IKRAR Vs. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner Ikrar to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 16.05.2014 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.45/14 whereby findings of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on conviction and sentence in case FIR No.153/2006 under Sections 392/34 IPC vide orders dated 11.03.2014 and 16.04.2014 were upheld. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with fine Rs. 15,000/- under Sections 392/34 IPC. It is relevant to note that the petitioner was acquitted of the charge under Section 411 IPC and the State did not challenge the said acquittal.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the chargesheet was that on 20.04.2006 at 08.34 pm at road No. 56, Railway bridge, Talcum Colony, Vivek Vihar, the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with his associates Shakir and Wasim committed robbery upon Sukh Lal and deprived him of his valuable articles and cash Rs. 6,000/- when he was travelling in TSR No. DL-1RG-5780. The accused was arrested at the spot whereas his associates succeeded to flee. Wrist watches, purse and other documents belonging to the complainant were thrown on the footpath and were collected by the complainant subsequently. Subsequently Shakir and Wasim were apprehended in some other case and on the basis of their disclosure statements, they were implicated in this case. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant and his associates for committing offences under Sections 392/411/34 IPC. To establish its case, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses in all. In 313 Cr.P.C. statements, the accused persons denied their involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication; no evidence in defence was produced. The trial resulted in conviction. The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence in Crl.A.No.45/14 which resulted in its dismissal. Hence, the present revision petition.

(3.) On perusal of the statements of the complainant Sukh Lal and his wife - PW-2 (Muktiyari) it stands established that while travelling in the TSR belonging to the accused Wasim, they were deprived of their valuable articles and cash lying in a brief case which they were carrying with them that time. The petitioner was arrested at the spot and the articles taken out of the brief case were thrown on the road which were collected and seized. Both PW-1 (Sukh Lal) and PW-2 (Muktiyari) had no prior animosity against the petitioner to falsely implicate him in this case. He was duly identified in the Court as the perpetrator of the crime. Merely because the petitioner and his associate were acquitted of the charge under Section 411 IPC, prosecution case cannot be thrown away overboard. This Court has no reason to take a different view from the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below about the role attributed to the petitioner in the commission of crime. It stands established that the complainant and his wife were travelling in the said TSR. Cash and other articles lying in brief case were taken out during the journey by the petitioner and his associates. It was apparently a case of 'theft'. PW-1 (Sukh Lal), the complainant, admitted in the cross-examination that on checking the suit case, he found that his purse and wrist watches were missing from it.