Delhi District Court
Sc No.338/19 ; State vs . Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; on 23 September, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJAY GARG I
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
SOUTH - EAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
SC No.338/19
STATE
Versus
1. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj
S/o Sh. Rafatullah
R/o Top Floor, E2 Building No.C44A
Chattarpur Enclave, Part - 2, New Delhi.
Also At :
Village Nausa, PS Barla
District Aligarh, U.P.
2. Amber Jafri @ Salman
S/o Amir Heidar
R/o 4/2356, Gali No.12
Mohalla Jivan Garh,
Ali Garh (UP)
FIR No.294/2018
u/Ss.397/34 IPC
PS : New Friends Colony
Date of Committal : 29.07.2019
Arguments heard : 17.09.2022
Date of Judgment : 23.09.2022
J U D G M E N T:
Accused persons namely Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj has been charged SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 1 of 18 for the offence punishable under Section 397/34 IPC for committing robbery on gun point. Accused Amber Jafri @ Salman has been charged for the offence punishable under Section 392/34 IPC.
1. Facts in brief are that, on receipt of GD No.20A, Mark PW2/1 dated 10.11.2018, regarding robbery of purse at gun point at Pocket B, Sukhdev Vihar, H.No.195, Gate No.5 by bike driver, ASI Kanhaiya Lal (PW3) reached at the spot where complainant Madhu Soni (PW1) was found who got recorded her statement, Ex.PW1/A stating that she was coming from Lajpat Nagar in an Auto due to some personal work. While she was in Auto, driver slowly stopped the Auto on side at Sukhdev Vihar Road, near Dev Samaj School. Suddenly, two men came on bike and stopped the Auto. One man put the gun on her forehead while the other told her to take out her Gold bangles. They took her brown colour purse containing Rs.1,57,000/ alongwith 1 SBI Debit Card, iphone 6S and other miscellaneous stuff. She got nervous and gave everything to the robbers. The Auto driver then dropped her in her colony ; took fare of destination and informed her the Bike number as 4067. On this complaint, a case FIR, Mark PW2/2 under Section 397/34 IPC was registered.
2. On 18.04.2019, SI Vishnu Dutt (PW4) during investigation of case FIR No.54/19 under Sections 392/34 IPC PS New Friends Colony, arrested accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj and accused Amber Jafri SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 2 of 18 @ Salman, wherein they disclosed regarding committing robbery of Rs.1,57,000/, mobile and gold bangles on bike. Accused Juber @ Tukda was formally arrested. He was produced in the court for TIP proceedings but he refused to join the same. Statement of witnesses were recorded, documents were seized and after completion of investigation, chargesheet under sections 397/34 IPC was filed against the accused Juber @ Tukda on 13.06.2019. After due compliance of Section 207 Cr. P. C., the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 22.07.2019.
3. On 14.07.2019, SI Babulal (PW8) from PS Kalindi Kunj arrested accused Amber Jafri @ Salman in case FIR No.367/19 under Sections 25/54/59 Arms Act & S.411/34 IPC, wherein he disclosed regarding his involvement in the commission of offence in the present FIR No.294/18 under Sections 397/34 IPC PS New Friends Colony. He was produced before the court and formally arrested in the present case. He also refused for TIP proceedings. Further investigation was carried out. Statement of witnesses were recorded and after completion of investigation, supplementary chargesheet against accused Amber Jafri @ Salman was filed in the court on 27.11.2019.
4. Charge under section 397/34 IPC was framed against accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj. Separate charge was framed against accused Amber Jafri @ Salman under section 392/34 IPC. Both the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 3 of 18
5. Both the accused persons vide their separate statements under Section 294 Cr. P.C. dated 04.07.2022 admitted the TIP proceedings dated 19.04.2019 conducted by Ms. Archana Beniwal, the then learned MM and by Ms. Sheetal Chaudhary Pradhan, the then learned MM as Ex.A1 and Ex.A2, respectively.
6. The prosecution in support of its case examined 12 witnesses in all.
7. PW1 Ms. Madhu Soni is the star witness of the prosecution being complainant. She deposed about the incident as narrated in her complaint, Ex.PW1/A. Her detailed testimony shall be considered subsequently.
8. PW2 Ct. Dharmender remained with IO ASI Kanhaiya Lal durig the investigation of this case.
9. PW3 ASI Kanhaiya Lal is the initial investigation officer. He deposed regarding the investigations conducted by him in the present FIR.
10. PW4 SI Vishnu Dutt deposed regarding the arrest of accused in FIR No.54/2019 PS New Friends Colony. He deposed that on 18.04.2019 he had arrested accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj and interrogated him and in his disclosure statement, Ex.PW4/A he disclosed that he had committed robbery of one bag containing cash of Rs.1,57,000/, mobile phone etc. besides wearing bangles from the possession of one lady near Dev Samaj School, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi when she was going in Auto rickshaw. He deposed that he had handed over the copy of disclosure statement and other SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 4 of 18 documents to SI Yashpal (PW7) at PS NFC and arrested accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj next day in the present case. The witness was not cross examined by the defence despite opportunity being given.
11. PW5 HC Naveen is the Duty Officer and deposed regarding registration of FIR No.294/2018 by him. He deposed that after receiving rukka at about 10:50 pm by ASI Kanhaiya Lal brought by Ct. Dharmender (PW2), he handed over the same to Computer operator to type the FIR. He recorded DD entry No.39A in respect of registration of FIR and after registration of FIR, Ex.PW5/A, he handed over the rukka and copy of FIR to PW3. He proved Certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, Ex.PW5/B issued by him. The witness was not cross examined by the defence despite opportunity being given.
12. PW6 HC Babu Lal deposed that one country made pistol with two live cartridges in sealed condition in case FIR No.367/2019 of PS Kalindi Kunj, were deposited in the malkhana of PS Kalindi Kunj and proved the entry in Register No.19 at Sr. No.1445 as Ex.PW6/A. This witness was also not cross examined on behalf of accused persons despite due opportunity.
13. PW7 SI Yashpal is the Investigation Officer to whom further investigation was marked in the present case on 18.04.2019. He deposed regarding arrest of accused persons in the present case and proved the arrest memo of accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj as SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 5 of 18 Ex.PW7/A and that of accused Amber Jafri @ Salman as Ex.PW7/D. He prepared pointing out memo of the place of incident, Ex.PW7/B and moved an application for conducting TIP of accused Juber @ Tukda, Ex.PW7/C but he refused to participate in the same. After completing investigation, he filed chargesheet against accused Juber @ Tukda in the court. He further deposed that on 14.10.2019 accused Amber Jafri was arrested in case FIR No.367/2019 PS Kalindi Kunj and on an intimation received from IO of that case, he interrogated accused Amber Jafri, formally arrested him in this case and recorded his disclosure statement Ex.PW7/E. He moved an application for conducting TIP of accused Amber Jafri, Ex.PW7/F but the accused refused to participate in the same. Thereafter, accused was taken on police remand vide application Ex.PW7/G and search was made for case property. After completion of investigation, he filed supplementary chargesheet in the court against accused Amber Jafri.
14. PW8 SI Babu Lal is the witness to the arrest of accused Amber Jafri in case FIR No.367/2019 PS Kalindi Kunj under Section 25 Arms Act and Section 411 IPC. He deposed that on 13.10.2019, he was posted in PS Kalindi Kunj. Investigation of this case was received by him from SI Rajiv Kumar (PW11). He alongwith Ct. Sanjay went to spot at Meethapur Road, near Kalindi Kunj Metro Station where accused Amber Jafri and his associate Abbas were apprehended by SI Rajiv Kumar. Accused Amber Jafri was found in SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 6 of 18 possession of one country made pistol. SI Rajiv Kumar handed over him both the accused persons, case property, seizure memos and other relevant documents to him. He interrogated accused Amber Jafri and arrested him in case FIR No.367/2019 PS Kalindi Kunj vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/A, his personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW8/B and he made disclosure statement Ex.PW8/C. He deposed that during interrogation, accused Amber Jafri had disclosed about the robbery in the present case. Since accused Amber Jafri disclosed about robbery in case FIR No.294/2018 PS NFC under sections 397/34 IPC, he informed IO of that case and produced the accused persons in Saket and handed over the relevant papers to the case to IO SI Yashpal (PW7). The witness was duly cross examined by learned defence counsel.
15. PW9 Ct. Bijender Singh joined the investigation with IO and he alongwith IO and accused Amber Jafri went to Sukhdev Vihar Road, near Dev Samaj School, where accused Amber Jafri @ Salman pointed out the place of incident and pointing out memo Ex.PW7/H was prepared. Due opportunity was given for cross examination of this witness but to no avail.
16. PW10 Ct. Kuldeep accompanied IO SI Yashpal (PW7) to Saket Court from where accused Amber Jafri was formally arrested in this case.
17. PW11 SI Rajiv Kumar was posted at PS Kalindi Kunj and deposed that is the investigation officer in case FIR No.367/2019 PS Kalindi SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 7 of 18 Kunj and deposed regarding the arrest of accused Amber Jafri and his associate Abbas. It is stated that on 13.10.2019 at around 6:30 pm a secret information was received that two boys are coming on a motorcycle and said motorcycle is without number plate and they may be carrying weapon. On this, he alongwith other police officials started checking vehicle and at about 7:00 pm, he noticed a motorcycle coming from the side of Shaheen Bagh after crossing the road from wrong side. On seeing police team, driver of the motorcycle tried to escape by turning his motorcycle towards the directions from which he was coming and after chasing at some distance, they were apprehended and interrogated. Both the boys were searched and during their search they were found carrying loaded desi katta and one live cartridge. During investigation, it was revealed that motorcycle was stolen from PS Jamia Nagar and in this regard eFIR has already been registered. He seized the case property, prepared memos and seized the motorcycle under section 102 Cr.PC. He prepared rukka and got the FIR registered at PS Kalindi Kunj through Ct. Sanjay and thereafter, further investigation was marked to SI Babu Lal (PW4). During cross examination on behalf of accused Amber Jafri, PW11 stated that he asked the public persons to join the proceedings but non agreed. There was no CCTV footage found at the place of arrest of accused Amber Jafri.
18. PW12 Rajan Singh, Ahlmad in the court of Sh. Himanshu Tanwa, the then learned MM, SouthEast, brought the record of FIR SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 8 of 18 No.367/2019 PS Kalindi Kunj under Section 25/54 Arms Act.
19. In their statement under section 313 Cr.PC, both the accused persons denied all the allegations leveled against them and stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The witnesses have deposed falsely against them. Accused Juber @ Tukda stated that police officials have resolved their pending cases by implicating him falsely.
20. Sh. Parvez Siddiqui, learned counsel for accused Juber @ Tukda and Ms. Malka Asad, learned counsel for accused Amber Jafri @ Salman vehemently argued that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt and accused persons are liable to be acquitted. It is stated that there are material contradictions in the statement of the complainant PW1. Complainant in her statement before this court has specifically stated that her neigbour Geeta Wason made a call at 100 No. about the incident but said Geeta Wason has not been made a witness for the reasons best known to the prosecution. Further, when the police officials reached the spot and asked the complainant to give her statement, she refused and stated th at she will give her statement later on when her son and husband will come and after few hours she gave a written complaint, which was written by her son. It is stated that Auto driver who is sole eye witness to the incident has also not been made a witness in this case. It is stated that complainant in her cross SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 9 of 18 examination has herself admitted that she cannot identify the Auto Driver as approximately 01 years 01 month has been passed. If she cannot identify the Auto Driver then how he can identify the accused persons after a lapse of one year. Further, she has stated that she had identified accused Juber in the PS. It is argued that the credibility of the witness is collapsed as accused was shown to her in the PS before deposition in the court. Since the accused was already identified by the complainant in the PS, the case of the prosecution cannot be relied upon.
21. On the other hand, learned Chief Public Prosecutor for the State has argued that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the accused persons. The testimony of the complainant is fully corroborated by the testimonies of police officials. Further, the complainant has correctly identified the accused persons. All the witnesses examined by the prosecution have consistently deposed against the accused persons. Further, the accused persons also refused their TIP Proceedings. It is stated that in view of the consistent and corroborative testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, accused persons are liable to be convicted.
22. I have heard learned Chief Public Prosecutor for State as well as learned counsel for the accused persons and have perused the entire record and the evidence led therein.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE
23. Complainant PW1 Madhu Soni is the backbone of this case. She SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 10 of 18 has deposed that on 10.11.2018 at about 4:30 pm, she was coming back from Lajpat Nagar, Central Market, New Delhi to her house in an Auto. Near Dev Samaj School, two boys on red colour bike stopped the Auto, one of them aimed pistol on her forehead and other boy removed her Gold Bangles from her hand. Thereafter, he also snatched her bag which was containing a sum of Rs.1,57,000/, 1 SBI Card, iphone 6S and other documents including house keys. Both the robbers ran away with their bike towards Metro Station after committing robbery. Auto driver dropped her in her colony. She paid fare to him and thereafter, he went away. One neighbour called her son near her house. She narrated the entire incident to her son Rahul. Her neighbour Geeta Wason made a call at 100 number. Police came at the spot and her son gave a written complaint Ex.PW1/A to police which bears her signatures. She stated that she can identify both the robbers if produced before her. Police took her to the spot and inspected the same in her presence. Thereafter, police prepared the site plan. The witness has correctly identified both the accused persons. She has further pointed out that accused Juber @ Tukda had shown her pistol at the time of incident. She has further deposed that she has identified accused Juber @ Tukda before the police at the PS. The witness has deposed that accused Amber Jafri had been seen by her first time at the spot at the time of incident and thereafter, she had see him before this court today. None of her robbed articles were recovered by the police. Her son SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 11 of 18 has mentioned bike number as 4067 as it was told by the Auto driver to the Security Guard of the Colony and Security Guard told the same to her son. She has not personally noted down the number. On the date of incident, her son had handed over photocopy of invoice/bill of mobile having IMEI and serial number of the mobile phone. During her cross examination, she has deposed that she can not identify the Auto Driver as approximately 1 year 1 month have already been passed. She was having brown colour bag but she can not tell how many items were with her in the bag while she was returning to home in Auto. She could not see the registration number of Bike however, colour of the bike was red. She does not know model and make of the Bike of the robbers. She has visited the PS only once to identify the robbers but she does not remember the date of her visit to PS. Police had shown some photographs of some persons at the PS. She denied the suggestion that she identified both the accused persons at the instance of police.
24. Accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj was arrested in this case by PW4 SI Vishnu Dutt. As deposed by him, on 18.04.2019, he was posted at PS New Friends Colony. On that day, he had arrested accused Juber @ Tukda in FIR No.54/2019 PS NFC. He had interrogated him and he made disclosure statement of many cases including this case. He recorded his disclosure statement, Ex.PW4/A. He had arrested accused on next day in this case.
25. PW7 SI Yashpal has deposed that on 18.04.2019, investigation of SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 12 of 18 this case was marked to him. On 19.04.2019, he collected the copies of disclosure statement of accused Juber @ Tukda and thereafter, formally arrested the accused in the present case. During police custody, accused led the police to the place of incident and he had prepared pointing out memo of the place of incident. He had moved an application for TIP of accused which was marked to Ms. Archana Beniwal, the then learned MM but accused refused to participate in the TIP. On 14.10.2019, accused Amber Jafri was arrested in case FIR No.367/2019 PS Kalindi Kunj and during interrogation of that case, accused had disclosed regarding commission of offence in the present case. He moved an application for production of accused Amber Jafri who was produced in the court on 16.10.2019. PW7 interrogated accused Amber Jafri after taking permission from the court and thereafter, formally arrested him in this case. He recorded disclosure statement of accused and moved an application for TIP of accused which was marked to the court of Ms. Sheetal Chaudhary Pradhan, the then learned MM but accused refused the TIP proceedings. On 19.04.2019, he took accused on police remand. During remand, he searched for case property of the present case but the same cannot be recovered. During remand, accused pointed out place of incident of which, pointing out memo was prepared.
26. PW8 SI Babu Lal had arrested accused Amber Jafri. He deposed that on 13.10.2019, he was posted at PS Kalindi Kunj. Investigation of FIR No.367/2019 under section 24 Arms Act & Section 411 IPC SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 13 of 18 was assigned to him. He alongwith Ct. Sanjay went to the spot at Meethapur Road near Kalindi Kunj, Metro Station, there accused Amber Jafri alongwith accused Abbas were apprehended by SI Rajiv Kumar, SI Ajay Katewa alongwith other police staff. Accused Amber Jafri was found in possession of one country made pistol. Both the accused persons were found in possession of stolen motorcycle from PS Jamia Nagar. SI Rajiv Kumar handed over him both the accused persons and case property. He interrogated both the accused persons. During interrogation, accused Amber Jafri made disclosure statement wherein he disclosed about this case. Accused has further disclosed that pistol which was recovered from his possession was used in that incident of robbery. He informed IO of this case. He produced both the accused persons in Saket court and there, PW7 SI Yashpal had formally arrested accused Amber Jafri.
27. PW11 SI Rajiv Kumar had arrested accused Amber Jafri and his associate Abbas on the basis of secret information. He has deposed that accused Amber Jafri was found carrying loaded desi katta in the right side dub of the pant. One live cartridge was also recovered from the pocket of accused Amber Jafri. He seized the weapon as well as cartridge by putting the same in pullanda. He had also seized motorcycle under Section 102 Cr.PC, prepared rukka and got the FIR registered.
REFUSAL OF TIP OF ACCUSED PERSONS
28. Ex.PW7/C is the TIP of accused Juber @ Tukda wherein he has SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 14 of 18 refused to participate in TIP stating that he does not want to participate in the TIP as the complainant has already seen him during robbery. Ex.A2 is TIP of accused Amber Jafri as per which he has refused to participate in TIP stating that his photograph has been shown and he have understood that same may be used against him during trial.
29. The date of incident is 10.11.2018. Accused Juber @ Tukda was arrested in FIR No.54/2019 PS NFC on 18.04.2019 wherein he is reported to have made disclosure statement about this case. The other accused Amber Jafri is stated to have been arrested on 14.10.2019 by police officials of PS Kalindi Kunj in case FIR No.367/2019 and therein he is reported to have also made a disclosure about his involvement in this case. Ex.PW4/A is the disclosure statement of accused Juber @ Tukda. As per the prosecution case, accused had pointed out the place of incident for which pointing out memo, Ex.PW7/B was prepared. There is no recovery of any robbed articles either from the possession of accused or at the instance of this accused. Thereby, this disclosure statement is of no value for the prosecution and is being hit by Section 25 of Indian Evidence Act. Similarly, Ex.PW7/E is the disclosure statement of accused Amber Jafri admitting his involvement in the present case alongwith his coaccused Juber @ Tukda. Ex.PW7/H is the pointing out memo stated to be prepared at the instance of accused Amber Jafri. Again, there is no recovery of SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 15 of 18 any robbed articles from the possession of this accused or at his instance. His disclosure statement is also of no help to the case of the prosecution as the same is also hit by Section 25 of Indian Evidence Act.
30. One of the main contention raised on behalf of learned defence counsel is that complainant PW1 has admitted that she identified accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj before the police in the PS but the entire prosecution case is silent as to when the accused was shown to her in the PS. Learned counsel has stated that since accused Juber @ Tukda was shown to the complainant in the PS, due to this reason, his refusal to join TIP cannot be used against him. Learned Counsel has further submitted that the complainant PW1 during her cross examination has admitted that police had shown her photographs of some persons at the PS. It is submitted that since both the accused persons were implicated by the police in various cases, police has also falsely implicated both of them in this case. It has been urged that since it has been admitted by the complainant PW1 that accused Juber @ Tukda was shown to her in the PS and photographs of some persons were shown to her by the police, thereby, the refusal of the TIP by both the accused persons cannot be used against them.
31. As discussed in above paras, complainant PW1 in her examination in chief has stated that she had identified accused Juber @ Tukda before police in the PS. When was accused shown to the SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 16 of 18 complainant in the PS, the entire prosecution case is silent about that. As already discussed, accused Juber @ Tukda was arrested by the police after about 5 months of the incident in case FIR No.54/2019 PS NFC. Why PW1 has deposed that accused Juber @ Tukda was shown to her in the PS, the prosecution has nowhere explained. Similarly, during her cross examination, PW1 has admitted that police had shown her photographs of some persons in the PS. The entire prosecution case is silent that when and how the photographs of the suspects were shown to the complainant and if she was able to identify any of the robber out of those photographs of the suspects or not, nothing in this case has come on record.
32. The other point to be considered is that in his TIP, Ex.A1, accused Juber @ Tukda has stated that "I do not wish to participate in TIP as the complainant has already seen me during robbery." If prosecution can draw any strength from this statement recorded by learned MM to strengthen its case ? As per criminal jurisprudence, the prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and to do so the prosecution has to stand on its own leg. Ex.A1 cannot be taken as confession on the part of the accused because there is prescribed procedure under law to record confession made by accused regarding his involvement in the crime. CONCLUSION
33. Because of the reasons discussed above, some doubts have crept in regarding the identification of both the accused persons by PW1 as SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 17 of 18 robbers at the time of alleged incident. In addition to identification by the complainant PW1, there is not even an iota of evidence against the accused persons. As already discussed, not a single robbed article was recovered either from the possession or at the instance of accused persons. As per the prosecution case, in FIR No.367/19 PS Kalindi Kunj, the weapon of offence i.e. Desi Katta used in the commission of this offence was recovered but the same was also not put to the complainant PW1. Moreover, the Auto driver in which the complainant PW1 was travelling at the time of this incident, was also a very important witness to this incident but he was not examined and cited as a witness, to the reasons best known to the prosecution.
34. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I find that prosecution has failed to establish its case against both the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Thereby, accused Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj and accused Amber Jafri @ Salman, are acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 397/34 IPC and 392/34 IPC, respectively.
35. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open Court (SANJAY GARG I)
Today, on 23.09.2022 Principal District & Sessions Judge
South East, Saket Courts,
New Delhi
SC No.338/19 ; State Vs. Juber @ Tukda @ Devraj & Anr. ; FIR No.294/2018 ; PS : New Friends Colony Page No. 18 of 18