DAULAT @ KALIA Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by a judgment dated 22.07.2014 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.40/2010 arising out of FIR No.01/10 PS Rithala Metro Station whereby the appellant ­ Daulat @ Kalia (A -1) and Virender (A -2) were convicted for committing offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and Sections 25/27 Arms Act, they have filed the instant appeals. By an order dated 25.07.2014, they were awarded various prison terms with fine. The substantive sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up in the charge -sheet was that on 03.02.2010 at around 07.15 p.m. at Metro Parking of Rohini East, the appellants along with their associates Himmat and Deepak (since acquitted) fired upon the police party on being asked to surrender. On that day, Insp. Rajiv Shah from Special Staff North -West received an information that A -2 along with his gang members would arrive at Rohini East Metro Station to commit robbery and was armed with weapons. On this information, a raiding team was constituted and the police party surrounded the area by deploying police personnel at various points. At about 07.15 p.m. on getting signal from the informer, the appellants and their associates total numbering five arrived at the spot. They were asked to surrender. On that, the appellants fired at the police party. Insp.Rajiv Shah directed HC Dinesh to fire two rounds in the air but it had no impact. A -2 again fired at the police party. In defence, HC Dinesh fired at A -1 and he sustained bullet injury on his thigh and fell down. In the commotion, the four assailants fled the spot. A -1 was taken to hospital for medical examination. Various arms and cartridges were recovered at the spot and necessary seizure memos were prepared. Subsequently, A -2, Deepak and Himmat were also apprehended. Applications for conducting Test Identification Proceedings were filed but they declined to participate in it. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Exhibits collected during investigation were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. Upon completion of investigation, a charge - sheet was filed against the appellants and their associates ­ Deepak and Himmat for committing offences punishable under Sections 186/353/307/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 Arms Act. In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined twenty -five witnesses. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the accused persons denied their complicity in the crime and pleaded false implication. On appreciating the evidence and after considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment convicted the appellants under Section 307 IPC and Sections 25/27 Arms Act. It is apt to note that Himmat and Deepak were acquitted of the charges and the State did not challenge their acquittal. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeals have been preferred by the appellants.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. Learned counsel for the appellants would urge that the Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in its true and proper perspective. No independent public witness was associated at any stage of the investigation. No CCTV footage was collected. In the presence of so many police officials, it was highly improbable for any assailant to escape from the spot. In the alternative, prayer has been made by the learned counsel for the appellants, on instructions, for modification of the sentence order. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor urged that there are no valid reasons to disbelieve the testimony of police officials who had no prior animosity with the appellants.