Delhi District Court
State vs . 1) Mohd. Sakir, on 21 July, 2018
SC No.56341/2016
IN THE COURT OF MS. SMITA GARG,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK COURT,
WEST DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
Sessions Case No :56341/2016
CNR No. DLWT010006652016
FIR No. : 934/2014
Under Sections : 392/394/397/34 IPC
Police Station : Uttam Nagar
State Vs. 1) Mohd. Sakir,
S/o Mohd. Sarif ,
R/o H. No. B275, JJ Colony, Hastsal,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
2) Ali Mohd. @ Ali Ahmed @Ali
S/o Sh. Safiq Ahmed
R/o H. No. B371, JJ Colony, Hastsal,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
3) Rahul @ Ganja @ Nagender
S/o Sh. Raj Kamal
R/o H. No. C434, JJ Colony, Hastsal,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
4) Azad Ahmad @ Babu
S/o Ikhlak Ahmad
R/o H. No. D149, JJ Colony, Shiv Vihar,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 1/10
SC No.56341/2016
Date of committal of case : 11.05.2015
Date of hearing arguments : 21.07.2018
Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 21.07.2018
JUDGMENT:
1. Accused persons were chargesheeted by PS Uttam Nagar for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 392/394/397/34 IPC on the allegation that in the intervening night of 22.08.2014 and 23.08.2014 at about 12 midnight, they all, in furtherance of their common intention, robbed the complainant Mohd. Israil of a sum of Rs. 27,000/ and one Mohd. Rafi of a sum of Rs. 3000/ and one mobile phone and that while committing the robbery, they also caused injury with a knife on the person of the complainant.
2. The case of the prosecution is that in the intervening night of 22.08.2014 and 23.08.2014 at about 12:25 AM, information was received at P.S Uttam Nagar regarding the commission of robbery near Vikas Nagar drain. On the basis of the information, DD No. 10A was recorded and assigned to SI Amit Kumar for inquiry. On receiving the DD, SI Amit Kumar alongwith Ct. Satender reached the spot and came to know that one injured FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 2/10 SC No.56341/2016 had been taken to DDU Hospital and others had gone to Police Station. Since no eye witness was found, SI Amit Kumar went to the Hospital leaving behind Ct. Satender to guard the spot. In the hospital, he found that the injured Mohd. Israil had been provided treatment vide MLC No. 11473 and that the nature of his injury has been opined to be simple blunt. SI Amit Kumar brought the injured to the police station where his other associates were also present. SI Amit Kumar recorded the statement of injured Mohd. Israil.
2.1 In his statement, Mohd. Israil stated that in the intervening night of 22.08.2014 and 23.08.2014 at about 12:00 AM, when he was taking accounts from Mohd. Rafi, Alam, Mohd. Jaan and Mohd. Rashid, who used to run his rehris, four boys came on motorcycle and after parking the motorcycle at some distance, they attacked the rehri with a knife and started giving kick and fist blows to him and his associates. The said boys took away Rs. 27000/ from the complainant Mohd. Israil and a sum of Rs. 3000/ and one mobile phone having sim number 8447314295 from Mohd. Rafi. While committing the robbery, one of the boys namely Sakir inflicted injury with a knife on the thigh of the complainant. Thereafter, all the four boys fled away on the FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 3/10 SC No.56341/2016 motorcycle. The complainant stated that out of the four boys, names of two of the boys were Sakir and Ali, who were known to him, and that he could identify the remaining two boys. He sought action against them.
2.2 On the basis of the above statement of the complainant, FIR was registered. Statements of Mohd. Rafi, Mohd. Rashid and Alam were recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Mohd. Jaan refused to join the investigation. During the course of investigation, site plan of place of occurrence was prepared by SI Amit Kumar at the instance of the complainant. On the basis of the secret information, accused Mohd. Sakir was arrested on 07.10.2014. He disclosed the name of his two other associates as Rahul @ Ganja @ Nagender and Mohd. Azad @ Babu. He also disclosed that the weapon of offence i.e. the knife had been thrown away in the drain. During the police remand of the accused Mohd. Sakir, accused Rahul @ Ganja was arrested. On 20.11.2014, information was received that the accused Ali Mohd. had been arrested in FIR No. 122/14 U/s 25 Arms Act by Crime Branch. With the permission of the court, the said accused was arrested on 27.11.2014. Charge sheet against the accused Mohd. Sakir, Rahul @ Ganja and Ali Mohd was filed in FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 4/10 SC No.56341/2016 court on 25.03.2015.
Later on, accused Azad Ahmad @ Babu was arrested on 26.05.2015. On 02.07.2015, supplementary charge sheet was filed against him.
3 Charge: On 30.06.2015, charges for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 392/394/34 IPC were framed against the accused Ali Mohd @ Ali Ahmed and Rahul @ Ganja and under Section 392/394/34/397 IPC was framed against the accused Mohd. Sakir. On 02.07.2015, charge for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 392/394/34 IPC was framed against the accused Azad Ahmad @ Babu. All the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against them and claimed trial.
4 Prosecution evidence: In support of its case, the prosecution has examined the following witnesses:
4.1. PW1 Dr. Khushwant Singh has proved the MLC report no. 11473 dated 23.08.2014 of the injured Mohd. Israil as Ex. PW1/A. FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 5/10 SC No.56341/2016 4.2 PW2 Ct. Lakshmi has proved the PCR Form pertaining to the call regarding robbery as Ex. PW2/A and the certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act as Ex. PW2/2. 4.3 PW3 Alam is the eye witness of the incident. 4.4 PW4 Mohd. Rashid is the other eye witness of the incident. 4.5 PW5 Israil Khan is the complainant/injured. 4.6 PW6 Mohf. Rafi is the other victim.
Since the complainant/injured as well as other eye witnesses of the incident did not support the case of the prosecution, prosecution evidence was closed by the order of even date. In the absence of any incriminating material against the accused persons, their statements under Section 313 CrPC were also dispensed with.
5. I have heard the Ld. Addl. PP for state as well as the counsel for the accused persons. Record has also been perused.
6. The star witnesses of the case of the prosecution were the complainant/injured Israil Khan, victim Mohd. Rafi and the eye witnesses of the incident namely Alam and Mohd. Rashid. However, none of the said witnesses supported the case of the FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 6/10 SC No.56341/2016 prosecution. The complainant/injured Israil Khan, who was examined as PW5, deposed that on the date of incident, 810 persons, who had come on the motorcycle, had snatched money from him but he could not see their faces as the same were covered with handkerchief and that upon being pushed by someone, he fell down on the road and sustained injury on his head. He was cross examined by the Ld. APP but in his cross examination also, he reiterated that the accused persons were not the same persons who had robbed him on the date of incident. He denied that he had told the names of the accused Mohd. Sakir and Ali Mohd. to the police or that the said accused persons were well known to him. He also denied that the accused Mohd. Sakir had stabbed on his leg with a knife while committing the robbery. He further denied that he had ever joined the investigation of the case or that the accused persons had been arrested on identification by him.
7. Victim Mohd. Rafi, who was allegedly robbed of a sum of Rs.
3000/ and a mobile phone by the accused persons, was examined as PW6. He also turned hostile and stated that neither he was present at the spot at the time of the incident nor he could identify the accused persons. In his cross examination by FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 7/10 SC No.56341/2016 Ld. APP, he denied that the accused persons had robbed him of his mobile phone and a sum of Rs. 3000/. Though he admitted his signature on the arrest memo (Ex. PW6/A) and the personal search memo (Ex. PW6/B) of the accused Azad Ahmad @ Babu but stated that the said accused was not arrested in his presence and that the police had obtained his signatures on blank papers.
8. Apart from the complainant Israil Khan and the victim Mohd.
Rafi, the prosecution has also examined Alam and Mohd. Rashid as PW3 and PW4 respectively. They are stated to be the eye witnesses of the incident. However, in their depositions, they also did not support the prosecution's version. While PW4 Mohd. Rashid deposed that he did not know anything about the case, PW3 Alam stated that at the time of incident, he was sleeping and had woken up upon hearing the noise of the crowd. PW3 Alam as well as PW4 Mohd. Rashid categorically denied that they had told the police regarding the involvement of the accused persons in the incident in question or that the accused persons had robbed the complainant and the victim Mohd. Rafi.
9. Since the complainant/injured, the victim and the eye witnesses FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 8/10 SC No.56341/2016 did not support the case of the prosecution, it would have been a futile exercise to examine the remaining witnesses cited by the prosecution who were either the police officials or formal in nature. Further, neither the alleged weapon of offence i.e. knife nor the robbed money or the robbed mobile phone had been recovered from the accused persons. In the absence of any incriminating evidence on record to connect the accused persons with the offences in question, the prosecution evidence was closed and the statements of the accused persons under Section 313 CrPC were dispensed with.
10. For the failure of the complainant/injured and the other eye witnesses to support the case of the prosecution and in the absence of any other material to connect the accused persons with offences in question, it is evident that the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused persons. Accordingly, the accused persons namely Mohd. Sakir, Ali Mohd. @ Ali Ahmad @ Ali, Azad Ahmad @ Babu and Rahul @ Ganja @ Nagender are hereby acquitted of the charges for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 392/394/34 IPC against them. Accused Mohd. Sakir is also acquitted of the charge for the commission of offence FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 9/10 SC No.56341/2016 punishable under Section 397 IPC.
Bail bond under Section 437A CrPC furnished on behalf of Mohd. Sakir has been accepted and it shall remain in force for a period of six months from today.
At request of the defence counsel, matter be listed for furnishing of bail bonds under section 437A CrPC on behalf of the remaining accused persons on 23.07.2018.
Digitally signed by SMITA SMITA GARG Date: GARG 2018.07.23 16:24:43 +0530 Announced in the open court (Smita Garg) on 21.07.2018 Addl. Sessions JudgeFTC, (West) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. FIR No. 934/14 State v. Mohd. Sakir & Ors. Page No. 10/10