Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(i) Statement recorded by IO of PW-1 as Ex.PW-1/A, Site Plan Ex.PW-

1/B, Sketch of the dagger Ex.PW-1/C, Seizure memo of dagger Ex.PW- 1/D, Seizure memo of stone Ex.PW-1/E, Seizure memo of motorcycle as Ex.PW-1/F, Arrest memo of accused persons as Ex.PW-1/G and Ex.PW- 1/H , Search memos of accused persons as Ex.PW-1/I and Ex.PW-1/J, case property stone as Ex.P-1, Dagger as Ex.P-2and motorcycle bearing no DL6S AC 3102 as Ex.P-3.

(ii)Superdarinama of motorcycle in question as Ex.PW-2/A.

PW-2 is Superdar Mukesh Kumar, who deposed that in the year 2010 he was running a shop of garment at Mata Rameshwari, Nehru Nagar in the house of Md. Shammi. There was also a shop of accused Mukesh @ Aman in the neighbouring house. He did not remember the date, however, his motorcycle was taken by police official to the PS Prasad Nagar and he had handed over them the key of his motorcycle. After one and a half - two hours, he went to the PS and he was told that his motorcycle will be released by court. He did not remember the name of the police official. After 3-4 days, he got released his motorcycle from the court vide superdarinama Ex.PW2/A. He is the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration no.DL- 6S-AC-3102.

7. During the examination, Ld. APP For the State cross examined PW-2 wherein he denied that on 24.08.2010 his motorcycle was taken by accused Mukesh @ Aman and on that day, he had committed incident in question. It is correct that he did not made any call at 100 number or any written complaint to the police or to any authority regarding taking away of his motorcycle by the official. PW1 stated that it is also correct that when he visited the PS he did not meet the concerned SHO for purpose of making a complaint. It is also correct that he was making the aforesaid statement for the first time in the court today and not when his vehicle was released or in PS Prasad Nagar State Vs. Mukesh @ Aman his application of superdarinama. He denied that he is deposing falsely at the instance of accused as he was his neighbour or had been won over by the accused persons.

33. Even though PW-2 Superdar Mukesh Kumar has stated in his examination that his motorcycle was taken by police officials to PS Prasad Nagar and he had handed over them the keys of his motorcycle and later on he got released his motorcycle from the Court vide superdarinama Ex.PW- 2/A. However, his aforesaid statement is in contradiction to his earlier statement given U/s 161 Cr.P.C. Further in his cross examination PW-2 stated that he did not make any call at 100 number nor made any written complaint to police or any other authority regarding taking away of his motorcycle by the police officials and when he visited the PS he did not make any complaint to the SHO concerned. In his cross examination he also stated that he was making the aforesaid statement for the first time in the court and not when his vehicle was released or in his application in superdarinama and for this reason his testimony does not seem to be reliable and trustworthy. Further the testimony of DW-1 to the effect that the accused persons were picked up by the police officials of PS Prasad Nagar who were in civil dress , from his shop on the ground of making some inquiry and later on were taken to PS and falsely implicated in the present case cannot be trusted in view of the documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution. He had not PS Prasad Nagar State Vs. Mukesh @ Aman informed the said facts at his house. Further no complaint was made by DW- 1 regarding alleged conduct of the police officials and the said fact was not even informed by DW-1 to any relative of accused Mukesh @ Matka as stated in his cross examination.