Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 30.07.04 complainant Dashrath Prasad reached in PS Ambedkar Nagar and got recorded his statement which is Ex.PW1/A. In the said State Vs. Mohd. Nazar Ali etc statement it has been alleged by the complainant that he is residing at B­59 Taimur Nagar Near New Friends Colony, New Delhi with his brother Surender Prasad and he drives TSR bearing no. DL1R 1142, Chesis no. 80680, Engine No. 23435. On 29.7.2004 at about 5 p.m he parked his TSR near ITO and he was also standing there. One person aged about 40 years alongwith one lady came there and asked him to take them to Chirag Delhi. He made them sit in the TSR and started the TSR. When TSR reached near Matka Peer, Pragati Maidan, they asked him to stop the TSR as they want to pray there and thereafter they will proceed. He stopped there and after 20 minutes they came. They gave him 'Persad' to eat. He consumed the same. He again made them sit in the TSR and started for Mazar Peer Baba. He felt giddiness in the way and became semiconscious. He stopped his TSR on the service road and thereafter he became unconscious. When he regained his consciousness, he found himself on patri in front of Mazar Peer Baba and his TSR was also not there. He was State Vs. Mohd. Nazar Ali etc also feeling giddiness at that time. He narrated the incident to his brother and searched for TSR. The said lady and unknown person have administered him some poisonous substance in "Persad' and when he became unconscious they had taken away his TSR. Legal action be taken against them. IO made his endorsement Ex.Pw12/A on his statement Ex.PW1/A and got the case registered. Complainant was examined in the hospital. Search for TSR was made and it was recovered from Loni Border without engine from abandoned place. The search for accused were conducted. In case FIR no.2/05 both the present accused were found taking the engines of TSR in an auto. Accused Mohd. Nazar Ali made disclosure statement about taking away the Engine of TSR no.DL1R 1142. Both the accused were arrested in this case. The investigation was done and after completing the investigation, accused persons were challaned to the court.

20. In the overall analysis of the testimonies of all the witnesses it is revealed that PW1 is the complainant and victim in this case. He is the main star witness of the prosecution case as he had seen the accused Mohd. Nazar Ali when he alongwith one lady Farida (Since PO) sat in his TSR. The prosecution has examined him as PW1. In his testimony he has stated that on 19.7.05 he was coming from Chandni Chowk side with his TSR no. DL 1RGH 1142. One gents and one lady gave him signal to stop his TSR. He stopped the TSR. They asked him that they had to go to Matka peer and from where they had to go to Chirag Delhi. At Matka Peer, the lady passenger gave some Prasad to eat which he had eaten. Thereafter they asked him for Majar Peer Baba, Chirag Delhi. He started his TSR alongwith passengers. At Chirag Delhi he stopped his TSR near Mazar of Peer Baba. Thereafter he became unconscious. After gaining his consciousness he found himself at the house at Taimoor Nagar in the morning at 7 a.m. His TSR was also found missing. ON 30.7.04 he lodged the report with the police. The same is State Vs. Mohd. Nazar Ali etc Ex.PW1/A.The accused Nazar Ali present in the court was the same person who had hired his TSR alongwith a lady. The 'Prasad' was also given to him by accused Nazar Ali. He has further deposed that after one week he came to know that his TSR was traced. So, he went to PS and told that his TSR is parked near Loni Border in abandoned condition. He alongwith police officials went there and found the TSR. He checked his TSR and found engine seat and CNG Kit and relevant documents and tyre tubes missing. The TSR was seized vide memo Ex.PW1/B. After two months police again called him to identify the accused persons at Tihar Jail. He went there but IO told him that the accused had refused to participate in the TIP. The TSR is Ex.P1. He had taken TSR engine on superdari vide superdginama Ex.Pw1/C. The engine is Ex.PW1/article1, photograph is Ex.PW1/article2, TSR is Ex.P1 and Photograph of TSR is Ex.PW1/article3. In cross examination he has stated that accused Pravez Alli was not with the passenger who stopped his TSR. He identified the accused Mohd. Nazar Ali in Tihar Jail in video conferencing where a lady Magistrate was also present. At the time of incident accused Nazar Ali was having a short beard. Prior to incident he had not seen accused Nazar Ali and even he does not know whether accused Nazar Ali was also TSR driver. At Matka State Vs. Mohd. Nazar Ali etc Peer Near Pragati Maidan they remained for about 20 minutes. He denied the suggestion that accused Nazar Ali had not given the 'Persad' to him at Matka peer near Pragati Maidan Again said the 'Persad' was given by lady passenger. He started giddiness at Sheikh Sarai. He had not asked the name of the driver of TSR by which he reached at his house. He had not gone to the doctor in the morning after regaining consciousness. He was taken by the police to hospital in the evening. He denied the suggestion that accused Nazar Ali was shown by the police to him or that Nazar Ali was falsely implicated in this case. He further denied the suggestion that accused was shown by the police in the PS.

21. Considering the above deposing made by complainant first he has stated that at Matka Peer, the Lady passenger gave some 'Persad' to eat which he had eaten and thereafter he became unconscious near Chirag Delhi. When he regained his consciousness he found himself in his house and his TSR was found missing. Thereafter he has stated that the accused Nazar Ali is the same person who had hired the TSR alongwith a lady. The 'Persad' was also given to him by accused Nazar Ali accused present in the court. In this case charge has been framed u/s 328 r/w sec. 379 IPC. Section 328 IPC reads as under:­ State Vs. Mohd. Nazar Ali etc "Whoever administers to or causes to be taken by any person any poison or any stupefying, intoxicating, or unwholesome drug, or other thing with intent to cause hurt to such person, or with intent or to facilitate the commission of an offence or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine"