Delhi District Court
State vs . Gaurav @ Goti on 19 December, 2014
State Vs. Gaurav @ Goti
IN THE COURT OF MS. BABITA PUNIYA: METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE-01, EAST, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
State Vs. Gaurav @ Goti
FIR No. 308/09
U/sec. 27 NDPS Act
PS: Gandhi Nagar
Date of institution of case: 30.03.2010
Date on which judgment is reserved: Not reserved
Date on which judgment is delivered: 19.12.2014
Unique I. D. No. 02402R00088752010
JUDGMENT
a) Sr. No. of the case : 37/03 b) Date of commission of the offence : 17.12.2009 c) Name of the complainant : Ct. Sukhbir
d) Name of the accused and his parentage : 1. Gaurav @ Goti S/o Sh. Shyam Lal, R/o H. No. 9/4413, Gali No. 07, Ajeet Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi
2. Sunny @ Matka (proceedings abated vide order dated 13.04.2012)
e) Offence complained of or proved : Sec. 27/61/85 NDPS Act FIR No. 308/09 Page No. 1 of 5 State Vs. Gaurav @ Goti
f) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
g) Final order : Convicted
h) Date of such order : 19.12.2014
i) Brief reasons for the just decision of the case:
Succinctly stated, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 17.12.2009 the accused Sunny @ Matka and Gaurav @ Goti were apprehended by Ct. Sukhbir from the place mark "A" in the site plan while they were consuming Smack with the help of panni, pipe and match stick. He immediately informed the police station over phone and a DD Entry No. 14A was recorded in this regard. The said DD Entry was marked to HC Munesh Kumar for investigation. Consequently, he reached the spot where he met Ct. Sukhbir, who handed over to him the accused persons, panni, pine and match box. Thereafter, HC Munesh Kumar made request to four-five persons who were passing by to join the investigation but none of them agreed. Therefore, without wasting time, he appraised the accused of his right to be searched in the presence of Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. A written notice in this context under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act") was also given to the accused. FIR No. 308/09 Page No. 2 of 5 State Vs. Gaurav @ Goti The accused agreed to be searched by the IO/ HC Munesh Kumar and did not opt to be searched before a Gazetted officer or a Magistrate. The IO thereafter, seized the panni, pipe and match box, sealed it with the seal of "M.K.", filled up the FSL Form, prepared the rukka and sent the tehrir to the police station through Ct. Amar Singh for registration of the case. After registration of the FIR, IO/ HC Munesh Kumar prepared the site plan at the instance of the complainant, conducted the personal search of the accused, arrested them vide arrest memo, deposited the case property in the malkhana, sent the same to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Rohini for examination and recorded the statement of the witnesses under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred to as the Code).
After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the court. Consequently, the accused persons were summoned to face the trial and the copies of documents, relied upon by the prosecution, were supplied to them as per the norms.
However, before commencement of the trial Accused Sunny @ Matka expired as a result whereof qua him the proceedings were dropped as 'abated'. Thereafter, the charge u/sec 27 of the Act was framed against the accused Gaurav @ Goti to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. FIR No. 308/09 Page No. 3 of 5 State Vs. Gaurav @ Goti With a view to connect the accused with the crime, the prosecution has examined only one witness.
PW1/SI Kiran Pal was the duty officer who recorded the formal FIR/Ex. PW1/A and made an endorsement Ex.PW1/B to this effect on the rukka. Ld. Counsel for the accused, in the midst of the prosecution evidence, moved an application for pleading guilty. It is stated by the ld. Counsel for the accused that the accused is desirous to plead guilty. It is no more res-integra that an accused can plead guilty at any stage of trial and in this regard reference may be made to the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Maharashtra etc vs. Sukhdeo Singh and Anr 1992 AIR 2100=1992 SCR (3) 480.
I have explained the consequences of pleading guilty and the allegations leveled by the prosecution in vernacular to the accused, however, the accused has reiterated his plea of guilt and has stated that he is pleading guilty without any force, pressure or undue influence and that he has understood the allegations. I am of the considered view that the accused has understood the nature of the allegations levelled against him and that plea of guilt is made voluntarily without any pressure or undue influence after understanding the allegations, hence the FIR No. 308/09 Page No. 4 of 5 State Vs. Gaurav @ Goti same is accepted. Accordingly, the accused Gaurav @ Goti, in view of the statement recorded separately, is held guilty and convicted for the offence charged with.
Let the convict be heard on the quantum of sentence. Announced in open Court on 19th day of December, 2014 (Babita Puniya) MM-01/East/KKD Courts/Delhi 19.12.2014 This judgment contains 05 pages and each page bears my signature.
(Babita Puniya) MM-01/East/KKD Courts/Delhi 19.12.2014 FIR No. 308/09 Page No. 5 of 5