Delhi District Court
State vs Ashok Kumar Goyal on 6 August, 2024
CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004
IN THE COURT OF MS. SONAM GUPTA
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (WEST)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
In the matter of :
State
Vs.
Ashok Kumar Goyal and Ors
FIR No.572/2003
P.S Hari Nagar/AEC
JUDGMENT
1. Sr. No. of case 69266/2016 2. Date of institution 08.06.2004 3. Name of the complainant SI Jagdish Kumar
4. Date of commission of offence On or before 04.11.2003.
5. Name of accused 1. Accused Ajay Kumar
S/o Sh. Suraj Bhan
r/o RZ-123 A/313, West Sagar
Pur, Geetanjali Park, Gali
No.3, New Delhi-110046.
2. Accused Kapil Tanwar
s/o Late Sh. Rajpal.
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 1 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 r/o WZ-1026, Nagal Raya, New Delhi-110046.
3. Accused Ashok Kumar Goyal S/o Sh. Jagat Ram r/o 3352/8, Jai Mata Market, Trinagar, Delhi.
4. Accused Neeraj Kumar s/o Sh. Rajender Singh r/o WZ-1027, Padam Basti, Nangal Raya, New Delhi.
5. Accused B. P. Sharma s/o Sh. Asha Ram Sharma r/o 303/304, Ram Pal Extension, Loni, Ghaziabad, U.P.
6. Accused Jagdish s/o Sh. Karan Singh (Declared as Proclaimed person vide order dated 22.01.2009).
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 2 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004
6. Offence complained of U/s 474/420/120-B IPC against all the accused persons.
7. Plea of accused Pleaded not gulity
8. Date of reserving the judgment 31.07.2024
9. Final order Acquittal 10 Date of such judgment 06.08.2024 BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR THE DECISION OF THE CASE
1. The present case of the prosecution is related to possession and trading of forged stamp papers. As per the prosecution, on 04.11.2003 one secret information was received that two persons would come with forged stamp papers for the purposes of selling them off and that they were selling the stamp papers at half the rates, this information was developed and raiding party was constituted and Ct. Rakesh was deployed as decoy customer and he was asked to strike a deal and he was also given a note of Rs.500/- for the purposes of purchasing forged stamp papers, on the same day at around 09:30PM, accused Ajay Kumar and Kapil Tanwar were found coming as per secret information and they both came on their motorcycle and scooter FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 3 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 and Ct. Rakesh had a conversation with accused Ajay Kumar, Ct. Rakesh gave accused Ajay Kumar a note of Rs.500/- which was handed by accused Ajay Kumar to his co-accused Kapil Tanwar and accused Kapil Tanwar took out two stamp papers of Rs.500/- each, then the signal was flashed and all the other police officials reached at spot and apprehended both the accused persons, accused Kapil Tanwar was having one polythene bag which was searched and it was found containing 74 forged stamp papers, accused Ajay was also concealing one polythene bag which was found containing three more stamp papers of value of Rs.5000/- each, then both the accused were accordingly arrested and their respective disclosure statements were recorded, then they claimed that the stamp papers were supplied by accused Neeraj Kumar, accused Neeraj Kumar was accordingly apprehended and he claimed that the stamp papers were supplied by B.P. Sharma, the house of accused B.P. Sharma was searched and from there nine stamp papers were recovered which were found to be forged ones, accused B. P. Sharma further disclosed that all these stamp papers had been supplied by accused Ashok Kumar Goyal and accused Jagdish, then they were also arrested and present charge-sheet was prepared. After thorough investigation, it was found that all the accused persons in connivance with each-other formed a conspiracy to forge stamp papers and sell them to earn profit and FIR U/s FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 4 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 420/471/474/120-B/34 IPC was registered against them. Upon completion of investigation into the allegations against the accused persons carried out by the Investigating Officer, a police report under Section 173 Cr.PC was filed in the court.
2. The provisions of Section of 207 Cr.P.C. were complied with. On appearance of accused persons before Court and prima facie case having been made out, charge for the offence of U/s 420/474/120-B IPC was framed against accused Ajay Kumar, Ashok Kumar Goyal, Kapil Tanwar, B.P. Sharma, Neeraj Kumar and Jagdish to which, all of them pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. During the trial of the present case, accused Jagdish was declared proclaimed person vide order dated 22.01.2009 passed by my Ld. Predecessor as accused Jagdish stopped appearing before the Court.
4. To prove the allegations against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses:-
(a). HC Prahlad Singh, was examined as PW1, who deposed that on 05.11.2003, he was posted at PS Hari Nagar as Duty Officer, FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 5 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 his duty hours were from 12:00AM (mid-night) to 08:00AM in the morning, on that day, at about 12:05AM (mid-night), he received one rukka through Ct. Rakesh which was sent by SI Jagdish, on the basis of rukka, he recorded FIR No. 572/03 Ex.PW1/A and further investigation was handed over to SI Sudhir. PW1 was duly cross-
examined by Ld. Counsels for the accused persons.
(b). HC Rajender Prasad, was examined as PW2, who deposed that on 31.03.2004, he was posted at PS Paschim Vihar as Duty Officer and his duty hours were from 05:00AM to 01:00AM, on that day at about 07:00PM, he received one rukka through HC Ramesh Chand which was sent by Inspector Naphey Singh, Anti Snatching Cell (West), on the basis of rukka, he recorded FIR No. 572/03 Ex. PW2/A (OSR). PW2 was not cross-examined by the accused persons.
(c). Sh. Rajesh Kumar, was examined as PW3, who deposed that he had purchased House No. 764 from its previous owner Hemant Tomar and he does not know who was residing in the abovesaid flat prior to him and even does not know about the work/profession carried out by the previous resident in the said premises.
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 6 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 Ld. APP for the State was permitted to cross-examine the witness as he was resiling from his previous statement made before the police. PW3 denied the suggestion that while dealing regarding the purchase of said house from its owner, he visited that house and as such he was aware about the previous residents/occupants of that house. PW3 stated that when he purchased and visited the house before purchase, it was in vacant. PW3 further stated that the police met him in connection with this case but his statement was never recorded. PW3 further denied the suggestion that the accused Jagdish and Ashok Goyal were residing in house No. 76-4 as tenants of Hemant Tomar and both the accused persons were running a computer and offset printing press in the above said premises. PW3 was question that whether the premises which he purchased was used for residential purposes or for commercial purposes, to which he replied that when he had gone to inspect the house for the purpose of purchasing the house, it was being used as a godown. PW3 further denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely or that he has been won over by the accused persons. PW3 was not cross-examined by Ld. Counsels for the accused persons.
(d). Sh. Hemant Tomar, was examined as PW4, who deposed that by way of a lease deed entered into between him and accused FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 7 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 Ashok Kumar Goyal, the premises no. 764/46, Onkar Nagar, Block-A, Tri Nagar, Delhi was given on rent by him to accused Ashok Kumar Goyal, then he handed over copy of lease deed to the police officials Ex. PW4/A (running into eight pages). PW4 further deposed that the police recorded his statement when he handed over copy of lease deed to them. PW4 further deposed that the accommodation was provided to Ashok Kumar Goyal for residential purposes. PW4 further deposed that the is physically handicapped person and on two occasions when he visited the said premises, he found it locked and as such he is not aware whether accused was carrying on any business. PW4 correctly identified accused Ashok Kumar Goyal present in the Court as his tenant.
Ld. APP for the State was permitted to cross-examine the witness as he was resiling from previous statement made before police. PW4 stated that he does not know accused Jagdish and his agreement was solely with accused Ashok Kumar Goyal. PW4 denied the suggestion that he had stated in his statement recorded by the IO that both accused Ashok Kumar Goyal and Jagdish were the tenants of his said premise and they were running an offset printing press along with some computers. PW4 further denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely or that he has been won over by the accused Jagdish.
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 8 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 PW4 was not cross-examined by Ld. Counsels for the accused persons.
(e). Sh. Dalbir Singh, was examined as PW5, who deposed that on 10.12.2003, he was posted in Anti Extortion Cell as a Constable, on that day he joined the investigation of the present case and he along with SI Sudhir Kumar and accused Neeraj reached at H. No.69A. Gali No.2. Vir Nagar, West Sagar Pur, accused Neeraj led them to that house and he pointed out towards this house and submitted that B.P. Sharma who had handed over the stamp papers to the accused resides in that house, then IO asked 3-4 public persons to join investigation and one out of them namely Satish Kumar resident of same locality joined the investigation, then they reached at the said residence of B.P. Sharma where his wife Usha Sharma met and she told that accused B.P. Sharma was out of station, then in the presence of Satish Kumar, House No.69A. Gali No.2 was searched, during the search 8 stamps papers of Rs.500/- denomination and one stamp paper of Rs.100/- denomination were recovered from small iron almirah (of bhura colour) kept in the bed room, all the stamp papers were kept in an envelop and were sealed with the seal of SK, the recovered stamp papers were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/A, the pointing out memo of the house vide memo Ex.PW5/B, seal after use FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 9 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 was handed over to him and the said envelop was deposited in the Malkhana of PS Hari Nagar, then accused was put into lock-up. PW5 was duly cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused B.P. Sharına and was not cross-examined by other accused persons.
(f). Sh. Satish Kumar, was examined as PW6, who deposed that on 10.12.2003, he was present at his shop when daughter of accused B.P Sharma came there and told him that police had come to her house and is calling two neighbors then he went there and 4-5 persons in civil clothes were there, one of them asked him to put his signatures on one document saying that house of accused has been raided upon and no allegation of taking away of any jewelry articles may be put by accused in future and his signature are required on it, firstly he refused, but when he said that his property is not being transferred in his name by signing of this document, then he put his signature on it. PW6 further deposed that his signatures were taken on two other documents, then he was asked to leave the house and he does not know anything more.
Ld. APP was permitted to cross-examine the witness as the witness is resiling from his previous statement. PW6 stated that his signatures were taken on two blank papers and his statement was not recorded by the said persons. PW6 further stated that on asking FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 10 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 identity documents, the said persons had shown their Identity card from Crime Branch. PW6 denied the suggestion that the house of accused B.P Sharma was pointed out by accused Neeraj Kumar, on which the pointing out memo was prepared by the police, which was witnessed by him. PW6 further stated that he does not know any Neeraj Kumar. PW6 was confronted with the statement Mark A, where it is so recorded. PW6 admitted that Ex. PW5/B bears his signature at point B. PW6 further denied the suggestion that in his presence house of B.P Sharma was searched and 8 stamps papers of Rs. 500/- and one stamp paper of Rs.100/- were recovered from one small iron almirah of brown colour kept in the corner of bedroom, which were kept inside one envelop and sealed with seal of S.K and seized by the police, after confronting from statement Mark A, where it is so recorded. PW6 admitted that Ex. PW5/A bears his signature at point B, however he stated that he had put his signatures at the place specifically pointed out by the police. PW6 further stated that he know accused B.P Sharma since last 9 years. PW6 further stated that his house was adjacent to the house of accused. PW6 further stated that his relations with accused were cordial. PW6 denied the suggestion that being the immediate neighbour of accused B.P Sharma he had given a false statement before the Hon'ble Court in order to save him from punishment. PW6 further denied the suggestion that he is FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 11 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 deposing falsely. PW6 was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused B.P Sharma and was not cross-examined by other accused persons.
(g). HC Sri Ram, was examined as PW7, who deposed that on 05.11.2003, he was posted at P.S Hari Nagar as MHC(M), on that day SI Sudhir Kumar had deposited four pullanda sealed with the seal of JK, one motorcycle no DL-1SP-1706 and one scooter number DL- 4SAL-3684, in Malkhana vide serial number 2341. PW7 further deposed that on 10.12.2003 another pullanda sealed with the seal of SK was deposited by SI Sudhir Kumar in the Malkhana which was recorded at serial number 2383 in Malkhana register. PW further deposed that on 07.03.04 three pullandas sealed with seal of JK and one pullanda sealed with the seal of SK, were sent to Indian Security Press Nasik, vide RC no. 33/21/04 through HC Anand. PW7 further deposed that the motorcycle was released on superdari on 15.11.2003 by the order of Ld A.C.M.M to the registered owner Sh. Suraj Bhan. PW7 further deposed that the scooter was released on superdari on 19.11.2003 by the order of Ld A.C.M.M to the registered owner Sh. Nand Lal Thakur. PW7 further deposed that all the sealed pullandas were kept intact during the period they remained in the Malkhana under his supervision and no tampering was effected during this FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 12 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 period in the pullandas. PW7 further deposed that he has brought Malkhana register No.19 containing the said entries, Ex. PW7/A(OSR) and Ex. PW7/B(OSR) and the RC register with entry No. 33/21/04 as Ex. PW7/C(OSR). PW7 was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused accused B.P Sharma and was not cross- examined by Ld. Counsel for other accused persons.
(h). HC Anand Singh, was examined as PW8, who deposed that on 07.03.2004, he was posted at anti-extortion cell, Crime Branch, on that day, he collected case property from MHC (M) PS Hari Nagar and the same was deposited at India Security Press, Nasik vide RC No.33/21/2004, then he returned back from Nasik and handed over received copy to MHC(M) and went to Nasik alongwith Ct. Lalit, during his custody the case property has not been tempered. PW8 was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused Neeraj and not cross-examined by other accused persons.
(i). Inspector Ram Chander, was examined as PW9, who deposed that on 26.04.2004, when he was investigating the case FIR No. 333/2004, PS Sultan Puri, the IO of the present case, met him and obtained relevant documents, then he arrested the accused Ashok Kumar Goyal, present in the court today, in the above said case and he FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 13 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 handed over the photocopies of relevant documents to the IO of the present matter i.e case FIR No. 572/03, P.S Hari Nagar. PW9 was not cross-examined by accused persons.
(j). Ct. Rakesh Kumar, was examined as PW10, who deposed that on 04.11.2003, he was posted at Anti-Extortion Cell, Crime Branch, R. K. Puram, on that day, he alongwith SI Jagdish, Ct Dalbir were on patrolling duty in South West District, during patrolling when they reached near Aggarwal Restaurant, Sagar Pur, at about 08:30PM, one secret informer met SI Jagdish and told that some persons are selling fake stamp papers near Hari Nagar police station, Surya Gas Agency, then IO asked 4-5 public persons to join the investigation but none obliged, after that they reached near Surya Gas Agency and started waiting for accused persons, at about 09:15PM, the IO/SI Jagdish handed over to him one note of Rs. 500/- denomination bearing no. 8BS387435 after signing the same and told him to work as decoy customer, then at about 09:30PM, they noticed some persons coming from the back side of P.S Hari Nagar, those persons were identified by secret informer and he was told to revolve his hand on head after completion of deal, then he alongwith note of Rs.500/- denomination, went to accused persons and he started dealing with accused persons, he asked those persons to purchase two stamp papers FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 14 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 of Rs.500/- each, The accused persons told him that they will sell the above said two stamp papers for Rs.500/-, then accused Kapil handed over to him two stamp papers of Rs.500/- from the dickey of scooter and he hand over the note of Rs.500/- to accused Ajay. Then he revolved his hand on the head and remaining police party arrived at the spot, the accused persons were apprehended by the staff and 74 fake stamp papers were recovered from possession of accused Kapil which were seized vide memo Ex.PW10/A, the total value of stamp papers were Rs.33,400/-, three stamp papers were recovered from possession of accused Ajay Kumar of worth Rs.1500/- and the said stamp papers were seized vide memo Ex.PW10/B, then he produced the stamp papers which were purchased from both accused and they were seized vide memo Ex.PW10/C, the currency note of Rs.500/- denomination bearing no. 8BS387435 was seized vide memo Ex.PW10/D, the note was handed over to him before deal vide memo Ex.PW10/E, then IO prepared rukka and handed over the same to him for registration of the case, then he went to police station and got the case registered and came back to the spot and handed over the rukka alongwith copy of FIR to SI Sudhir Kumar, who later on arrived at the spot. PW10 further deposed that the motorcycle bearing No. DL-1SP- 1706 was seized vide memo Ex.PW10/F and the scooter bearing No. DL-48AL-3684 was seized vide memo Ex.PW10/G, then accused FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 15 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 Ajay and Kapil were arrested vide memos Ex.PW10/H and Ex.PW10/I, then IO recorded his statement. PW10 correctly identified the case property i.e. 74 stamp papers recovered from possession of accused Kapil, as Ex.P1, three stamp papers recovered from possession of accused Ajay as Ex.P2, two stamp papers which were purchased from accused Kapil and Ajay as Ex.P3, one note of Rs.500/- denomination bearing no. 8BS387435 as Ex.P4 recovered from possession of accused Ajay. PW10 correctly identiifed the accused Ajay and Kapil present in the Court. PW10 was cross- examined by Ld. Counsel for accused Kapil and was not cross- examined by other accused persons.
(k). SI Jagdish Kumar, was examined as PW11, who deposed that on 04.11.2003, he was posted at Anti-Extortion Cell, Crime Branch, RK Puram, on that day, he was present in his office, then he received one secret information that two boys are selling fake stamp papers at half price behind P.S Hari Nagar near Surya Enterprises, Gas Godown, then he informed the Senior Officials regarding the secret information and he formed a raiding party comprising of Ct Dalbir, Ct Rakesh and himself, then he made departure entry vide DD No. 9 dated 04.11.2003, then they reached at Pankha Road opposite Aggarwal Sweets where they met with the secret informer, there he FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 16 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 asked 5-6 passersby to join the investigation but none agreed and he asked Ct Rakesh to go to the accused persons and start dealing of stamp papers and was directed to revolve his hand on the head after completion of the deal and handed over a note of Rs.500/- denomination after signing the same, he also prepared handing over memo of the above said note Ex.PW10/E, after that they reached opposite Surya godown and they took position at the above said place, at about 09:30PM, two persons, one on motorcycle bearing no. DL 1S P 1706 and another on scooter bearing No. DL 4S AL 3684, arrived at the above said place and the secret informer who was accompanying them pointed towards accused persons and told that these are the persons who sold fake stamp papers at half rate, then Ct. Rakesh was sent towards accused persons to purchase the fake stamp papers, Ct. Rakesh handed over the note of Rs.500/- denomination to the person who came on motorcycle and whose name was later on disclosed as Ajay Kumar and he pointed towards the person who came on scooter and that person opened the dickey of his scooter and took out one polythene and from that polythene, two stamp papers of 500/- each were handed over to Ct Rakesh, then Ct Rakesh revolved his hand on his head which was fixed as a signal and they reached at the spot and apprehended both accused persons, then the accused who came on scooter revealed his name as Kapil, the polythene which was in the FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 17 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 hand of accused Kapil was checked and they found 74 stamp papers, out of the 74 stamp papers, 65 stamp papers were of Rs.500/- each and remaining 9 stamp papers were of Rs.100/- each, then they took casual search of accused Ajay and they found three stamp papers of Rs.5000/- each, they also found the note which was handed over by Ct Rakesh to accused in the casual search of accused Ajay, the 74 stamp papers which were found in possession of accused Kapil, were put into an envelope and sealed with the seal of JK and the stamp papers were taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PW10/A, the three stamp papers which were found in possession of accused Ajay were also put in an envelope and were sealed with the seal of JK and same were taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PW10/B, the stamp papers which were handed over to Ct Rakesh by the accused persons were also seized after putting them into an envelope and sealing with the seal of JK vide memo Ex.PW10/C, the currency note of Rs.500/- was seized vide memo Ex PW10/D, the seal after use was handed over to Ct Dalbir, then he prepared rukka Ex.PW11/A and handed over the same to Ct Rakesh for registration of FIR, then the Second IO SI Sudhir Kumar arrived at the spot and he handed over the prepared documents, case property and custody of both accused persons to the second IO, who prepared site plan at his instance Ex.PW11/B. PW11 correctly identified the accused Ajay and kapil present in the Court.
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 18 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 PW11 correctly identified the case property i.e., 86 stamp papers marked as Q2/1 to Q2/74 as Ex. P1 (Colly) recovered from accused Kapil Tanwar, three stamp marked as Q3/1 to Q3/3 as Ex. P2 (Colly) recovered from accused Ajay, two other stamp papers marked as Q1/1 and Q1/2 as Ex. P3(colly) purchased by decoy customer from accused Kapil, one note of Rs.500/- denomination bearing no. 8BS 387415 as Ex. P4. PW11 was duly cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused persons.
(l). HC Lalit Kumar , was examined as PW11, who deposed that on dated 06.02.2004, he was posted at Anti-extortion Cell, R.K.Puram as a Constable, on that day, he joined the investigation with IO / SI Sukhbir and they went to Sagarpur at the residence of B.P.Sharma, where B.P.Sharma met them and they arrested him vide arrest memo Ex. PW10/A, personal searched him vide memo Ex. PW10/B, got him medically examined and on the next day, the accused made a disclosure statement, which was recorded vide Ex. PW10/C. PW11 further deposed that on dated 07.03.2004, he again joined the investigation in the present case with SI Sudhir, on that day, he alongwith SI Sudhir went to PS Hari Nagar, from where IO collected four pullandas, out of which three pullandas were sealed with the seal of JK and one pullanda was sealed with the seal of SK FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 19 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 with intact seal alongwith some documents vide road certificate and he deposited the same at Nasik Press with intact seal, HC Anand was also with him in this proceeding and they did not tamper with the seal in any manner till the case property were remained in their possession. PW11 was not cross-examined by accused B.P. Sharma.
(m). Sh. Mukesh Kumar, UDC, Record Room, Rohini Courts, was examined as PW12, who deposed that he has brought the case file of FIR No. 198/04, PS Paschim Vihar from the Record Room of Rohini Courts, bearing Goswara No. 63/S and proved the copy of pointing out memo and seizure memo as Ex. PW12/A (OSR) and copy of rukka as Ex. PW12/B (OSR). PW12 was not cross-examined by accused persons.
(n). SI Sudhir Kumar, was examined as PW13, who deposed that on 04.11.2003, he was posted at Anti Extortion Cell, Crime Branch, R.K. Puram, he received one telephonic calls from SI Jagdish to reach near Surya Gas Godown, Hari Nagar, he reached Surya Gas Godown where he met with Sl Jagdish and he handed over him two persons namely Kapil and Ajay alongwith seizure memo of 74 stamp papers, another seizure two stamp papers, one another seizure 3 stamp papers and one seizure memo of currency notes of Rs.500/- and one FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 20 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 motorcycle and one scooter, in the meantime, Ct. Rakesh arrived at the spot and handed over to him one copy of FIR alongwith original rukka, SI Jagdish told him about about the facts then he prepared site plan Ex. PW 11/B after that he alongwith Ct. Rakesh and both the accused went to PS Hari Nagar, where he deposited the case property in Malkhana after that he alongwith the accused person came to the Office of AEC Crime Branch, R.K. Puram there he prepared the seizure memos of motorcycle and scooter Ex.PW10/F and PW10G, then he interrogated both the accused persons at length and both of them told him that they had procured these fake stamp papers one persons namely Neeraj and then they reached at the place of incident to sale the abovesaid stamp papers where they were apprehended by the police, both the accused persons were arrested vide memo Ex. PW10/I and Ex. PW10/H, after that both the accused were produced before the court and their PC remands were sought and two days PC remands of both the accused was granted, both the accused persons were again brought to Office of AEC, Crime Branch and interrogated in detail, they disclosed that they had obtained the abovesaid fake stamp papers from one person namely Neeraj and he recorded their disclosure statements vide memos Ex.PW12/A and Ex.PW12/B, after that they alongwith accused Kapil Tanwar and Ajay went to West Sagarpur where the accused persons had pointed towards one house FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 21 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 and told that the abovesaid house is belonging to accused Neeraj, after that he alongwith both the accused persons went inside the abovesaid house but the accused Neeraj was not found, he prepared pointing out memo in this regard Ex.PW12/C, after that he came back at the Office of AEC, Crime Branch, both the accused persons were put behind the bar, after that on next day, the accused persons were sent to JC and he tried to search the accused Neeraj. PW13 further deposed that on 04.12.2003, he went at the house of accused Neeraj situated at Sagarpur alongwith one constable, accused Neeraj was found present in his house and he brought accused Neeraj to the Office of AEC, Crime Branch and interrogated him and arrested him vide memo Ex.PW12/A, he personally searched accused Neeraj Kumar vide memo Ex.PW12/D and recorded disclosure statement of accused Neeraj vide memo Ex.PW12/E, accused Neeraj disclosed that he had purchased all the stamp papers at lower price from one person namely B.P. Sharma and he further sold that the abovesaid stamp papers at higher rate to the accused Ajay and Kapil, then he obtained one day PC remand of accused Neeraj after producing the accused before the Court, accused Neeraj had led them to the house of accused B.P. Sharma situated at Veer Nagar, Sagarpur, there he prepared pointing out memo Ex. PW5/B and he asked some public persons of locality to join the investigation, one person namely Satish Kumar agreed to join FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 22 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 the investigation and in the presence of Satish Kumar house of the accused B.P. Sharma was searched, they found 8 stamp papers of 500 rupees valuation and one stamp papers of 1,00 rupees valuation which were recovered vide memo Ex.PW5/A, after that he came back at the office of Crime Branch, accused Neeraj Kumar was put behind the lock up and the case property was deposited in Malkhana. PW13 further deposed that on the next day the accused Neeraj was sent to JC, accused B.P. Sharma was found present at his house when he again reached at his house situated at Veer Nagar, Sagarpur and accused B. P. Sharma was brought to the Office of AEC, Crime Branch where he was interrogated and arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW10/A, he was personally searched vide memo Ex.PW10/B and his disclosure statement was recorded vide memo Ex.PW10/C, then accused B. P. Sharma was also sent to JC. PW13 further deposed that the accused B.P. Sharma disclosed in his statement that fake stamp papers were purchased by him from one Jagdish and Ashok Kumar Goyal and during investigation he came to know that accused Jagdish was running in JC in another case, then he interrogated the accused Jagdish in Tihar Jail and arrested the accused vide memo Ex.PW12/F and moved an application before the Court for production of accused Jagdish, Accused Jagdish was produced before the Court and he obtained one day PC remand of accused Jagdish, during PC remand FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 23 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 the accused Jagdish was interrogated in detail and he disclosed that he had obtained the fake stamp papers from one person namely Ashok Kumar Goyal who used to print the same, then he recorded the disclosure statement of accused Jagdish vide memo Ex.PW12/G, he also came to know during the investigation of the case that accused Ashok Kumar Goyal was also running in JC in another case of FIR No.198/04, PS Paschim Vihar, then he obtained the relevant documents from the IO of case FIR No.198/04 and placed them in the file and he went to Tihar Jail and interrogated the accused, Ashok Kumar Goyal, after interrogation he arrested accused Ashok Kumar Goyal vide memo Ex.PW12/H and sent him to JC in the present case. PW13 further deposed that he sent the recovered fake stamp paper to Government Press, Nasik for examination and prepared the charge- sheet and sent to Court, the examination report Ex. PW12/I was later on filed in the Court. PW13 correctly identified all the accused persons present in the Court. PW13 correctly identified the case property i.e. fake stamp papers recovered from the accused persons as Ex. P1 to P88. PW13 was duly cross-examined by all the accused persons.
(o). Inspector Dilip Kaushik, was examined as PW14, who deposed that on 31.03.2004, he was posted at Anti Snatching Cell, FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 24 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 Paschim Vihar. Delhi as Sub-Inspector, on that day, further investigation of the case FIR No. 198/04, PS Paschim Vihar was marked to him and he arrested accused Jagdish and at his pointing out some forged stamp papers and printing machine etc. were recovered from the possession of accused. PW14 further deposed that he prepared pointing out seizure memo Ex.PW12/A and the recovered case property was deposited in Malkhan and accused was put behind bar. PW14 further deposed that on the next day the PC remand of accused Jagdish was obtained and accused Ashok Kumar Goyal and some other accused persons were also arrested. PW14 correctly identified accused Ashok Kumar Goyal present the Court. PW14 was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused B. P. Sharma and he was not cross-examined by other accused persons.
(p). Sh. Vicky Rathi, Junior Judicial Assistant, Record Room, Rohini Courts, Delhi, was examined as PW1, who deposed that he has appeared on summons of the Court and the requisite case file i.e. case FIR No. 333/2004, PS Sultan Puri is presently in Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and the file can be produced as and when it comes back from Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 25 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004
5. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was closed and case was listed for recording statement of accused persons u/s 313 Cr.P.C. In their examination recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C r/w Section 281 Cr.P.C, accused persons denied the entire evidence put to them. Accused persons deposed that they are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case and they opted not to lead Defence Evidence and the matter was put up for final arguments.
6. In have heard the rival contention of the parties and have perused the records carefully.
7. Before discerning the evidence against each individual led by the prosecution, it would be pertinent to understand the essential ingredients of Section 120-B IPC, 420 IPC and 474 IPC.
"Section 120-B IPC : Punishment of Criminal conspiracy-
(1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 26 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he has abetted such offence.
(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable a aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both"
"Section 420 IPC : Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property - whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine."
In order to bring home the guilt of accused persons under Section 420 IPC, the prosecution is required to prove the following facts beyond reasonable doubts :
(i) That the accused cheated another person.
(ii) That he thereby induced:-
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 27 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004
(a) delivery of property to any person which property did not belong to the accused, or
(b) to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or
(c) anything which is signed or sealed and capable of being converted into a valuable security.
(iii) That he did so dishonestly.
Burden of proof - It is for the prosecution to show beyond reasonable doubt that at the time the accused entered into the transaction, he had no intention to pay the money and that he was actuated by a dishonest intention to cheat the complainant.
"Section 474 IPC : Having possession of document described in Section 466 or 467, knowing it to be forged and intending to use it as genuine- Whoever has in his possession any document or electronic record, knowing the same to be forged and intending that the same shall fraudulently or dishonestly be used as genuine, shall, if the document or electronic record is one of the description mentioned in Section 466 of this Code, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 7 years, and shall also be liable to fine, and if the document is one of the description mentioned FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 28 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 in Section 467, shall be punished with (imprisonment of life), or with imprisonment of either description, for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine."
BRIEF REASONS FOR DECISION:-
8. The role and allegations against the accused persons, shall now be dealt wr.t. the above mentioned legal provisions:
All accused persons have been charged for offence U/s 474/420/120-B IPC with the allegations that they were found in possession of forged stamp papers which they sold at half the price to general public. The entire case of prosecution is based on the disclosure statement of one accused person against another co-accused and the subsequent recoveries of stamp papers from them. The criminal machinery was put into motion in this case on the basis of one secret information stating that accused persons Ajay Kumar and Kapil Tanwar used to sell forged stamp papers at half the price, on the basis of which the present FIR was registered. At the behest of the secret informer, accused Ajay and Kapil were apprehended on 04.11.2003 with forged stamp papers seized vide seizure memo Ex.
PW10/A and Ex. PW10/B. Accused persons Ajay and Kapil disclosed that he had purchased the said stamp papers from accused Neeraj, then FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 29 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 a raid was conducted at the house of Neeraj and he was arrested vide Ex.PW12/A and disclosed vide memo Ex.PW12/E that he had purchased the forged stamp papers from accused B.P. Sharma at a lower price, then raiding team went to the house of accused B.P. Sharma from where thery recovered stamp papers which they seized vide memo Ex. PW5/A and he further disclosed vide memo Ex. PW10/C that he purchased stamp papers from accused Jagdish and Ashok Kumar Goyal. It is stated stamp papers were recovered from all the accused persons.
9. At this juncture, it is pertinent to mention herein that there is no independent witness examined/joined by the Investigating Officer at the time of search/seizure/apprehension of the accused persons and seizure of the alleged forged stamp papers. No effort has also been made by the Investigating Officer to join public witnesses in the alleged recoveries of stamp papers except joining one Satish Kumar, examined as PW6, the alleged witness to the search and seizure of the house of accused B. P. Sharma, however, PW6 turned hostile in the Court and he categorically stated that the police officials took his signatures on blank papers and categorically denied the suggestion of Ld. APP for the State that in his presence house of accused B.P. Sharma was searched and some stamp papers were FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 30 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 recovered. Under these circumstances, there is absolute non compliance of Section 100 Sub Sec (4) Cr.P.C which specifically provides that whenever any search or seizure is effected by an investigating officer, the latter before making search or seizure shall join at least two independent respectable local inhabitants from the same locality in which search is to be effected. The word used in sub Sec (4) of Sec 100 Cr.P.C is "shall" which makes it mandatory. An investigating officer is granted liberty to join independent witnesses from other locality only when the witnesses from the same locality are either not available or they refuse to become witness. It appears that no sincere efforts were made by the IO to join independent witnesses from the same locality.
10. In case law reported as "Anoop Joshi Vs. State" 1992(2) C.C. Cases 314(HC), Hon'ble High Court of Delhi had observed as under:
"18. It is repeatedly laid down by this Court in such cases it should be shown by the police that sincere efforts have been made to join independent witnesses. In the present case, it is evidence that no such sincere efforts have been made, particularly when we find that FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 31 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 shops were open and one or two shopkeepers could have been persuaded to join the raiding party to witness the recovery being made from the appellant. In case any of the shopkeepers had declined to join the raiding party, the police could have later on taken legal action against such shopkeepers because they could not have escaped the rigours of law while declining to perform their legal duty to assist the police in investigation as a citizen, which is an offence under the IPC".
11. In a case law reported as Roop Chand Vs. State of Haryana 1999 (1) C.L.R. 69, it was held as under:
"3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the evidence with their help. The recovery of illicit liquor was effected from the possession of the petitioner during noon time and it is in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses that some witnesses form the public were available and they were asked to join the investigation. The explanation furnished by the prosecution is that the independent witnesses were asked to join the investigation but they FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 32 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 refused to do so on the ground that their joining will result into enmity between them and the petitioner".
"4. It is well settled principle of the law that the Investigating Agency 19.01.2013 should join independent witnesses at the time of recovery of contraband articles, if they are available and their failure to do so in such a situation casts a shadow of doubt on the prosecution case. In the present case also admittedly the independent witnesses were available at the time of recovery but they refused to associate themselves in the investigation. This explanation does not inspire confidence because the police officials who are the only witnesses examined in the case have not given the names and addresses of the persons contacted to join it is a very common excuse that the witnesses from the public refused to join the investigation. A police officer conducting investigation of a crime is entitled to ask anybody to join the investigation and on refusal by a person from the public the Investigating Officer can take action against such a person under the law. Had it been a fact that the witnesses from the public had refused to join the investigation, the FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 33 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 Investigating Officer must have proceeded against them under the relevant provisions of law. The failure to do so by the police officer is suggestive of the fact that the explanation for non-joining the witnesses from the public is an after thought and is not worthy of credence. All these facts taken together make the prosecution case highly doubtful".
The laxity on the part of the IO when he did not take sincere steps to join the public persons in the proceedings of the present case is beyond comprehension. This fact puts the case of the prosecution under cloud of doubt. It is a settled proposition of criminal law that prosecution is supposed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt by leading reliable, cogent and convincing evidence, which has not been done in the present case.
12. Besides all this, in the present case, the seizure memos of stamp papers bears the number of FIR. As per the rukka and testimony of witnesses, the seizure memo was prepared prior to registration of FIR. If that be so then how seizure memo bears the FIR number is beyond comprehension. Now, I consider the observation made by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Giri Raj v. State, 83 (2000) DLT 201. This gives rise to two inferences that either the FIR FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 34 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 was recorded prior to the alleged recovery of the case property or number of the said FIR was inserted in the document after its registration. In both the situations, it seriously reflects upon the veracity of the prosecution version and creates a good deal of doubt about the recovery of the case property in the manner alleged by the prosecution. That being so, the benefit arising out of such a situation must necessarily go to the accused.
13. Being guided by above-said case laws, it can be said that the search, seizure and recovery made by the above said police officials was in complete violation of the well established principles of law and the same can be said to be illegal which create grave doubts on the prosecution's version of recovery of liquor from the possession of the accused from the spot and substantiates the defence version that the alleged recovery was planted upon the accused at the police station and that entire proceedings were recorded at the police station and not on the spot.
14. In the judgment titled as "S.L.Goswami v. State of M.P"
reported as 1972 CRI.L.J.511(SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held:-
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 35 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 "...... In our view, the onus to proving all the ingredients of an offence is always upon the prosecution and at no stage does it shift to the accused. It is no part of the prosecution duty to somehow hook the crook. Even in cases where the defence of the accused does not appear to be credible or is palpably false that burden does not become any the less. It is only when this burden is discharged that it will be for the accused to explain or controvert the essential elements in the prosecution case, which would negative it. It is not however for the accused even at the initial stage to prove something which has to be eliminated by the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offence with which he is charged, and even if the onus shifts upon the accused and the accused has to establish his plea, the standard of proof is not the same as that which rests upon the prosecution ..........................."
15. The onus and duty to prove the case against the accused is upon the prosecution and the prosecution must establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt. It is also a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that if there is a reasonable doubt with regard to the FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 36 CNR No. DLWT02-000213-2004 guilt of the accused the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt resulting in acquittal of the accused. Reference may also be made to the judgment titled as Nallapati Sivaiah v. Sub Divisional Officer, Guntur reported as VIII(2007) SLT 454(SC).
16. Thus, in the present case, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of all the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence accused Ashok Kumar Goyal, Ajay Kumar, Kapil Tanwar, Neeraj Kumar and B. P. Sharma are acquitted for the offence U/s 474/420/120-B IPC.
17. File be consigned to record room.
SONAM Digitally signed by
SONAM GUPTA
GUPTA 12:26:57 +0530
Date: 2024.08.09
Announced in the open court (SONAM GUPTA)
on 06.08.2024 Chief Judicial Magistrate,
West District, Tis Hazari Courts,Delhi
FIR No.572/2003 PS Hari Nagar/AEC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Goyal & Ors. Page no. 37