Delhi District Court
State vs . Satyawan on 1 March, 2012
FIR no. 392/01
PS: Narela
U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act
State Vs. Satyawan
IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK WASON,
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE:ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
FIR no. 392/01
PS Narela
U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act
State Vs. Satyawan
Date of Institution of case:15.12.01
Date of Judgment reserved:01.03.12
Date of which Judgment pronounced:01.03.12
JUDGMENT
Unique ID No. :02401R0171052001 Date of commission of offence :21.10.01 Name of the complainant :HC Ramesh Chand No. 660/NW, PS Narela, Delhi.
Name and address of accused :Satyawan S/o Sh. Rohtash Singh R/o H. no. 319, Pana Bhitrola, Village Bawana, Delhi.
Offence complained of :25/54/59 Arms Act Plea of accused :Pleaded not guilty Date of order :01.03.12 Final order :Acquitted BRIEF REASONS FOR DECISION:
1. The story of the prosecution in brief is as under:
Accused Satyawan, S/o Sh. Rohtash Singh has been sent up for the trial for the offence U/s. 25 Arms Act for the reason that on 21.10.01 at about 7:15 p.m at DSIDC, Outer Road, near Mohan Dhaba, Delhi, he was found in possession of one loaded desi katta with one live cartridge without licence and he thereby Page 1 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan committed the offence punishable U/s. 25 Arms Act and on the basis of which FIR no. 392/01 was registered at PS Narela.
2. After investigation, chargesheet was filed against the accused & after supplying the copies to him in compliance of Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called Cr.P.C), a charge U/s. 25 Arms Act was framed against accused on 05.10.02, to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In support of its version, the prosecution examined 5 witnesses.
4. PW1 is SI Jageer Singh, no. 4524 D, NW, District Line, Delhi. He is the Duty Officer and has proved the copy of FIR as Ex. PW1/A.
5. PW1 is Sh. Samunder Singh, S/o Sh. Shobachal, R/o Village Shahpur, Narela, Delhi (inadvertently mentioned as PW1 and now to be read as PW2). He is the public witness in the present case.
6. PW3 is Retd. SI K.P.Singh, S/o Lt. Sh. Badan Singh, R/o Village Bhootgarhi, District Bulandshahar, UP. He is the witness, who on receiving DD no. 34 B went to the spot Page 2 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan and has deposed about the investigation conducted by him.
7. PW4 is Head Constable Vijender, no. 689 PCR, West Zone, Vikaspuri, Delhi. He is the witness of initial recovery and has deposed about the investigation conducted by him as well as by the IO.
8. PW5 is Head Constable Ramesh Chand, no. 247, PS Shalimar Bagh, Delhi. He is the IO of the case and has deposed about the investigation conducted by the him.
9. It is a matter of record that vide order dated 29.09.11, last and final opportunity was granted to the prosecution to conclude entire evidence and remaining witnesses were summoned through IO as well as through DCP Office and matter was fixed for 01.11.11 and on 01.11.11, two witnesses were present, who were examined and discharged and at the request of Ld. APP, one more opportunity was granted to the prosecution to lead entire evidence and matter was fixed for 16.01.12 and on 16.01.12, no witness was present and accordingly, prosecution evidence was closed and thereafter, statement of accused was recorded separately, in which he has submitted that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and simultaneously stated that he does not want to lead D.E and matter was fixed for final arguments.
Page 3 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan
10. I have heard both the parties. Record perused.
11. In the present matter, accused has been charged U/s. 25 Arms Act and to convict the accused, prosecution has to prove that accused was found in possession of one desi katta with one live cartridge without licence.
12. In the present case, PW4 has deposed that on 21.10.01, he alongwith Ct. Sunil and Ct. Suraj Bhan were on beat patrolling duty at DSIDC and while patrolling, when they reached at DSIDC, near Mohan Dhaba, they saw two vehicles i.e maruti car bearing registration no. DL-GCA-1425 and one Santro car bearing registration no. DL-CL-8429 coming from Petrol Pump side and they signalled them to stop and the said cars were checked, in which three persons were sitting and one person deboard from the Santro car, who was having katta and the said person fired on them and he alongwith Ct. Sunil fired with the service revolver but both the persons, who were driving the said Santro car ran away and he apprehended accused Satyawan and other accused persons namely Sanjay and Sandeep were apprehended by Ct. Sunil and Ct. Suraj Bhan and their personal search was conducted and recovered three kattas and they gave this information to PS upon which SI K.P.Singh, HC Joginder Pal, Ct. Devender and HC Ramesh came at the spot and he Page 4 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan handed over accused Satyawan to HC Ramesh and separate proceedings were conducted by the officials against the other accused persons and HC Ramesh conducted further investigation. He was cross examined at length by Ld. defence counsel.
13. PW5 is the IO of the case and he has deposed that on 21.10.01, Duty Officer told him that SI K.P. Singh called him at DSIDC, Outer Road, near Mohan Dhaba, Narela and accordingly, he reached there and met SI K.P.Singh and Ct. Vijender, who handed over to him accused Satyawan and one loaded katta. He has further deposed that he unload the said katta and prepared the sketch/khakha of katta and live cartridges and joined one public person namely Samunder Singh in the investigation. He has further deposed that he prepared pullanda, seized the case property, filled FSL form and seal after use was handed over to Ct. Vijender. He has further deposed that he recorded the disclosure statement of of accused, prepared rukka and got the FIR registered through Ct. Vijender, prepared site plan, arrested the accused and conducted his personal search. He has further deposed that he brought the case property and accused to PS and deposited the case property in malkhana and accused was sent to lock-up. He has further deposed that on the next day, he produced the accused before the concerned court, from where he was sent to judicial custody. He has further deposed that he Page 5 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan sent the above said katta and FSL form to CFSL and later on, collected the result and obtained the Sanctionj U/s. 39 Arms Act and after completion of investigation, prepared the challan and filed the same in the court through SHO for judicial verdict. He was cross examined by Ld. defence counsel.
14. Further, PW3 has deposed that on 21.10.01, on receiving DD no. 34 B, he alongwith Ct. Devender went to DSIDC, Narela, near Mohan Dhaba, where they met Ct. Sunil, Ct. Vijender and Ct. Suraj Bhan, who handed over to him accused Satyawan, Sanjay and Sandeep. He has further deposed that in the meantime, HC Ramesh and HC Jogender Pal came at the spot and conducted the casual search of all the accused persons and recovered desi kattas from accused Satyawan and Sandeep and one knife from accused Sanjay. He has further deposed that he conducted the investigation of accused Sandeep and other accused persons were handed over to HC Ramesh and HC Joginder, who conducted the investigation of said accused persons. He was cross examined by the accused.
15. Now, coming to the deposition of PW2, whose testimony is very relevant in the present case as he is the public witness and he has deposed that few years back, he had gone for a walk after dinner. He has further deposed that one police jeepsy came and recorded his statement and it was dark and he Page 6 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan did not see anything and he did not know anything about this case. This witness was cross examined at length by Ld. APP and in his cross-examination, he has deposed that he signed all the papers at PS Narela. He has further deposed that he had not seen the accused. He denied the suggestion that a katta loaded with one live cartridge was recovered from the possession of the accused.
16. Perusal of testimony of this witness shows that this witness has not supported the case of prosecution as he has specifically deposed that he had not seen the accused. He has even denied the suggestion that a katta loaded with one live cartridge was recovered from the possession of accused. Further, he has specifically deposed that he could not identify the katta, if shown to him as no such katta was recovered from the possession of accused in his presence. Neither this witness has identified the accused nor he has identified the case property in the present case. Hence, he has totally demolished the case of prosecution.
17. Further, as per the prosecution story, PW4 was on beat patrolling duty meaning thereby that at the relevant time, he was not in the PS and it seems that he was outside the PS, then as per Punjab Rules, he being on duty was required to enter his departure & arrival to & from the PS Narela in the DD Register Page 7 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan of the said PS.
18. Now, as per Chapter 22 Rule 49 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934:-
"22.49 Matters to be entered in Register No. II-The following matters shall, amongst others, be entered.:-
(c) The hour of arrival and the departure on duty at or from a police station of all enrolled police officers of whatever rank, whether posted at the police station or elsewhere, with a statement of the nature of their duty. This entry shall be made immediately on arrival or prior to the departure of the officer concerned and shall be attested by the latter personality by signature or seal.
Note:- The term Police Station will include all places such as Police Lines & Police Posts, where Register No. II is maintained.
19. But, in the present case, this provision appears to have not been complied with in respect of departure and arrival entry of PW4. Prosecution has failed to produce any evidence, whatsoever on record in the nature of documentary entries of the required DD entries, so as to establish the presence of PW4 at the spot. Hence, it creates doubt in the story of prosecution.
20. Further, as per the deposition of PW4 on 21.10.01, he alongwith Ct. Sunil and Ct. Suraj Bhan were on beat patrolling duty and apprehended the accused Satyawan and recovered one katta from him but there is no corroboration with regard to Page 8 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan the testimony of PW4 qua the alleged recovery. Merely on the deposition of PW4 and in the absence of any other witness, the alleged recovery cannot be attributed upon the accused. Besides this, the testimony of the witnesses are not corroborating with each other as PW3 has deposed that after the casual search of accused persons, one-one desi katta was recovered from accused Satyawan and Sandeep and one knife was recovered from accused Sanjay. On the other hand, PW4 has deposed that on conducting the casual search of accused persons, three kattas were recovered from them.
21. Further, it is admitted fact that recovery memo was prepared before the registration of the FIR. But the perusal of recovery memo shows that FIR number is mentioned at the top of it. It is a surprising fact that how the FIR number came at the top when the FIR was not registered at that time. No explanation has been given on this point. Further, as per cross-examination of PW4 i.e HC Vijender, he came back at the spot alongwith original rukka & copy of FIR at about 11:30 p.m. However, Ex. PW1/D i.e arrest memo shows the time of arrest of accused as 11:10 p.m & signature of Ct. Vijender is at pt. B. When, Ct. Vijender reached at the spot at 11:30 p.m after registration of FIR, then how he can sign the arrest memo at 11:10 p.m. Hence, all these facts give doubt in the prosecution story. Further, the prosecution has not examined the witness regarding Sanction Page 9 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan U/s. 39 Arms Act. The Sanction U/s. 39 Arms Act has not been proved on record despite various opportunities given to the prosecution, which is fatal to the prosecution since, on the basis of Sanction report, present case was filed before the court.
22. In view of the above said discussion, I am of the considered view that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, accused Satyawan stands acquitted from the charges U/s. 25 Arms Act.
23. Bail bond of accused is extended in terms of Section 437 A of Cr.P.C.
24. Case property be confiscated to the State.
25. File be consigned to Record Room.
(Deepak Wason) Metropolitan Magistrate Rohini Court,Delhi ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY i.e on 1st March, 2012 Page 10 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan FIR no. 392/01 PS Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan 01.03.12 Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Ld. counsel for the accused with accused Satyawan on bail. Statement of accused has been recorded separately, in which accused has submitted that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further stated that he does not want to lead defence evidence.
I have heard the arguments and perused the record. Vide separate judgment dictated to the steno in the open court, accused Satyawan is acquitted of the said offence U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act.
At this stage, Satyawan is directed to furnish fresh bail bond in terms of Section 437 A of Cr.P.C in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount.
At the request of Satyawan, his previous bail bond is extended in terms of Section 437 A of Cr.P.C.
File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.
(Deepak Wason) MM (Outer)-01/Rohini 01.03.12 Page 11 of 10 Contd/-..... FIR no. 392/01 PS: Narela U/s. 25/54/59 Arms Act State Vs. Satyawan Page 12 of 10 Contd/-.....