DEEPAK KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned judgment dated 12th March, 2010 the Appellants have been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 392/411/506/186/34 IPC and awarded sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and fine of `5,000/- each under Section 392 IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months Rigorous Imprisonment. For offences punishable under Sections 411 and 506 IPC they have been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and for offence under Section 186 IPC a fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine they have been directed to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY the case of the prosecution is that one Daroga Prasad, the complainant was going to his native village and thus boarded a TSR to go to Uttam Nagar Bus Terminal. In the said TSR two people were already sitting on the back seat. However, the TSR instead of taking him to the destination started taking him in different directions. On this, the Complainant became suspicious, raised alarm and jumped out of the TSR. The three persons including the TSR driver also got down. The TSR driver caught him from his collar and the other two occupants of the TSR who were armed with knife, threatened him and took away all his belongings and ran away. On hearing the cries of Complainant, two police officials namely Ct. Babu Lal and Ct. Jitender Tyagi who were patrolling nearby reached there and chased the TSR on their motorcycle. The TSR was intercepted near Aggarwal Sweets, Vikas Puri. The TSR driver and one passenger managed to escape while the other passenger sitting on the back seat whose name came to be known as Deepak was apprehended. A chhura kept in a rexine cover was recovered from his possession. The broken suitcase of the Complainant was also recovered from the TSR. On checking, the suitcase, the Complainant found `1800/- cash, nokia charger and two video CDs missing. The Appellant Deepak was apprehended at the spot and on his disclosure statement Ex. PW3/B Appellant Sandeep Kumar was arrested in the presence of the Complainant and Ct. Kuldeep Kumar. The Appellant Sandeep Kumar got recovered the mobile phone charger, one purse and two silver rings from his house. On 27th May, 2005 the Appellant Rinku surrendered in the Court. During investigation TIP of the Appellant Rinku was conducted, and he was correctly identified by the Complainant and thereafter on 4th June, 2005, his police custody remand was taken. While in custody Rinku got recovered two video CDs of the Complainant from his house in Raghubir Nagar, Delhi. Since the Appellants had obstructed the police officers in their duty a complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. was filed by the SHO along with the charge sheet. During trial the Appellants were charged for offences punishable under Sections 392/397/506/186/353/34 IPC and Section 411 IPC. The Appellant Deepak was separately charged for offence punishable under Section 27 Arms Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the Appellant Rinku contends that the Appellant was not apprehended at the spot. There is no recovery of any incriminating article from the Appellant. The Appellant in his defence had examined DW1 Saleem who had stated that on the day of incident the Appellant was at Meerut, however, the defence of the Appellant has not been considered by the learned Trial Court. Even as per the prosecution case the Appellant has not used any weapon of offence and in the absence of any recovery and usage of weapon he is entitled to be acquitted. The prosecution case against the Appellant falls flat as it was dark when the incident took place and the Appellant could not have identified the Appellant. It is thus prayed that the Appellant be acquitted and in the alternative since there is no previous involvement he be released on the period of imprisonment already undergone.