STATE Vs. SHAILENDER KADYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State seeks leave to appeal against a judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 01.02.2011 in SC No.134/2009; by the impugned judgment the respondent Shailender Kadyan was acquitted of the charges for having committed offence punishable under Sections 307/353/186/34 IPC.

(2.) The prosecution alleged that SI Satinder Vashisht, (deployed with the Special cell and who deposed during the trial as PW-14) received secret information in the morning of 28.08.2004 that four robbers i.e. Anoop Singh, Yogesh, Shailender and Deepu would be passing Najafgarh from Kapashera side at about 12.00 AM in a stolen Maruti car bearing registration No. HR-06-5338. He was also told that these individuals would be in possession of unlicensed arms. PW-14 constituted a raiding party which comprised of himself and three other Sub Inspectors, two ASIs and constables. This raiding party left in an official vehicle armed with service pistols. One Constable Ravish was armed with an AK 47; he wore his uniform. At about 12.15 PM; the said Maruti car came from the Kapashera direction and was sought to be stopped by PW-14 and Constable Ravish. As the police barricades were shut, the car was stopped, the respondent Shailender Kadyan (who was driving the car) shouted out to his other accomplices that the police party had surrounded them and they should start firing. A coaccused Anoop allegedly opened the car door, whipped out his pistol and fired at Ravish; the latter managed to evade and PW-14 opened fire in the air and asked the accused to surrender. The co-accused Anoop Singh was over powered by Constable Ravish and the other co-accused Yogesh -who also took out his pistol was over powered by the police.

(3.) After conclusion of investigation the accused were charged with having committed the offence; they denied guilt and claimed trial. In the course of the proceedings the prosecution relied on the testimonies of 12 witnesses. The material witnesses were PWs-6, 8, 12 and 14. The Trial Court concluded that the prosecution had been able to establish the role attributed to the co-accused Anoop Singh and Yogesh Sharma. However, so far as Shailender Kadyan was concerned, the Court concluded that his guilt had not been established beyond reasonable doubt.