Delhi District CourtState vs . Suraj @ Shutti on 27 November, 2021IN THE COURT OF SH. PUNEET NAGPAL METROPOLITAN\n  MAGISTRATE-07, WEST DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS,\n                        DELHI\n\nSTATE\nVERSUS\nSURAJ @ SHUTTI\n\n                                      Computer ID No. 70629/16\n                                      FIR No. 843/15\n                                      P.S. Paschim Vihar (East)\n                                      U/S 457/380/511/34IPCSh. Rahul Chanduria\nS/o Sh. Balbir Singh\nR/o H. No. 18/19 Jhuggies, E-Block,\nNear Multan Nagar,\nPaschim Vihar, Delhi\n                                                 ... Complainant\n\n\n                              VERSUS\n\n\nSuraj @ Shutti\nS/o Sh. Santu\nR/o Peeragarhi Village, Ambedkar Camp,\nDelhi.                                           .... Accused\n\n\nDate of Institution                        :     08.01.2016\nDate on which judgment was reserved        :     24.11.2021\nDate of judgment                           :     27.11.2021\nFinal Order                                :     Convicted\n\n\nFIR No. 843/2015                                              Page 1 of 11\nP.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n                                     JUDGMENTThe important facts of the present case are as follows :1.                         In the instant case, an FIR bearing No. 843/2015 was\nlodged by the complainant Sh. Rahul Chanduria against the accused\nnamely Suraj @ Shutti S/o Sh. Santu alleging therein that the accused\nSuraj had trespassed into his Jhuggi No. 18/19, E-Block, Multan Nagar,\nNew Delhi along with his associate (since absconding) by breaking open\nthe lock of the main gate of the house with the help of a rod, for\ncommitting theft. The accused was caught red handed by the complainant\nand his friend, at that time and therefore, the accused was handed over to\nthe police. Investigation was completed and challanu/s 173Cr. P.C was\nfiled against the accused Suraj in respect of offences punishableu/s\n457/380/511/34IPC.2.                         Cognizance was taken and production warrants were\nissued and the accused was produced before the court. After compliance\nof the provisions ofsection 207Cr. P.C., vide order dated 28.01.2016\npassed by the then Ld. MM-07, (West) Tis Hazari, charges were framedu/s 457/380/511/34IPC against the accused Suraj @ Shutti to which\naccused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.PROSECUTION EVIDENCE3.                         To prove the charge against the accused, prosecution\nexamined five prosecution witnesses.FIR No. 843/2015                                                   Page 2 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti4.                         PW-1/Complainant namely Sh. Rahul deposed that\non 12.12.2015 at about 01:00 AM, while he was sleeping in his house i.e.\nat 18/19, Jhuggi, E-block, Near Multan Nagar, Delhi, he heard some\nnoise from his adjacent Jhuggi, where he had kept his house-hold articles.\nPW1 deposed that on hearing the noise, he got up and he saw that two\npersons had entered the said Jhuggi. He further deposed that on seeing\nthem, he called his friend namely Gaurav Sachdeva and when his friend\nGaurav Sachdeva came to the spot, they started to shout. On hearing their\nshouts, the accused persons tried to run away. However, PW-1 was able to\napprehend one of them, whose name was later revealed as Suraj @ Shutti.\nPW-1 further deposed that the other accused managed to flee from the\nspot. It was the version of PW-1 that the accused persons were carrying\niron rods in their hands and which were used by them for breaking the\nlock of the door. PW-1 also deposed that when they entered the Jhuggi,\nthey found that all the articles were scattered. Thereafter, PW-1 dialed at\nnumber 100 and police officials came to the spot. Subsequently, the\naccused was handed over to the police officials. PW-1 proved the arrest\nmemo (Ex.PW-1/D), and the personal search memo (Ex.PW-1/E) of the\naccused. He also proved the seizure memo (Ex.PW-1/B) and the\ndisclosure statement of the accused (Ex.PW-1/C). PW-1 further deposed\nthat he had made statement (Ex.PW-1/A) to the police and on the basis of\nwhich the FIR of the instant case was got registered. During the course of\ntestimony, PW-1 correctly identified the accused and also correctly\nidentified the case property through its photographs. The said\nphotographs are (Ex.P-1(Colly)). In his cross-examination, PW-1 deposedFIR No. 843/2015                                              Page 3 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n that at the time of incident, apart from him, his mother and two sisters\nwere also present at the spot. However, at the time of apprehension of the\naccused, apart from his friend Gaurav, no one else was present at the spot.\nHe deposed that the IO had prepared the site plan in his presence and that\nhe had appended his signatures on four documents during the course of\ninvestigation.5.                         PW-2/Sh.   Gaurav   Sachdeva   deposed   that   on\n12.12.2015 at about 01:00 AM, he had received a telephonic call from his\nfriend/ the complainant namely Rahul, and his friend Rahul had informed\nhim that some noises were coming from the adjacent house and that\nhe/PW-2 was requested by the complainant to come to the spot.\nThereafter, PW-2 went to the spot, and there, he saw that one person\ncame out from the Jhuggi (house) and immediately ran in the street.\nHowever, the other accused namely Suraj @ Shutti was apprehended by\nthe complainant namely Rahul at the spot. He deposed that when he had\nalong-with his friend/complainant entered inside the Jhuggi, he saw that\nall the articles were scattered. It was his version that the accused persons\nwere carrying iron rods and one lock was found to be broken. He further\ndeposed that thereafter, the complainant namely Rahul had informed the\npolice and the police arrived at the spot. Subsequently, the custody of the\naccused namely Suraj @ Shutti was handed over to the police. PW-2\ncorrectly identified the case property through photographs (Ex.P-1)\nduring the course of his testimony. He also correctly identified the case\nproperty i.e. two iron rods and one lock. In his cross-examination, PW-2FIR No. 843/2015                                                Page 4 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n deposed that his house was in front of the house of the complainant\nnamely Rahul. He further deposed that the accused persons had closed the\ndoors from outside of the other houses of the neighbourhood. He deposed\nthat the IO had not recorded the statement of any other witness in his\npresence.6.                         PW-3/HC Vinod deposed that at the relevant time, he\nwas posted as MHC(M) in PS Paschim Vihar (East) and that on the said\nday i.e. 12.12.2015, the IO/SI Rajender had deposited iron rods and one\nlock vide Entry No.4927 in Register No.19 in the malkhana of PS\nPaschim Vihar. The copy of the said entry is (Ex.PW-3/A). Despite\nopportunity, PW-3 was not cross-examined by the accused.7.                         PW-4/DO/HC Hari Charan proved the relevant DD\nentry and the FIR of the instant case. He deposed that on 12.12.2015, he\nhad recorded one DD Entry (Ex.PW-4/A) bearing No. 4A PS Paschim\nVihar (East) which was regarding the fact of the apprehension of a thief\nin A-4 Block, Jhuggi, Multan Nagar, Delhi. He deposed that after\nrecording of the said DD, the said DD was marked to IO/SI Rajender\nSingh for further investigation and for taking necessary action. He further\ndeposed that on the said date, at about 02:20 AM, he had received a rukka\nthrough Ct. Narender sent by IO/SI Rajender. On the basis of the said\nrukka, he had recorded the FIR of the instant case. The computer\ngenerated copy of the FIR is (Ex.PW-4/A). PW-4 also proved the\nendorsement made by him on the original rukka. The said endorsement isFIR No. 843/2015                                                  Page 5 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n (Ex.PW-4/C). PW-4 also placed on record certificate undersection 65Bof\nIndian Evidence Act (Ex.PW-4/D).8.                     PW-5/Ct. Narender deposed that on 12.12.2015, he\nwas posted on night emergency duty at PS Paschim Vihar as a Constable.\nHe deposed that at about 01:20 AM, the IO/ SI Rajender was assigned the\nDD entry bearing No. 4A dated 12.12.2015 vide which information was\nreceived that one thief had been apprehended. After receiving the same,\nPW5/he along-with the IO/SI Rajender Singh (since deceased) had\nproceeded to the spot i.e. 18/19, A-Block Jhuggi, Multan Nagar, Delhi. It\nwas the version of PW5 that at the spot, they found that the lock of the\niron door of the house/jhuggi bearing No.18/19, A-Block Jhuggi, Multan\nNagar, Delhi in a broken condition. At the same time, the complainant,\nwhose name was later revealed as Sh. Rahul had already apprehended the\nalleged thief namely Suraj @ Shutti. He deposed that the complainant had\nalso revealed that one of the thief/co-accused had absconded and that the\nother accused namely Suraj @ Shutti was apprehended by him. The\ncustody of the said thief was handed over to the IO. He further deposed\nthat at the spot, they also saw that almirah gate was opened and the\nclothes and other bags etc. were scattered at all over the place and that the\naccused persons were carrying iron rods and the said iron rods were\nrecovered from the spot. He deposed that the said iron rods and broken\nlock were seized vide seizure memo (Ex.PW-1/B). Subsequently, the\nstatement of the complainant was recorded by the IO and on the basis of\nthe same, the tehrir (already Ex.PW-1/A) was prepared and the same wasFIR No. 843/2015                                                Page 6 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n handed over to him by the IO for getting the FIR of the instant case\nrecorded. Thereafter, he/PW5 took the accused to the PS along-with the\ntehrir and got the FIR of the instant case recorded through the Duty\nOfficer/HC Hari Charan. After registration of the FIR, the accused was\ntaken by him/PW5 to SGM Hospital, Mangolpuri, Delhi for medical\nexamination of the accused. After medical examination, PW5/he came\nback at the Police Station and received the tehrir and the copy of FIR and\nwent to the spot to hand over the copy of the FIR, original tehrir and the\naccused to the IO. He deposed that the accused was arrested at the spot by\nthe IO vide arrest memo (Ex.PW-1/D) and the personal search of the\naccused was carried out vide personal search memo (Ex.PW-1/E).He also\nproved the disclosure statement (Ex.PW-1/C) made by the accused. He\nfurther deposed that the IO had also taken the photographs of the spot\nthrough his own mobile phone and that the said photographs are already\non record. PW5 also identified the signatures of the IO on the tehrir,\nseizure memo, disclosure memo, arrest memo and personal search memo.\nPW5 also proved the site plan (Ex.PW-5/A) which was prepared by the\nIO at the instance of the complainant. He deposed that after completion of\nthe formalities at the spot, they returned to PS and the IO deposited the\ncase property in the malkhana vide entry No.4927, Register No.19.\nDuring the course of testimony, PW5 correctly identified the accused. In\nhis cross-examination, PW5 denied the fact that he had not participated in\nthe investigation of the instant FIR and that the accused was falsely\nimplicated in the instant FIR at the instance of the IO. He also\ncategorically denied the fact that all the documents were prepared by theFIR No. 843/2015                                              Page 7 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n IO while sitting in the PS.9.                         Subsequent to the examination of PW-5, PE was\ndirected to be closed at the request of the Ld. APP for the State as all the\nrelevant prosecution witnesses had been examined. Thereafter, the matter\nwas fixed for recording the statement of the accused u/s 313 Cr. P.C.10.                        In his statement u/s 313 Cr. P.C, the accused took the\ndefence of false implication and pleaded innocence. Accused submitted\nthat he does not wish to lead his defence evidence. Consequently, the\nmatter was fixed for addressing Final arguments.11.                        I have heard the Ld. APP for the State and Ld.\nCounsel for the accused and perused the record carefully in light of the\narguments advanced.12.                        Learned APP for State has argued that prosecution\nhas proved its case against the accused by examining the material\nwitnesses, that is PW-1/ complainant and his friend namely Gaurav/PW2\nwho have supported the case of the prosecution in entirety. At the same\ntime, it has submitted by Ld. APP for the State, that the accused was\ncaught red-handed immediately after the accused had attempted to\ncommit the theft in question. He has argued that the complainant/PW-1\nhas deposed with consistency regarding all the incriminating facts which\nform gravamen of charge framed against the accused. By referring to theFIR No. 843/2015                                                     Page 8 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n respective testimony of PW1/ complainant and of the testimony of PW2,\nLd. APP for State has stated that sufficient incriminating evidence against\nthe accused in the present case has been adduced by the prosecution and\ntherefore, the accused deserve to be held guilty for the commission of the\nalleged offences.13.                        Per contra, Ld. Counsel for the accused has argued\nthat the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the alleged charges qua\nthe accused. It was submitted on behalf of the accused that, admittedly,\nthere is no independent witness account of the transaction in question. He\nhas argued that both PW1 as well as PW2 are interested witnesses and\ntheir testimony ought not to be accepted at its face value and must be\ntaken with a pinch of salt. Ld. Defence Counsel submits that the facts\nproved by the prosecution, do not unerringly point out towards the guilt\nof the accused and this would inexorably result in the acquittal of the\naccused.14.                        .In order to prove its case, the prosecution has\nexamined the complainant Rahul as PW1. In his examination in chief,\nPW1 has categorically stated that on the day of the incident, accused\nSuraj was caught red-handed by him when the accused had entered into\nhis jhuggi by breaking open the lock of the main gate of his house/\njhuggi, where he had kept his household articles and when, the accused\nwas trying to flee from the spot. At the same time, it also stands\nunambiguously proved from the deposition of PW2/Gaurav that theFIR No. 843/2015                                                 Page 9 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n accused Suraj @ Shutti had in deed committed the alleged offences and\nthat he was caught red-handed by the complainant/PW1 at the spot itself.15.                        At the same time, I find no reason as to why the\ncomplainant or the police officials would falsely implicate the accused\nSuraj, there being no previous rivalry/enmity against him. The defence\nhas failed to prove on record, any motive which could be assigned to the\ncomplainant for falsely implicating the accused, especially in light of the\nfact that the accused Suraj @ Shutti was a stranger to both PW1 and\nPW2. Not even an iota of evidence, much less cogent, has been brought\non record, to prove the defence, advanced on behalf of the accused Suraj\nthat he has been falsely implicated in the instant case.16.                        Accordingly, in view of my above discussion, the\nallegations against the accused Suraj @ Shutti stands proved and accused\nSuraj @ Shutti is held guilty in respect of the offence punishable\nunderSection 457/380/511/34IPC.17.                        Consequently, the accused namely Suraj @ Shutti s/o\nSh. Santu stands convicted in respect of offences punishableu/s\n457/380/511/34IPC.18.                        Let the convict be heard on the quantum of sentence.19.                        Copy of judgment be given to the convict free of costFIR No. 843/2015                                                    Page 10 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti\n and copy of judgment be placed on case file.Digitally signedDecided on 27.11.2021\n                                        PUNEET              by PUNEET\n                                                            NAGPAL\nAnnounced in the Open Court\n                                        NAGPAL              Date: 2021.11.27\n                                                            10:04:28 +05'30'\n                                               (PUNEET NAGPAL)\n                                               MM-07, West District\n                                                   THC/DelhiFIR No. 843/2015                                              Page 11 of 11P.S. Paschim Vihar\nState Vs. Suraj @ Shutti