Delhi District Court
Ram Nagina @Rahim Khan vs State on 30 April, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SH. SATISH KUMAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE- 03, NORTH DISTRICT
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.
FIR No.328/2005
u/s 384/511/419/34 IPC
PS Adarsh Nagar
First Crl. Appeal No. 213/2019
Prakash Joshi
S/o Sh. Jagdish Joshi
R/o H.No.407, Gali No.10,
Adarsh Mohalla, Maujpur,
Delhi. ........Appellant
Versus
The State
(N.C.T. of Delhi). .......Respondent
Second Crl Appeal No.214/2019 Anil Lodhi, S/o Sh. Puran Chand Lodhi, R/o H.No.605, Gali No.5, Pul Mithai, Shivaji Road, Azad Market, Delhi. ........Appellant Versus The State (N.C.T. of Delhi). .......Respondent Third Crl Appeal No.215/2019 Ram Nagina @ Rahim Khan, S/o Sh. Budhi Ram Yadav, Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 1 of 11 R/o C-1375, Jahangir Puri, Delhi. ........Appellant Versus The State (N.C.T. of Delhi). .......Respondent Fourth Crl Appeal No.216/2019 Firoz Khan, S/o Sh. Chhaban Khan, R/o E-1584, Jahangir Puri, Delhi. ........Appellant Versus The State (N.C.T. of Delhi). .......Respondent Date of filing of Criminal Appeal : 26.11.2019 Date on which arguments were heard : 30.04.2024 Date of pronouncement of judgment : 30.04.2024 Decision : All the four appeals dismissed COMMON ORDER OF SEPARATE FOUR APPEALS U/S 374 CR.P.C. AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT DATED 31.10.2019 AND ORDER ON POINT OF SENTENCE DATED 02.11.2019 PASSED BY LD. CMM, NORTH, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI WHEREBY ALL THE FOUR APPELLANTS WERE SENTENCED TO UNDERGO RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT FOR A PERIOD OF 2 YEARS FOR OFFENCE U/S 419/34 IPC AND A FINE OF RS.10,000/- AND IN DEFAULT THEREOF TO UNDERGO SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT FOR A PERIOD OF 30 DAYS. FURTHER SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT FOR A PERIOD Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 2 of 11 OF ONE YEAR U/S 384/511/34 IPC.
1. Vide common order, this court shall dispose off the four separate appeals filed separately by all the appellants/convicted Prakash Joshi, Anil Lodhi, Ram Nagina @ Rahim Khan and Firoz Khan u/s 374 Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment dated 31.10.2019 and order on sentence dated 02.11.2019 whereby all the four appellants were held guilty for commission of offence punishable u/s 384/511/419/34 IPC and were awarded sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years for offence punishable u/s 419/34 IPC and a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days. Further simple imprisonment for a period of one year for offence punishable u/s 384/511/34 IPC.
2. Succinctly, the brief material facts to decide all the four appeals are that the FIR was registered u/s 384/511/408/419/468/34 IPC & 138 Electricity Act.2003 against all the appellants/ accused persons with the allegation that on dated 08.07.2005, complainant Surender Singh, Manager (Enforcement), NDPL alongwith his staff namely Ravi Bharti, Birender Prasad and Sandeep Das went to the office of Crime Branch wherein they were shared with the information regarding tampering of electricity meter. The raiding team was constituted at about 2:40 pm. At about 3:00 pm, they reached at Azadpur Bus Stand. They took their position and at about 3:30 pm, one white Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 3 of 11 colour Maruti Van bearing registration number DL4CH 5114 came in front of Chauhan Dry Cleaner's Shop. In the meantime, one motorcycle bearing number DL8S AB 3221 also came and stopped there. The secret informer identified the motorcyclist as Ram Nagina who alongwith three occupants of the van was trying to extort money from Dharmender Chauhan, owner of Chauhan Dry Cleaner on the pretext of tampering of electricity meter. IO thereafter deputed HC Radha Krishan as decoy customer and their official Ravi Bharti was deputed as shadow witness. They were asked to hear the conversation between the owner of the shop namely Dharmender Chauhan and the said persons. They went to the shop and made designated signal and upon receiving the signal, all the accused persons namely Ram Nagina @ Rahim Khan, Anil Lodhi, Prakash Joshi and Firoz Khan were apprehended. All the accused persons impersonated themselves as employees of NDPL. The meter in question at the shop of Dharmender Chauhan was checked which was found to be tampered. It was found that the accused Ram Nagina, who used to work with the contractor of NDPL, during installation of meter, he tampered the meter. The said meter was photographed and proceedings were initiated with respect to the tampering of meter as well as the present meter. After registration of FIR, the incriminating documents were recovered from the possession of the accused persons i.e fake ID card claiming themselves to be employee of NDPL/ BSES Yamuna, visiting cards showing themselves to be involved in Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 4 of 11 the said work of electricity bills, booklets concerning the installation report of electricity meters, electrical instruments for installation etc. Investigation was carried out and the charge sheet u/s 384/511/408/419/468/34 IPC & 138 Electricity Act.2003 was filed against all the four appellants/accused.
3. The chargesheet u/s 384/511/408/419/468/34 IPC and u/s 138 Electricity Act was filed against all the appellants/accused persons and after hearing the submissions of ld. Counsel for all the accused persons, the charge u/s 384/511/419/34 IPC was framed against all the four appellants/accused by the ld. Trial court. Separate charge were framed against accused Ram Nagina for offence punishable u/s 408/468 IPC vide order dated 05.10.2006 to which all the appellants/accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The charge u/s 138 Electricity Act was not framed against any of the accused. After recording the prosecution evidence as well as statement u/s 313 Cr. PC of the appellants/accused persons, Ld. Trial court was pleased to held guilty all the four appellants/accused persons and convicted them.
4. Aggrieved against the impugned judgment dated 31.10.2019 and impugned order on sentence dated 02.11.2019, the present appeal has been filed on the following grounds :-
(a) That, the ld. Trial court has passed the impugned judgement without appreciating the true facts and the Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 5 of 11 impugned judgement is in contravention of the provisions of law and is based upon conjectures and surmises.
b) That, the ld. Trial court has also overlooked the basic principle of law which says that while convicting a person, the prosecution must established such circumstances and evidence which gave only impression of the guilt of the accused and there is no such doubt whatever in favour of the accused or against the prosecution.
c) That, the ld. Trial court has also overlooked the defence raised and proved by the appellant/accused.
d) That, the ld. Trial court has also failed to appreciate the testimony of PW1, PW3, PW5, PW6, PW9, PW10 and PW13.
The court has also not appreciated the fact that if there was recovery of any vehicle, certainly, if the vehicle was without RC or without DL, appropriate proceedings was to be taken.
By way of the four separate appeals filed separately by all the appellants/accused, it is prayed that the impugned judgment dated 31.10.2019 and order on Sentence dated 02.11.2019 passed by Ld. CMM, North, District, Rohini Courts, New Delhi in case FIR No.328/2005 u/s 384/511/419/408/468/34 IPC PS Adarsh Nagar may kindly be set aside and all the four appeals may kindly be allowed.
5. The notice of all these four appeals were served upon the State and ld. APP for the State has submitted that he does not want to Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 6 of 11 file the reply of any of the appeal and will argue straightaway. It is submitted by ld. APP for the State that the manner in which the offence was committed by all the appellants/accused persons has been duly proved by the prosecution and the appeal filed by all the four appellants is without any merit and make a submission that the same may kindly be dismissed.
6. Having heard the submissions made by Ld. Counsel for all the four appellants/accused as well as Ld. APP for the State and having gone through the grounds of appeal as well as the impugned judgment dated 31.10.2019 and order on sentence dated 02.11.2019 passed by Ld. Trial Court and having gone through the trial court record as well as the testimony of the material witnesses, this court is of the considered view that the testimony of PW7 namely Dharmender Chauhan who was the shopkeeper of Chauhan Dry Cleaner who has deposed that he is the owner of the Dry Clean shop situated at Azadpur, Near Pyare Lal Chowk which was raided. PW7 has also deposed that around 12 years ago in the afternoon hours, accused Ram Nagina and his two associates came at his shop and told him that there was tampering in his meter. They demanded money from him to hush-up the matter but he told them he has not tampered any meter and refused to pay the money but his neighbours adviced him to settle the matter. While talks regarding process of arranging money was going on, police raided the shop. This witness has categorically identified all the Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 7 of 11 four appellants/accused persons and the identity card claiming to be the employee of NDPL was recovered from the possession of appellant/accused in his presence.
7. That, PW2 Hari Om who is also the shopkeeper in the vicinity of Village Azadpur also deposed that he was dishonestly induced by accused Ram Nagina in the year 2005 in connection with the installation of the Electricity meter and there being defect in it. He was threatened by all the accused persons for imposition of heavy fine as well as imprisonment. They also demanded money to get the matter settled. He accordingly paid Rs.10,000/- to them and he had joined the investigation of this case.
8. That, PW6 Surender Singh, Manager (Enforcement), NDPL is the complainant and has deposed that on 08.07.2005, he alongwith his team consisting of Mr. Ravi Bharti, Mr. Sandeep Dass (ET) and photographer went to the Crime Branch Office, Prashant Vihar at about 10.30 -11.00 am and from there, they all alongwith team member of Crime Branch went to shop of Chauhan dry Clearner, Azad pur Delhi. The secret informer had informed that the suspects would be coming there and accordingly, they took their positions by hiding themselves. They started waiting for the suspects who were stated to be involved in extortion of money from NDPL Customers on the pretext of meter tampering by customers. After about half an Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 8 of 11 hour, one white coloured Maruti Van reached there alongwith one motorcycle. The occupants of the van and motorcycle rider went to the shop of Chauhan Drycleaner. The Crime Team members HC Radha Krishan alongwith Ravi Bharti had gone to the shop to hear the talks between the suspects and the shop owner. When they received signal regarding the confirmation of said information of extortion, they all rushed to the Dryclean shop. Four persons were apprehended at the shop by the Crime Branch Team. The electricity meter of the shop was checked and found to be tampered i.e. Resistance to slow the meter. The documents regarding the tampering of meter was prepared. Police seized the recovered articles i.e. Identity Card and Electricity Bill. Upon making inquiry, they found that all the four accused persons were not the employee of NDPL nor they were workers of the contractor.
9. It is worth mentioning that the allegations against the accused persons are that the appellant/accused Ram Nagina was working with Technicom Company which was sub-contractor of NDPL and during that period, the appellant/accused Ram Nagina being the employee used to visit the sites and replaced the old meters with new one. PW11 Parminder Singh, official from Technicom Company has deposed that Ram Nagina was their employee who used to visit the sites and replace the old meters with new one. Later on, he came to know that there used to be tampering in the meter by some of their employees Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 9 of 11 and they have removed Ram Nagina from the job due to the said complaints.
10. That, there is a complete corroboration by the testimony of PW7 Dharmender Chauhan, owner of the Dryclean shop and PW11 Dharmender Singh, official from Technicom Company with the testimony of PW6 Surender Singh who is the Manager (Enforcement) in the NDPL and has made the complaint against the appellants/accused persons.
11. That, all the appellants/accused persons were apprehended at the spot having fake identity cards of Technicom Company who is the sub-contractor of NDPL and in their bag, they were having the instruments which are being used to reopen the seal of the meters. Therefore, considering all the facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered view that the impugned judgment passed by the ld. Trial court is a well reasoned judgment. This court has no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the ld. Trial court of dated 31.10.2019. Therefore, all the four appeals stand dismissed.
12. Ld. counsel for all the appellants has submitted that all the four appellants belongs to poor strata of the society and facing the trial for the last 20 years and are not involved in any other criminal case of similar nature and make a submission that the sentence awarded by the ld. Trial court to all the appellants may Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019, 215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 10 of 11 kindly be modified.
13. Having heard the submissions made by Ld. counsel for all the four appellants and considering all the facts and circumstances, the sentence awarded by the Ld. Trial Court to the appellants/ accused, is converted/modified to the extent that all appellants/ accused are sentenced u/s 384/511/419/34 IPC for the period already undergone with fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each to be deposited by all the appellants/accused in the office of the Rohini Courts Bar Association Welfare Fund. Reliance is placed upon Sundram Vs. Sub Inspector of Police Crl. Appeal No.536/2021, Special Petition (Crl) no. 5985 of 2016 decided by Hon'ble Apex Court of India on dated 30.06.2021.
14. Bail Bond u/s 437-A Cr. PC furnished at the time of filing of the appeal shall remain on record for further period of six months till the period of appeal is over.
15. TCR be sent back to the ld. Trial court alongwith copy of this order.
16. Appeal file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (Satish Kumar)
on 30.04.2024 Addl. Sessions Judge-03, (North)
Rohini Courts, Delhi
Crl. Appeal No.213/2019, 214/2019,
215/2019 and 216/2019 Page No. 11 of
11