under Section 195 C.r.P.C, in absence of a complaint, as prescribed under the provision. Therefore, logically and fundamentally, Section 188 IPC being cognizable, the same reasoning would also apply to an offence under Section 174-A IPC, which is also cognizable."
SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 8 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29 16:50:03 +053014. There is no such complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. filed or proved in this case. Therefore, the accused cannot be convicted under Section 174A IPC.
15. In view of the discussion above held, accused Aman @ Ammu, Bikesh @ BK, Sandeep @ Deda and Mukesh @ Rajni are acquitted of all the charges levelled against them.
Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29
Date : 29.01.2025 16:50:09 +0530
(Vikram)
ASJ-02/Spl. Judge (NDPS),
North West, Rohini Courts,
Delhi/29.01.2025
Dictated on : 29.01.2025 Digitally signed
by VIKRAM
Transcribed on : 29.01.2025 VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29
checked on : 29.01.2025 16:50:14 +0530
Signed on : 29.01.2025 (Vikram)
ASJ-02/Spl. Judge (NDPS),
North West, Rohini Courts,
Delhi/29.01.2025
SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 9 of 14
Annexure 'A'
List of Prosecution Witnesses S.No. PW No. Name of Witness Details of Witness
1. PW-1 Sh. Jagat Singh Public witness
2. PW-2 SI Jagdeep Nara Incharge, Crime Team
3. PW-3 Ct. Naveen Assistant draftsman
4. PW-4 HC Muzib Khan Police witness from CPCR, PHQ
5. PW-5 Ct. Shashi Kumar DD writer
6. PW-6 Ct. Yogesh DD writer
7. PW-7 HC Dalbir Duty officer
8. PW-8 ASI John Patric Duty officer
9. PW-9 Dr. Satya Ranjan Panda CMO, Dr. BSA Hospital, Delhi
10. PW-10 Sh. Vishnu Complainant
11. PW-11 Retired SI Jai Bhagwan 1st IO
12. PW-12 Insp. Abhishek Kumar Police witness Singh
13. PW-13 Insp. Bhanu Pratap Police witness
14. PW-14 Ex. Insp. Surender IO Chahal Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29 16:50:23 +0530(Vikram) ASJ-02/Spl. Judge (NDPS), North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi/29.01.2025 SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 10 of 14 Annexure 'B' List of Exhibits S.No. Exhibit No. Details of Remarks Documents
1. Ex.Pw1/A Dead body identification memo
2. Ex.Pw2/A Detailed inspection report
3. Ex.Pw3/A Site plan
4. Ex.Pw4/A PCR form
5. Ex.Pw5/A DD No. 75B
6. Ex.Pw6/A DD no. 68B
7. Ex.Pw7/A Copy of FIR
8. Ex.Pw7/B Endorsement on original tehrir
9. Ex.Pw7/C Certificate u/S 65B IEA
10. Ex.Pw8/A DD no. 91A
11. Ex.Pw9/A MLC
12. Ex.Pw10/A Statement of witness
13. Ex.Pw10/B Photographs of the (colly) spot
14. Ex.Pw10/C Statement u/S 161 Cr.P.C.
15. Ex.Pw11/P-1 Rukka
16. Ex.Pw11/P-2 Seizure memo of exhibits lifted from the spot
17. Ex.Pw11/P-3 Three pullandas to containing clothes, Ex.Pw11/P-5 viscera of deceased and blood in gauze alongwith sample SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 11 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:2025.01.29 16:50:29 +0530
seal
18. Ex.Pw12/A Copy of order dated
15.11.2022 of ld.
MM whereby accused Mukesh @ Rajni was declared absconder
19. Ex.Pw12/B Arrest memo of accused Mukesh @ Rajni
20. Ex.Pw12/C Personal search memo of accused Mukesh @ Rajni
21. Ex.Pw12/D Disclosure statement of accused Mukesh @ Rajni
22. Ex.Pw12/E Application for TIP of accused Mukesh @ Rajni
23. Ex.Pw12/F Pointing out memo of the place of incident
24. Ex.Pw13/A Arrest memo of accused Sandeep @ Deda
25. Ex.Pw13/B Disclosure statement of accused Sandeep @ Deda
26. Ex.Pw13/C Refusal of TIP proceedings
27. Ex.Pw13/D Pointing out memo
28. Ex.Pw14/A Site plan
29. Ex.Pw14/B Dead body identification memo
30. Ex.Pw14/C Inquest report
31. Ex.Pw14/D & Written request SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 12 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date: 2025.01.29 16:50:34 +0530 Ex.Pw14/E alongwith brief facts of the case made to doctor for postmortem
32. Ex.Pw14/F Dead body handing over memo
33. Ex.Pw14/G Sketch of the knife
34. Ex.Pw14/H Seizure memo of knife
35. Ex.Pw14/I-1 Arrest memos and to personal search Ex.Pw14/I-4 memos of accused Aman @ Ammu and Bikesh @ BK
36. Ex.Pw14/J-1 Disclosure statement & of accused Aman @ Ex.Pw14/J-2 Ammu and Bikesh @ BK
37. Ex.Pw14/K Pointing out memo
38. Ex.Pw14/L Application for TIP of accused persons
39. Ex.Pw14/M FSL report
40. Ex.MO-1 One pair of sleepers, (colly) one pant, t-shirt, underwear and one banyan
41. Ex.MO-2 Earth control and blood stained concrete pieces
42. Ex.MO-3 Blood stained concrete pieces
43. Ex.MO-4 Blood stained concrete pieces
44. Ex.MO-5 Blood stained concrete pieces
45. Ex.MO-6 Blood stained big SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 13 of 14 Digitally signed by VIKRAM VIKRAM Date:
2025.01.29 16:50:40 +0530concrete pieces
46. Ex.MO-7 Knife with wooden like handle Digitally signed by VIKRAM Date: VIKRAM 2025.01.29 16:50:44 +0530 (Vikram) ASJ-02/Spl. Judge (NDPS), North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi/29.01.2025 SC no. 215/2019 State Vs. Aman @ Ammu & ors. Page no. 14 of 14