Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
Vide this judgment, I shall decide the present case u/s 3 DPDP Act (Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007) filed by the prosecution against accused Anshul Gupta.
2. Before deciding the present case, it is inevitable to mention here the brief facts of the case. It is the case of the prosecution that on 01.02.2020 at 05:30 pm, one board mentioning "The physics IIT- JEE tree NEET IIT-Roorkee (AIR 764) EX-FIT-JEE Faculty 8 years + Experience Best Result, AIR 52 NEET (2019) AIR 21 Neet (2018) AIR 51 NEET (2017) 8169869569 A-12, 2nd Floor, Opp. Aakash Institute, Vikaspuri Printed By: SVA # 9911519160" was found affixed on telephone pole, near A-12, Vikaspuri Delhi. Charge-sheet for commission of offence punishable u/s 3 DPDP Act was filed on the assumption that since the said board was bearing mobile number of the accused, hence he was the one who had got printed and affixed the board there.
3. Copy of charge-sheet and supporting documents were supplied to the accused. After hearing arguments, notice for offence punishable u/s 3 DPDP Act was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution, in support of its case, has examined two witnesses.
5. PW1 Bhoop Singh deposed that on 01.11.2019 he had prepared a board in a length of 2x3 in the name of "The Physics Tree" at the instance of a coaching owner, namely Anshul Gupta. He further deposed that he had issued a bill in respect of the same. He proved poster Ex. P1.
20. Further, no independent witness was joined in the investigation by the IO. PW has not explained in their testimony as to why the public witness was not joined in the investigation. It was within the reach of the IO to examine the independent witness to prima facie satisfy that the poster was affixed on the spot. No evidence has been brought on record to prove that the alleged poster was affixed by the accused or with his authority.
21. In the present matter, the allegation against the accused is that one board mentioning "The physics IIT-JEE tree NEET IIT-Roorkee (AIR 764) EX-FIT-JEE Faculty 8 years + Experience Best Result, AIR 52 NEET (2019) AIR 21 Neet (2018) AIR 51 NEET (2017) 8169869569 A-12, 2nd Floor, Opp. Aakash Institute, Vikaspuri Printed By: SVA # 9911519160" was found affixed on the telephone pole at A-12, Vikaspuri, Delhi. Now, it has to be seen whether installing of board would amount to an offence u/s 3 of DPDP Act, or not. Prior to enactment of DPDP Act, West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 1976 was prevalent in Delhi. Section 3 of West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act is same to State Vs. Anshul Gupta same as Section 3 of DPDP Act. For the sake of clarity, Section 3 of West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, is reproduced here as under: -
23. The question which is to be decided in the present case is whether the present case is covered by the aforesaid judgment and whether the aforementioned judgment also applicable to offence u/s 3 of DPDP Act. Provisions of Section 3 of DPDP Act and Section 3 of the West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act are similar to each other and, therefore, the ratio of the aforementioned judgment of T.S. Marwah (supra) would also be applicable to the provision of Section 3 of DPDP Act. In these circumstances, affixing of a board mentioning "The physics IIT-JEE tree NEET IIT- Roorkee (AIR 764) EX-FIT-JEE Faculty 8 years + Experience Best State Vs. Anshul Gupta Result, AIR 52 NEET (2019) AIR 21 Neet (2018) AIR 51 NEET (2017) 8169869569 A-12, 2nd Floor, Opp. Aakash Institute, Vikaspuri Printed By: SVA # 9911519160" would not amount to an offence u/s 3 of DPDP Act.