STATE Vs. MANJIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL. M.A. 1706/2011 (Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act) in CRL. L.P. 76/2011 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed. CRL. M.A. 1706/2011 stands disposed of accordingly. CRL. L.P. 76/2011 The State, by this petition seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 24.04.2010 in S.C. No. 62/2008. The respondents were charged with having committed offences punishable under Sections 302/392/411/120-B/34 IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution allegations were that on 03.02.2007, one Pramod Kumar was attacked sometime in the forenoon in his premises ? Flat No. 226, Pocket-E, Sector-17, Peepal Apartment, Dwarka. THE information to this effect was received by D.D. No. 20- A by the Police Control Room (PCR), Police Station Dwarka. THE initial information appeared to be, besides attack, Pramod Kumar's chain and ring had been snatched. THE police, after reaching the premises, found that Pramod Kumar had died; he appeared to have been beaten. His blood soaked body and the other personal effects were seized and investigation took place. THE police recorded the statement of Meenakshi, PW-1, who claimed to have witnessed the attack. She was an Office Assistant employed by the deceased with effect from 20.12.2006 on a monthly salary of ` 3,000/-. She had stated that at around 11.00 am on the date of the incident, her co-worker Sunil had gone to the deceased's premises and later, after talking to Pramod, went away. About half an hour later, someone knocked on the door, and when it was opened by the deceased three persons entered. PW-1 further stated to the police that the tallest among the three ? who entered the premises showed an Identity Card of Pramod Kumar and claimed that he found it on the way. Pramod Kumar, however, refused having lost it whereupon she was asked to fetch some water for the three. At that moment, Pramod Kumar was taken to the bedroom adjacent to the drawing room and given beatings. PW-1 also stated that Pramod Kumar had been tied and gagged with the handkerchief. PW-1 tried to raise an alarm upon which the same assailant, the tall person grabbed her and took her to the kitchen. THE other two were alleged to have killed Pramod Kumar. THE three appellants left after taking-away the gold chain and ring besides Pramod Kumar's mobile phone.

(3.) UPON a consideration of the entire evidence, the Trial Court acquitted all the respondents of the charges leveled against them.