DHARMENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated 19.03.2002 and the Order on Sentence dated 26.03.2002, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in the Session's case No. 62/99, FIR No. 715/98 of Police Station RK Puram. The Trial Court had held the appellant, Dharmender Kumar, s/o Sh. Ram Manorath Yadav, r/o village RZ -385/315, Gali No. 6, Geetanjali Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi, guilty of the offence under Section 397 and Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, IPC). The appellant was sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment (hereinafter, RI) for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - and in default whereof to a further RI for one (1) year under Section 397 of the IPC. The appellant was also sentenced to Imprisonment for Life with a fine of Rs. 20,000/ - under Section 302 of the IPC and in default of the payment of fine he was directed to undergo RI for a further period of two years. The sentences were to run concurrently and the appellant was also given the benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, CrPC).

(2.) THE facts of the case as noticed by the learned Trial Court, briefly stated are. The appellant was working as an employee in the capacity of a Petrol Pump Operator for filling petrol into the vehicles at one of the petrol pumps, 'Saran Motors Private Limited' at Bhikaji Cama Place. On the morning of 21.09.1998 at about 6:50 AM, Ashok Saran, PW 11 (Managing Director of the said Petrol Pump) received a phone call from his employee Ram Achebar, who was the morning shift -in charge, that the cash kept inside the safe and drawer was missing and that the same had been removed during the preceding night. PW 11 immediately rushed to the spot and found that the safe and the drawer had been opened by their keys and had not been broken open. PW 11 telephoned the police and the police reached the spot. It was found that the rear window pane of the bathroom attached to the office was broken. A report of theft was lodged with the police by PW 1, Mrs. Madhulika Saran, w/o of PW 11. On the basis of this report and the endorsement made by SI J.P. Singh, FIR was registered about the theft. It was reported in the complaint that an amount of Rs. 3,09,600/ - had been missing. Since Phuman Ram was the night duty cashier, persons were sent at Phuman Ram's house and it was reported that he had not reached home and that his relatives had also been searching for him. The relatives of Phuman Ram lodged a report with the police about his missing on 21.09.2008. Since Phuman Ram had not returned home, the theft at the said petrol pump and the missing of Phuman Ram appeared to be interconnected.

(3.) THE prosecution has examined a total of nineteen (19) witnesses. However, no witness has been examined from the side of the appellant. This Court considers it necessary to analyse the evidence of material witnesses.