AHMED SAYYAD @ NANHU @ NANHE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants-Ahmed Sayyad @ Nanhu @ Nanhe (A-1) and Ameen Alou (A-2) challenge judgment dated 19.05.2004 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.50/2001 arising out of FIR No.366/2000 by which they were held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 412 IPC. By an order on 20.05.2004, they were sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine Rs. 1,000/- each.

(2.) On 09.09.2000 Rama Shanker working with Aggrelliolo & Co., 11-B, Netaji Subhash Marg, Darya Ganj, Delhi took five washing machines make Videocon on the cycle rickshaw of the company for delivery to Ladi Electronics, Dakshin Puri. When he reached behind Indira Gandhi Indoor Stadium, cycle-rickshaw punctured. Four boys in the age group of 25-30 years robbed washing machines and caused injuries to him. SI Mahender Pal Singh lodged First Information Report after recording Ram Shankar's statement (Ex.PW9/A). He was medically examined. During investigation, it revealed that Nuresh, Qutubddin, Zakir, Jamshed and Amrul were perpetrators of the crime. On 17.09.2000, on receipt of secret information, Qutubddin, Jamshed and Zakir were arrested from the jhuggies in Moolchand Basti, Yamuna Pushta and identified by the complainant. Pursuant to disclosure statements, they led the police to shop No.17, DDA Market, Turkman Gate and recovered two washing machines bearing Nos.49247 and 49249 from A-2's possession. A-2 was arrested and interrogated. At his instance, the police recovered three more washing machines bearing Nos. 49229, 49257 and 49253 from A-1's flat No.A-1, DDA flats, Turkman Gate. On surrender in the court on 11.10.2000, A-1 after police remand was taken to Meerut for recovery of the documents but nothing could be recovered. Thereafter, A-1 allegedly recovered documents i.e. letter pad and visiting cards from underneath a pillow in his flat. The investigating officer recorded statements of the witnesses conversant with facts. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses. On appreciating the evidence and after considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment convicted Qutubddin @ Ganja, Mohd.Jamshed @ Jamil, Mohd.Zakir @ Rakesh Gupta, for committing offences punishable under Section 392/394/34 IPC. A-1 and A-2 were convicted under Section 412/34 IPC. Benefit of doubt was given to Abdul Rashid. It appears that the convicts who robbed Ram Shankar have not preferred appeals against their conviction.

(3.) Appellants' counsel urged that the prosecution could not establish recovery of washing machines beyond doubt from appellants' possession. The defence witnesses categorically elaborated that the premises from where recoveries were made did not belong to A-1 and A-2. Recovery of Videocon machines after one month of incident is doubtful. Nothing could be recovered pursuant to A-1's disclosure statement from Meerut. No independent public witnesses were associated during investigation. The investigation officer did not collect documentary evidence to show that the premises from where the recoveries were effected belonged to the appellants. Learned APP has urged that the judgment is based on fair appraisal of the evidence and no interference is called for.