SURINDER SINGH Vs. STATE DELHI ADMN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal the Appellant lays a challenge to the judgment dated 12 th July, 2000 convicting him for offence punishable under Section 392 IPC and the order on sentence dated 13 th July, 2000 directing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of ' 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one month.

(2.) Briefly the prosecution case is that on 6 th July, 1995 at about 3.00 P.M. a lady along with the Appellant came to the house of PW2 Sanjay Jaggi when his mother Smt. Shanti Jaggi and PW1 Sumitra Dass their maid servant were present. The woman who had come along with the Appellant had visited the house 10-15 days earlier also in the presence of PW2 Shri Sanjay Jaggi and his wife PW3 Kajal Jaggi. The said lady asked for water and the Appellant who was accompanying her went down stairs and returned with two boys. Thereafter the three boys took PW1 Sumitra Dass and Smt. Shanti Jaggi to the bedroom. The Appellant pulled out a knife and asked PW1 Sumitra Dass to stand by the side of the Almirah and threatened that if she would make any noise he would kill her. The other two boys caught hold of Shanti Jaggi and one of them gagged her mouth & the other hit her on the head with the emulsion rod. They took the keys of the almirah from the drawer of the table and removed the jewellery. Thereafter they left the flat and PW1 Sumitra Dass raised an alarm.

(3.) On the basis of the statement of PW1 Exhibit PW1/A FIR No. 489/1995 under Sections 399/397/392/34 IPC was registered at PS Paschim Vihar, Delhi. The description of the woman who accompanied the Appellant and two others matched with one Meenu Chadha who had disposed of her flat through the agency of PW2 Sanjay Jaggi and his partner PW4 Sanjay Kapoor who used to run the business of property dealers. This Meenu Chadha could not be arrested and thus, was declared a proclaimed offender. On the 20 th July, 1995 the Appellant, Anil and Balwant were arrested from Om Vihar in pursuance of a secret information. Their disclosure statements Ex.PW8/C, Ex.PW8/D & Ex.PW8/E respectively were recorded and pursuant to it recovery of some stolen jewellery was made from their house on the 21 st July, 1995 wherein a gold necklace was recovered from the house of the Appellant, a pair of gold tops from the house of Anil and a gold ring from the house of the Balwant. On 21 st July, 1995 all the three accused were produced in the Court and the Investigating Officer moved an application for Test Identification Parade (TIP) of Balwant and Anil however, they declined to participate. The Appellant was remanded to police custody for one day and after the said remand period an application for Test Identification Parade was filed. The Appellant also refused to participate in the same. On filing of the charge-sheet, the statements of the prosecution witness and the accused were recorded. Co-accused Balwant and Anil were acquitted giving them benefit of doubt however, the Appellant was convicted and sentenced as above.