MOHD ISRAR QURESHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 27.11.2002, on receipt of copy of DD No.17A, ASI Samsuddin of Police Station Shakarpur, reached House no.145, Bank Enclave, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi, where the complainant Smt.Suman Bansal was present. In her complaint, Smt.Bansal alleged that on the aforesaid date, she was sleeping in her bedroom and her servants, namely Raju, Lalan and Arvind, were present in the house. At about 1.15 pm, she got up on hearing some sound and found a boy aged about 20-25 years, present in the room, with a country made pistol in his hand. She asked him as to who he was and how he had entered her room. In the meanwhile, two more boys entered the room, one of whom was carrying a knife in his hand whereas the other one was carrying a country made pistol with him. One of the boys, threatened the complainant saying that they wanted her articles and asked her to hand over the keys of the safe to them. Being afraid, the complainant opened the almirah of the dressing room, adjoining the bedroom. After taking out the cash kept in the almirah, the intruders again threatened the complainant saying that they also wanted her jewellery. Since she was afraid of them, the complainant took out her entire jewellery from the almirah and handed it over to the intruders. Thereafter, they searched the almirah as well as the remaining part of the house and took out jewellery, wherever it was lying. During this process, the fourth boy, who also was carrying a country made pistol with him, came to her room and threatened the complainant, asking her not to identify them. The hands of the complainant were tied with her chunni and her legs were tied with telephone wire.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 8.11.2003, the Crime Branch arrested the appellant Mohd. Israr Qureshi, in some other case. During the course of interrogation, he confessed about his involvement in the robbery from the house of the complainant, whereupon he was arrested. One ring found in his personal search was found to be stolen from the house of the complainant. This is also the case of the prosecution that on 25.11.2003, the appellant Akmal Hussain was arrested by the staff of Special Cell during interrogation of an FIR No.46/2003 and during the course of interrogation, he confessed about his involvement in the robbery of various articles from the house of the complainant. He also got recovered a stolen chain of the complainant from his house.

(3.) Both the appellants were charged under Section 392/397 IPC as well as under Section 411 thereof. Since they pleaded not guilty to the charges, as many as 15 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. One witness was examined in defence.