LAWS(DLH)-2008-4-151

SHIV PRASAD Vs. STATE OF DELHI

Decided On April 04, 2008
SHIV PRASAD Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Shiv Prasad has challenged the judgment and order dated 22. 3. 1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions case No. 205/97 whereby he was convicted under Section 392 read with Section 397 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- with a default stipulation of further one month"s rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine.

(2.) THE relevant facts may first be stated. On 1. 10. 1991 at about 11. 30 p. m. four persons came to the factory of PW-3 Prem Parkash Bansal at Prahladpur and at that time his two employees Suresh (PW-1) and one Tajan were present in the factory. One of the intruders was having a "katta" and he put the same on the temple of Tajan and the other intruder who was holding a knife put it on the back of PW-1 and took them in the office and two other intruders tied them with a rope and covered their eyes with a piece of cloth. In the factory some bags of plastic granules were lying and those intruders were loaded in a truck and taken away by the intruders. As per the further prosecution case, Mangal Bahadur, who was a chowkidar in the factory and one Krishan, who was also the employee in that factory, were also involved in that incident and they had also fled away from the factory along with other four persons. Thereafter, Suresh and Tajan informed the owner of the factory (PW-3) about the incident who then informed the police. PW-6 ASI Raghubir Singh reached the factory and recorded the statement (Ex. PW-3/a) of PW-3 Parkash Bansal and a rukka (Ex. PW-2/b) was then sent to the police station for the registration of an FIR under Section 380 IPC. Accordingly a case was registered under Section 380 IPC vide FIR No. 209/91 (Ex. PW-2/c ). On receiving some secret information on 9. 10. 91 about the culprits involved in this incident the police apprehended eight persons, including the present appellant and the above named two employees of the complainant, from a godown in village Khera Khurd which belonged to Ram Lal (PW-5 ). All the eight persons were found sitting on the stolen bags of plastic granules which were 64 in number. Those bags were then sealed and taken into police possession vide memo Ex. PW-5/c. Later on the complainant (PW-3)identified the bags at the police station when he had gone there to find out the progress in his case.

(3.) AFTER investigating the matter the police filed charge-sheet under sections 395/397/342/412/34 IPC in the Court against all the eight persons apprehended on 09-10-91. They were then charged and tried for the commission of offences under Sections 395/398/34 IPC. During the pendency of trial four accused persons, namely, Tej Bahadur, Man Singh, Bhim Singh and Mangal Bahadur absconded and they were declared proclaimed offenders.