Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. Accused is produced before the court to stand trial for the offences punishable u/s 283/291/431 IPC.

2. In brief, facts of the case as alleged by the prosecution are that while IO HC Hemant Kumar and Ct. Sunil Kumar were on patrolling duty vide DD no. 51A on 05.08.2021 at about 12.00 PM, they reached house no. 10A,Gopal Park, where construction was going on of fourth lanter of the building. It is further alleged that builder accused Arvind Singh S/o Sh. Dharmpal was found present there who FIR no. 277/2021 PS Jagatpuri State vs. Arvind Singh Yadav Page no. 1 of 11 alleged that he has taken a contract for construction of the said building and the accused does not know the name of the owner. It is alleged that the acused did not produce any permission from the MCD and thereafter IO HC Hemant took photographs of the machine/mixer which was kept outside the property and due to that the people/passerby could not cross that lane. It is further alleged that the accused did not remove the said machine and did not stop the construction work and information was also given to MCD control room regarding the construction. Thereafter, FIR u/s 283/291/431 IPC was registered, site plan was prepared and accused was bound down by the IO.

Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed by the IO against the accused Arvind Singh Yadav, in the court for the offences punishable u/s 283/291/431 IPC.

3. Accused Arvind Singh Yadav was produced before the court on 06.12.2021 and copy of charge-sheet was supplied to him as per Sec. 207 Cr.P.C. Further, accused Arvind Singh Yadav was charged for the offences u/s 283/291/431 IPC on 23.04.2022 by this Court to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. As per section 294 Cr.P.C., accused admitted the FIR, and accordingly, witness at serial no. 3 duty officer HC Dharam Veer Singh was dropped from the list of witnesses by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2022.

8. On the other hand, it was argued by the Ld. APP for the prosecution that prosecution has established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. He has further argued that the prosecution has been able to establish that the accused has committed the offences punishable under section 283/291/431 IPC as the accused had deliberately kept the building material i.e. (bricks, sandstone, concrete) and sandstone, concrete and cement mixing machine on the public way and has committed mischief upon the public road and made it impassable. It was further submitted that accused has caused public nuisance and continued the same despite asking of the IO to stop.

From the perusal of the aforesaid provisions it is apparent that to bring home the guilt of causing danger or obstruction in public way, the prosecution must prove act or omission on the part of the accused with respect to his property which can cause danger or obstruction or injury to public person. Further to prove the offence u/s 291 IPC, it is essential to prove public nuisance and issuance of injunction by a public servant.

FIR no. 277/2021 PS Jagatpuri State vs. Arvind Singh Yadav Page no. 7 of 11