Delhi District Court
State vs Satpal on 29 November, 2025
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST
CLASS-02, NORTH EAST DISTRICT, KARKARDOOMA
COURTS, DELHI PRESIDED BY: SH. ANMOL NOHRIA, DJS
STATE Vs. SATPAL & ANR.
FIR NO. : 376/2013 PS : NEW USMANPUR
CNR NO. DLNE020020462014
-: JUDGMENT :-
1.FIR No. 376/2013
2.Unique Case no. 465567/2015
3.Title State vs. Sat Pal & Anr.
3(A).Name of complainant Md. Iliyash S/o Md. Zasim
3(B).Name of accused 1). Satpal S/o Nathu Singh,
R/o H. No. 82, Vill.-Garhi
ANMOL Mendu Mandir Vali Gali,
NOHRIA Usmanpur, Delhil.
2). Salman S/o Md. Kirani,
R/o Vill.-Madheypur, PS-
Digitally signed
by ANMOL
Madheypur, Distt.-
NOHRIA
Date: 2025.11.29
15:00:18 +0530
Madhubani, Bihar
3 (C). Representation on behalf Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Ld. of State APP for the State.
4.Date of institution of challan 07.05.2014 FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 1 of 28
5.Date of Reserving judgment 09.07.2025
6.Date of pronouncement 29.11.2025
7.Date of commission of 13.10.2013 offence
8.Offence complained of 392/411/34 IPC.
9.Offence charged with 392/411/34 IPC
10.Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
11.Final order ACQUITTED Brief Statement of Reasons for Decision of the Case :-
1. The case of the prosecution in brief is that he works at Gammon India as a labourer and on 13.10.2013, he had received his salary and he was supposed to catch a train from Anand Vihar to his house at Bihar and at around 6:00 PM, he left his company and was ANMOL going towards Wazirabad Shamshan Ghat then at Paltoon Pull, three NOHRIA boys came on foot. Out of them, one caught hold of his neck and took Digitally signed by ANMOL out Rs.1,000/- from right pocket of his pant forcefully and the other NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29 15:00:26 +0530 caught hold of his hand and forcefully took out his Voter Card, mobile phone make Samsung from pocket of the shirt and the third one took out Rs.5,000/- from left pocket of his pant and after pushing him ran towards the jungle. He raised hue and cry and in the meanwhile HC FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 2 of 28 Manoj arrived on motorcycle and alongwith him started chasing them and one person, who had caught hold of his neck was apprehended and his name was disclosed as Salman and he can identify the other two co-
accused. Upon this FIR No. 376/2013 PS-New Usmanpur u/S 392/411/34 IPC was registered. Thereafter, Rs.1,000/- was recovered from accused Salman and his disclosure statement was recorded. Thereafter, co-accused Satpal was arrested at the disclosure of accused Salman and Rs.1,500/- were recovered from him. Later on, accused Nafees joined investigation but his TIP failed and hence he was discharged/released.
2. On conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed for the offences u/S 392/411/34 IPC against the accused Satpal and Salman. The copy of the charge sheet was supplied to the accused persons in compliance of provision U/s 207 Cr.P.C. ANMOL NOHRIA Digitally signed by ANMOL
3. On the basis of the contents of the charge-sheet and after NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29 hearing both the parties, the charge was framed against the accused 15:00:31 +0530 persons for the offences under Section 392/411/34 IPC vide order dated 28.04.2015.
4. During the trial, prosecution led the following oral and FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 3 of 28 documentary evidence against the accused to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt-:
ORAL EVIDENCE PW-1 : HC Shri Pal (DO) PW-2 : Mohd. Iliyas (complainant) HC Manoj Kumar (police PW-3 :
witness/first IO) PW-4 : Ct. Pradeep (police witness) Ct. Satya Prakash (police PW-5 :
witness)
PW-6 : SI Sonal Raj (2nd IO)
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Ex. PW1/A : Endorsement
Ex. PW1/B : FIR
Ex. PW2/A : Statement of complainant
ANMOL Ex. PW3/A : Rukka
NOHRIA Ex. PW3/B to
: Seizure memos
Ex. PW3/D
Digitally signed
by ANMOL Ex. PW3/E &
: Disclosure statements
NOHRIA Ex. PW3/F
Date: 2025.11.29
15:00:36 +0530 Ex. PW3/G &
: Arrest memos
Ex. PW3/H
Ex. PW3/I &
: Personal search memos
Ex. PW3/J
Ex. PW4/A : Arrest memo
Ex. PW6/A : Site plan
FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 4 of 28
Ex. PW6/A1 &
: Pointing out memos
Ex. PW6/A2
Ex. PW6/B : Personal search memo
CASE PROPERTY
Rs.1,000/- in denomination of
Ex. P1 :
Rs.100/-
Rs.1,500/- in denomination of
Ex. P2 :
Rs.100/-
Ex. P3 : Voter Card
Ex. P4 : SIM Card of Idea
5. PW2/Mohd. Iliyash, is the complainant in the present matter. He has deposed that he does not remember the date and month, however, incident took place three years back and on that day, he was working as labourer in Gammon India company and had got salary of Rs.6,000/-, after which he was going to Anand Vihar from Gammon ANMOL NOHRIA India company to hand over the same to his brother, who was going to village from Rly. Station. He had kept Rs.1,000/- and identity card in Digitally signed his shirt pocket and Rs.5,000/- in the back pocket of his pant and by ANMOL NOHRIA Date: mobile phone in right pocket of the pant. At about 6:00 PM, when he 2025.11.29 15:00:43 +0530 reached near Paltoon Pull near Wazirabad Shamshan Ghat then two boys came from the front side and both caught hold of him and forcbly took him towards the jungle and in the jungle accused Salman pressed FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 5 of 28 his neck and the other accused twisted his hand towards back and snatched Rs.1,000/- and identity card from pocket of his shirt and Rs.5,000/- from back pocket and mobile phone from right side pocket of the pant. He raised alarm and police officials came at the spot and one accused namely Salman was apprehended at the spot and the other accused managed to flee. Police officials inquired and recorded his statement.
In his examination in chief dated 23.10.2018, he has further deposed that three persons had robbed him on the day of incident and accused Salman was apprehended at the spot while other accused persons managed to flee away from the spot towards forest area near cremation ground, Yamuna Khadar near Paltoon Pull. During the search of accused Salman, Rs.1,000/-/snatched amount was recovered from his possession and police had seized the same and had also recorded his statement. Thereafter, police prepared site plan at his ANMOL instance and the accused Salman was arrested and personally searched NOHRIA in his presence. The witness had correctly identified accused Salman Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA and Satpal, present in the court as well as the case property i.e. Date: 2025.11.29 15:00:48 +0530 Rs.1,000/-, Rs.1,500/-, Voter ID Card and Idea SIM.
5.1. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons, PW2/Mohd. Iliyash has stated that he had put his FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 6 of 28 thumb impression on the statement near the Shamshan Ghat but does not remember whether the contents of the same were read over to him or not. He has volunteered that the same were read over but he does not remember the contents of the same. He does not remember the exact distance from the place of incident to the place of apprehension of accused Salman but he has volunteered that he was apprehended within the short distance after chasing him for half an hour and other accused had fled away towards forest area. He has admitted that he had put his thumb impression on Ex. PW3/B at the PS alongwith other documents and another document he had put his thumb impression at the spot. The other two persons were not apprehended at the spot on the date of incident and he did not narrate their physical particulars to the police. He had seen the other two accused on the day of incident and thereafter in court on 12.09.2015 and has no knowledge about their names and came to know about them only when they came to the court. The ANMOL NOHRIA accused persons were not carrying any weapon with them and were Digitally signed empty handed when they snatched money and he was taken a side to by ANMOL NOHRIA Date: the jungle, accused Salman was arrested by the police at a distance at 2025.11.29 15:01:03 +0530 about 300 meters and he was interrogated in his presence and he identified him as the accused to chock his neck. He remained at the PS for about 2-2.5 hours. After that accused Satpal was apprehended at the instance of accused Salman near Pushta Road i.e. way coming from the FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 7 of 28 jungle. He was not taken to the place of incident after registration of FIR but was asked about the incident in the PS also and does not remember whether any other statement was also recorded at the PS after interrogation or not. He does not remember the exact place from where accused Satpal was arrested and when he finally left the PS. He does not remember whether he was present at the PS at about 10:30 PM or not but has volunteered that he left the PS in the night. He had put his thumb impression on other documents in presence of three police persons but does not remember whether accused Salman had signed anywhere or not. He had denied the suggestion of accused Salman of not being apprehended at the spot or having falsely implicated both the accused persons in the present matter.
6. PW3/HC Manoj Kumar is police witness/1st IO in the ANMOL present case and he has deposed on oath that on 13.10.2013, he was NOHRIA posted at PS-New Usmanpur as HC and was on patrolling duty Digitally signed alongwith Ct. Sat Prakash from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM. At about 6:00 - by ANMOL 6:15 PM, when they reached at Paltoon Pull, they met complainant NOHRIA Date:
2025.11.29 15:01:11 +0530 Mohd. Iliyash who narrated them the incident after which he alongwith complainant and Ct. Sat Prakash followed three persons in the direction stated by the complainant and after some distance he apprehended accused Salman at the instance of the complainant and took his search FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 8 of 28 who was wearing half pant and Rs.1,000/- in the denomination of Rs.100/- was recovered from pocket of his pant and same was identified by the complainant saying that accused had robbed him after pressing his neck. He recorded the statement of Mohd. Iliyash and Rs.1,000/- was kept in an envelope and sealed with the seal of MG and thereafter rukka was prepared and the currency notes were seized. Rukka was handed over to Ct. Sat Prakash for registration of FIR and in the meantime, SI Sonal Raj came to the spot and custody of accused Salman alongwith documents was handed over to SI Sonal, who prepared site plan at the instance of the complainant. Thereafter, he alongwith SI Sonal Raj, complainant and accused Salman went to Nanaksar Gurudwara in search of co-accused persons, where accused Sat Pal was apprehended and on search, Rs.1,500/- in denomination of Rs.100/- was recovered alongwith one Voter ID Card and SIM card. ANMOL NOHRIA The same was seized and sealed and thereafter disclosure statement of Digitally signed accused Sat Pal and Salman were recorded, the accused persons were by ANMOL NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29 arrested and personally searched in his presence. On 14.10.2013, both 15:01:19 +0530 the accused persons were taken to Yamuna Khadar in search of the third co-accused, who could not be found; thereafter, they also visited the house of the third co-accused Nafees but he was not present and accused Salman and Sat Pal were brought to the PS and thereafter remanded to JC by the court. The witness had correctly identified the FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 9 of 28 accused present in the court as well as the case property.
6.1. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the accused persons, PW3/HC Manoj has deposed that he left for patrolling duty at about 8:00 AM and had reached Yamuna Khadar by doing patrolling on Pushta Road and met complainant at Paltoon Pull and the distance between the Paltoon Pull and the Main Road going towards Wazirabad is around 200-300 meters. The inquiry with the complainant for the first time took about five minutes and he pointed towards the jungle for the accused persons and they chased the accused on foot, who was apprehended 200 meters away from the Paltoon Pull and was alone. He was in police uniform and on seeing them, the accused tried to run away and was apprehended after around 20-30 steps and there is no specific mark where the accused was apprehended ANMOL as he was apprehended in the jungle. The accused was taken to Paltoon NOHRIA Pull and his search was conducted there where public persons were Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA passing by, who upon asking did not agree to join the investigation.
Rs.1,000/- was recovered from the right side pocket of the pant of the Date:
2025.11.29 15:01:25 +0530 accused, he had not put any identification mark on the recovered currency notes and nothing else was recovered from accused Salman. He prepared seizure memo before recording the statement of the complainant and signatures of public persons were not taken on seizure FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 10 of 28 memo and the seal of MG is his as his name is Manoj Giri. The seal was handed over to Ct. Sat Prakash to deposit it in the malkhana at about 7:00 - 7:15 PM and seizure memo was prepared at about 6:00 - 6:15 PM. The statement of complainant was recorded at about 6:15 PM and rukka was sent at 6:30 PM. SI Sonal Raj reached at Paltoon Pull at about 7:00 - 7:15 PM and site plan was prepared by SI Sonal Raj at the instance of the complainant in his presence and at that time he had pointed out to SI Sonal Raj the place of apprehension of the accused and same was shown in the site plan by SI Sonal Raj. The incident had taken place at a distance of 10 steps towards the right of the Paltoon Pull. After seeing site plan, the place of incident was told to be point X and place of apprehension was told to be at point Y by the witness. He further deposed that he alongwith SI Sonal Raj, complainant and accused Salman had left at about 8:00 PM for Nanaksar Gurudwara via ANMOL Wazirabad Road on two motorcycle and SI Sonal Raj had recorded NOHRIA disclosure statement of accused Salman prior to leaving for Nananksar Digitally signed by ANMOL Gurudwara, where he disclosed about presence of co-accused at the NOHRIA Date: Gurudwara. On being confronted with the disclosure statement Ex. 2025.11.29 15:01:31 +0530 PW3/F, it was revealed that location of Nanaksar Gurudwara is not mentioned in the same, he has further admitted that the same does not contain the signature of the complainant but denied the complainant being absent when disclosure was recorded. He has further admitted FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 11 of 28 that no name as to the person whose thumb impression is there on disclosure Ex. PW3/F is mentioned. He has further deposed that they reached Gurudwara at about 8:30 PM and accused Sat Pal was apprehended at a distance of 100 meters from Nanaksar Gurudwara. SI Sonal Raj had requested some public persons to join the investigation but none agreed and all writing work regarding accused Sat Pal was done in Gurudwara. He has admitted that proceedings with respect to accused Sat Pal do not bear the signature of the complainant and also the seizure memo of recovery from accused Sat Pal does not bear his signature. He had denied the suggestion of falsely implicating accused Sat Pal or that accused Sat Pal was absent when all proceedings connected to him were conducted or that no recovery has been effected from accused Sat Pal.
7. PW5/Ct. Satya Prakash is police witness in the present matter and has deposed that on 13.10.2013, he was posted at PS-New ANMOL Usmanpur as constable and was on patrolling duty alongwith HC NOHRIA Manoj from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM. At about 6:10 PM, when they Digitally signed reached at Paltoon Pull, they met complainant Mohd. Iliyash who by ANMOL NOHRIA Date: narrated them the incident after which he alongwith complainant and 2025.11.29 15:02:03 +0530 HC Manoj chased accused persons towards the forest as stated by the complainant and after some distance they apprehended accused Salman FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 12 of 28 at the instance of the complainant. Upon his search, Rs.1,000/- in the denomination of Rs.100/- was recovered from his possession and same was identified by the complainant saying that accused had robbed him. Rs.1,000/- was kept in an envelope and sealed by the IO with the seal of MG and thereafter rukka was prepared and the currency notes were seized. Rukka was handed over to him for registration of FIR and he came back after registration of FIR to the spot and handed over the same to HC Manoj. IO/HC Manoj had called SI Sonal Raj on the spot and he came there. Thereafter, he alongwith SI Sonal Raj and HC Manoj arrested accused Sat Pal at the instance of accused Salman and upon his search, Rs.1,500/- in denomination of Rs.100/- was recovered alongwith one Voter ID Card and SIM card. The same was seized and sealed and thereafter accused persons were taken for medical examination and brought to the PS. IO recorded his statement. The witness had correctly identified the accused present in the court as well as the case property.
ANMOL NOHRIA 7.1. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the Digitally signed by ANMOL accused persons, PW5/Ct. Satya Prakash has deposed that he left for NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29 patrolling at about 8:00 AM and the complainant met them at about 15:02:12 +0530 100 meters from Paltoon Pull and complainant took five minutes to narrate the incident and was crying at that time after which they went FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 13 of 28 alongwith him in search of accused persons. He does not remember the direction in which complainant told them about fleeing of the accused, he had volunteered that complainant told them that they had fled in the jungle. He was on motorcycle and HC Manoj Giri accompanied the complainant by foot; accused Salman was apprehended at a distance of 200 meters from Paltoon Pull and was apprehended after identification by the complainant from kachi sadak and no specific mark is available there, after apprehension, accused Salman was taken to the place of incident and public persons were not passing there at that time. The search of accused was conducted at the place of apprehension and Rs.1,000/- was recovered from wearing half pant of accused Salman. Statement of the complainant was recorded at the spot by HC Manoj and he was sent to PS for registration of FIR, the money was seized and sealed at the spot with the seal of MG. He does not remember the time when SI Sonal Raj had come to the spot and accused Sat Pal was apprehended from jungle near Nanaksar Gurudwara at the instance of accused Salman and at that time complainant had also accompanied ANMOL them. He does not remember whether any specific mark was given to NOHRIA the currency note recovered from teh accused persons. He went to the Digitally signed by ANMOL PS with rukka at about 6:30 PM and he came back at the spot within NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29 30 minutes and does not remember at what time site plan was prepared 15:02:17 +0530 by the IO but the same was prepared at the instance of the complainant FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 14 of 28 and does not remember whether any site plan was prepared as to place of apprehension of accused Salman; they had gone on foot in search of accused Sat Pal in the jungle and he had signed all the documents prepared by the IO. Upon confrontation with Ex. PW3/B, he has admitted that the same does not bear his signatures but complainant had signed the same. They reached PS at about 7:30 PM, accused Salman was apprehended at the spot but he does not remember the time when he was apprehended and accused Sat Pal was apprehended within half an hour after the incident. The seal was handed over to him after using by the IO. He has denied the suggestion of falsely implicating the accused persons as main accused had run away.
8. PW6/SI Sonaj Raj is the 2nd IO in the present matter and has deposed on oath that on 13.10.2013, the present file was marked to him for further investigation and he alongwith Ct. Satya ANMOL Prakash went to the spot, wherein he met with first IO/HC Manoj, who NOHRIA disclosed the contents of the present case and also produced Digitally signed complainant and handed over accused Salman, seized case property by ANMOL NOHRIA Date: with its seizure memo. Thereafter, he prepared site plan at the instance 2025.11.29 15:02:22 +0530 of the complainant and recorded disclosure statement of accused Salman and thereafter arrested and personally searched him. He searched for co-accused and meanwhile accused Salman took them FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 15 of 28 near Nanaksar Gurudwara, wherein accused Sat Pal was found and he was apprehended by them. Accused Sat Pal was inquired at the spot and was found in possession of cash of Rs.1,500/-, one Idea SIM and ID card of the complainant which he seized at the spot and also prepared recovery site plan, recorded disclosure statement of accused Sat Pal, who disclosed name of another co-accused namely Nafees, after which accused Sat Pal was arrested and personally searched. Thereafter, both the accused took them to the place of occurrence and pointing out memo was prepared and statements of witnesses were recorded. Both accused were produced before the court and accused Sat Pal refused to participate in the TIP. One day PC of accused Sat Pal was taken for apprehension of accused Nafees but he could not be found. Thereafter, on 08.01.2014, accused Nafees joined the investigation at the PS on his own and he was arrested after inquiry, however, on 06.02.2014 TIP of accused Nafees failed and thus he was discharged in the present case thereafter, charge sheet was filed before the court. The witness correctly identified the accused persons present ANMOL in the court and case property has already been identified by the NOHRIA witnesses.
Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIADate: 8.1. In his cross examination by Ld. Counsel for the 2025.11.29 accused Sat Pal, PW6/SI Sonal Raj has deposed that he had prepared 15:02:26 +0530 FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 16 of 28 the site plan and same does not bear the signature of the complainant. Accused Sat Pal was arrested on 13.10.2013 at night around 10:00 PM near Nanaksar Gurudwara. The seizure memo from accused Sat Pal does not bear accused Sat Pal's signature. The complainant was not present at the time of recovery from accused Sat Pal. He has denied the suggestion that accused Sat Pal was not kept in muffled face as long as he remained in police custody, the witness was confronted with proceedings connected with accused Sat Pal, wherein muffled face is no where mentioned. The accused had refused TIP when he obtained PC remand of the accused; order dated 14.10.2013 was shown wherein accused Sat Pal was produced in muffled face. He has admitted that he did not ask any specific date of TIP but has volunteered that the date was provided by the concerned link Judge. Apart from this, another application of TIP of accused Sat Pal was moved and same was conducted on 23.10.2013. He had not affixed any identification on currency note after its recovery and the pointing out as stated in Ex. PW6/A is a distance of 500-700 meters from Paltoon Pull and in the ANMOL NOHRIA area of Yamuna Khadar. He has admitted that he had not shown the position of the accused and witness in site plan but denied not showing Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA the same for the reason that the same was prepared in their absence and has also admitted that the same does not bear the signature of Date:
2025.11.29 15:02:30 +0530 complainant and the accused. He has also admitted that arrest FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 17 of 28 proceedings with respect to accused Sat Pal does not bear Sat Pal's signatures. He has denied the suggestion of no recovery having been effected from accused Sat Pal or that he did not make any point out memo at accused Sat Pal's instance or that accused were not arrested from the spot as shown in the memo. However, he has admitted that accused Nafees was discharged due to non identification by the complainant or that pointing out memo Ex. PW6/A1 does not bear signature or name of any witness and also arrest memo of accused Sat Pal bears overwriting and that prior to this, accused Sat Pal was not known to him. Accused Sat Pal was arrested at the pointing out of accused Salman and complainant did not accompany him during the arrest of accused Sat Pal and arrest memo of accused Sat Pal does not bear signature of accused Salman. He had denied the suggestion about falsely implicating the accused or that no recovery has been effected from them or having deposing falsely.
ANMOL 8.2. PW6/SI Sonal Raj was not cross-examined by counsel for NOHRIA accused Salman despite being given opportunity. Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA Date:
9. All other witnesses have supported the case of the 2025.11.29 15:02:37 +0530 prosecution and proved the documents on record as well as the police FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 18 of 28 proceedings.
10. PE was closed on 22.11.2024 and on 27.01.2025 statement of accused persons under section 313 Cr. PC read with section 281 Cr. PC was recorded. Accused persons did not wish to lead DE.
11. Final arguments heard. Case record perused meticulously It has been argued by Ld. APP that all the ingredients of the offence have been fulfilled and prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution wherein the accused persons as well as case property has been identified; Ld. APP has prayed that accused persons be convicted accordingly.
12. Per contra, it has been argued for the defence that the complainant as well as the police official have not supported the case of the prosecution and there exists numerous inconsistencies in the ANMOL version of every witness and as such the recovery as well as the NOHRIA presence of accused persons is not proved. It is prayed that the benefit of doubt of the contradictions of witnesses be given to the accused Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA persons and they be acquitted.
Date: 2025.11.29 15:02:42 +053013. This Court has thoughtfully considered the material on FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 19 of 28 record and arguments advanced with due circumspection.
14. The prosecution has charged the accused persons for committing offence u/S 392/394/34 IPC. The offence punishable under S. 394 IPC has been defined as follows:
"394. Voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery.--If any person, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery, voluntarily causes hurt, such person, and any other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
and offence under S. 392 IPC has been defined as follows :-
"392. Punishment for robbery.- Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten ANMOL years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if the NOHRIA robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment may be Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA extended to fourteen years."Date: 2025.11.29 15:02:46 +0530
FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 20 of 28
15. The genus of the offence punishable under S. 394/392 IPC is robbery as defined in S. 390 IPC. Every robbery as defined in section 390 IPC is either theft or extortion in an aggravated form. For proving an offence of theft punishable under section 379 IPC. The following ingredients are to be proved:-
(i) dishonest intention
(ii) moving of the property i.e. physical displacement.
(iii) without the consent of the owner and for proving an offence of extortion under section 383 IPC. The following ingredients are to be proved :
(i) intentionally putting in fear of injury to the person or any other.
(ii) dishonest inducement of the person put under fear.
(iii) delivery of property or valuable security.
and these ingredients coupled with voluntary hurt or wrongful restrain or their attempt or fear of instant death or instant hurt would amount to offence of robbery.
16. The identity of the accused with above mentioned ANMOL NOHRIA ingredient is also to be proved.
Digitally signed by ANMOLNOHRIA 17. The present case was registered on the basis of complaint Date: 2025.11.29 15:02:50 +0530 by PW2 and thereafter recoveries were effected at the spot in the FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 21 of 28 presence of PW3, PW5 & PW6. Hence, PW2, PW3, PW5 & PW6 are the star witnesses of the prosecution and their testimonies require careful scrutiny and upon scrutiny of the testimonies, the following observations can be made :-
a). PW2/complainant has stated in his initial statement to the police that he was robbed by three persons and has also specifically stated the role of each of the accused, however in his testimony before the court dated 02.09.2015, he has only stated about two persons, though later on 23.10.2018 he has improvised his version and stated about three persons. Further, as per his initial statement as per which Ex. PW2/A he had kept his voter card and mobile phone in the pocket of the shirt and same was taken out by one of the accused, however, in his testimony before the court, he has stated that he has kept his ID card in the shirt pocket, Rs.5,000/- in back pocket of his pant and mobile phone in ANMOL the right pocket of his pant and the other accused present in the NOHRIA court i.e. Sat Pal had taken out Rs.1,000/- and identity card from Digitally signed his shirt, Rs.5,000/- from back pocket of the pant and mobile by ANMOL NOHRIA phone from right pocket of the pant; and has totally changed the Date: 2025.11.29 15:02:54 +0530 roles stated by him in his initial complaint in Ex. PW2/A. Thus, in view of the contradictions above, the complainant is himself not sure as to the position of articles kept by him which were robbed FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 22 of 28 by the accused persons from him and is also not sure as to the number of accused persons or their specific roles in the said offence.
b). Further, perusal of the testimony of PW2/complainant shows that in his testimony he has stated that the accused persons forcibly took him towards the jungle whereas nothing of this sought is stated in his initial statement Ex. PW2/A. Further, perusal of site plan Ex. PW6/A shows that no jungle is shown as the point of incident on the same. This fact itself is another contradiction in the version of the complainant.
c). Further, as per the version of the prosecution accused Salman was apprehended by the police party which included PW3 & PW5 at the instance of the complainant after running behind the accused persons immediately after the incident as police had reached at the spot. However, perusal of testimony of PW2 shows ANMOL incoherence with the same as he has stated that the accused NOHRIA persons had taken him into a jungle but no explanation has been Digitally signed by ANMOL NOHRIA offered as to how he met the police officials in the jungle, further Date: 2025.11.29 15:02:58 +0530 as per his version accused Salman was apprehended after chasing him for half an hour but the distance of the chase was around 300 FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 23 of 28 meters which itself is doubtful. Perusal of the testimony of PW3 shows that accused Salman was apprehended at a distance of about 200 meters from the Paltoon Pull after consumption of five minutes in inquiry with the complainant and seizure memo was prepared at around 6:00 - 6:15 PM; this fact itself is contrary to the version of the complainant that accused Salman was chased for about half an hour before apprehension and the recovery itself has been effected before the half an hour stated by the complainant expired.
d). Further, PW3 in his testimony had stated that after apprehension accused was taken to Paltoon Pull where is search was conducted and public persons were requested to join the investigation before the seizure, however, PW5 who was accompanying PW3 had stated in his testimony that the search of ANMOL NOHRIA the accused was conducted at the place of apprehension, which is in the jungle as per testimonies of PW2, PW3 & PW5, and no Digitally signed public persons were present at the spot. Thus, there exits another by ANMOL NOHRIA contradiction between the version of the witnesses as to Date:
apprehension and recovery from accused Salman. 2025.11.29 15:03:02 +0530
e). Interestingly, as per the version of the prosecution the FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 24 of 28 accused Sat Pal was apprehended at the disclosure of accused Salman, who told about the exact whereabouts of accused Sat Pal and in the presence of the complainant, however, no such fact is mentioned in disclosure statement of accused Salman Ex. PW3/F and the same also does not bear the signatures of the complainant.
Though, as per the version of PW3 and PW5 complainant had accompanied them to the place where accused Sat Pal was arrested, however, this is in contradiction to the version of PW6/2nd IO, who has categorically stated that complainant was not present at the time of recovery from accused Sat Pal and also with the testimony of PW2 which is silent on the aspect of recovery or arrest of accused Sat Pal and in which he has stated after the arrest of accused Salman, he had gone to the PS and remained there for about 2-2.5 hours and the same is in line with the arrest memo of accused Sat Pal Ex. PW3/H which neither ANMOL bears his signature and also bears the time of 10:30 PM. NOHRIA Digitally signed by ANMOL f). Further, PW6/IO has stated that the present file was NOHRIA marked to him for further investigation and he alongwith PW5 Date:
2025.11.29 15:03:07 +0530 reached the spot after registration of the FIR and met PW3. However, PW3 in his testimony stated that it is during the period when PW5 was sent for registration of FIR that PW6 arrived at FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 25 of 28 the spot and after which he alongwith complainant/PW2, PW6/2nd IO and accused Salman went to the Nanaksar Gurudwara; but PW5 in his testimony has stated that PW3 had called PW6/2nd IO to the spot and he had handed over the copy of the FIR and original rukka to PW3 and he does not remember at what time PW6 had come to the spot and all of them i.e. PW2, PW3, PW6, accused Salman and he himself had gone for apprehending accused Sat Pal. Further, PW3 has stated that they had gone in search of accused Sat Pal on motorcycle, whereas PW5 has stated that they had gone on search of accused Sat Pal on foot. From the above discussion it is clear that neither of the members of the police party is sure as to how and when who arrived at the spot and who was present in what proceedings and how they transported themselves for conducting the proceedings and even about the time line of the proceeding specially when as per PW1 the rukka/Ex. PW3/A was received at around 8:00 PM ANMOL but as per PW5 and PW3, the FIR was received at the spot at NOHRIA around 7:15 PM. Thus, there is no coherency in the statement of Digitally signed by any of the police officials as to what had transpired on the day of ANMOL NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29 15:03:11 +0530 the event and during their investigation after meeting the complainant.
FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 26 of 28
18. From the above discussion no coherency can be found in the version of the prosecution as none of the witnesses of the prosecution have corroborated each other or the documents on any aspect; rather they have contradicted each other as well as themselves on numerous aspects thereby unable to conclusively establish the reason, presence and time line of the events, thus creating a doubt upon the whole version to prove the presence of witnesses as well as the ingredients of the offence. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr. S.L. Goswami vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 197 SCC (Crl.) 258 that the accused person is entitled to benefit of doubt where the onus of proving the ingredients of the offence is not discharged by the prosecution.
19. It is also not in dispute that the place of incident is a public place and it has been admitted by the witnesses that public persons were present at the spot. No sincere efforts were made to make ANMOL NOHRIA a public person to join the investigation. A public witness would have been an important link in the chain of circumstances to support the Digitally signed prosecution version. The failure to do so by the police officer is a fact by ANMOL NOHRIA Date:
that draws negative inference in the version put forward by the 2025.11.29 15:03:16 +0530 prosecution.
FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 27 of 28
20. Thus, the prosecution has not been able to establish beyond reasonable doubt that offence punishable under section 394/392/34 IPC has been committed and accused persons are entitled to the benefit of doubt arising from the aforementioned contradiction, therefore, accused 1). Sat Pal S/o Nathu Singh and 2). Salman S/o Md. Kirani are found not guilty of committing offence u/S 392/411/34 IPC, they stand acquitted in the present case.
21. Accused persons are directed furnish bail bond and surety bond in the sum of ₹10,000/- each u/s 437A Cr.P.C and directed to be present before the Ld. Appellate Court as and when directed.
22. This judgment contains 29 pages. This judgment has been signed and pronounced by the undersigned in open court.
23. Let a copy of the judgment be uploaded on the official website of District Courts, Karkardooma forthwith.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
ANMOL Digitally signed by
ANMOL NOHRIA
NOHRIA Date: 2025.11.29
15:03:23 +0530
Announced in open court ( ANMOL NOHRIA )
today i.e. 29th Nov., 2025 JMFC-02/NE/KKD Courts/Delhi
FIR No. 376/2013 P.S-New Usmanpur Page No. 28 of 28