SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Del) 1857

High Court Of Delhi
Pradeep Nandrajog
MANOJ KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
Crl. Appeal 279 Of 2005
Decided On : 09/06/2007

Advocates Appeared:
R.S.GUPTA, RICHA KAPOOR

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860

       Sections 395 & 397 - Robbery and Dacoity - Challenge to sentence - Appellants were arrested in another case - On interrogation, accused made disclosure about their involvement in this case - Other accomplices were also arrest on basis of their disclosure - Case properties were recovered on basis of their information - Victim/complainant identified his case properties in TIP as well as in the court - Court considered that the legal position of a prosecution and an injured were not different and conviction can be founded on the testimony of injured alone unless it was shown that the injured had same motive to falsely implicate the appellant - Court was of view, no infirmity in the challenged judgment - Hence, Court upheld the judgment - Appeal dismissed.

       [Paras 5,7 & 11]

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) AFORE-NOTED appeals arise out of a common judgment of conviction dated 21. 2. 2005 in Sessions Case No. 139/2001.

( 2 ) THUS, the 4 appeals have been taken up together for hearing.

( 3 ) AT the outset, I may note that in Crl. Appeal No. 240/2005 which was listed on 29. 8. 2007 learned counsel for the appellant was directed to send communications to learned counsel for the other appellants informing them that all appeals would be listed for final hearing on 6. 9. 2007 i. e. today.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant in Crl. Appeal No. 240/2005 has produced 3 receipts issued by Blaze Flash Couriers Ltd. which evidence that learned counsel, Shri Vikas Pahwa, had intimated Shri Sachin Chopra, Shri randhir Jain as also Shri Vijender Sharma, counsel for appellants in the other 3 appeals that matter would be listed for hearing today. Mr. Vikas Pahwa states that his colleague Mr. Abhinit Das has personally spoken to Mr. Vijender Sharma, counsel for appellant Ashok Kumar and had duly informed him that Crl. Appeal no. 265/2005 would be listed today. Learned counsel states that Mr. Vijender sharma, Advocate for accused Ashok Kumar informed the counsel i. e. Abhinit Das that he was never the counsel for Ashok Kumar.

( 5 ) I note that Crl. Appeal No. 265/2005 has been filed by Vijender sharma, Advocate.

( 6 ) SINCE Mr. Vikash Pahwa is appearing for the appellant of crl. Appeal No. 240/2005 and Mr. Randhir Jain, Advocate is appearing for the appellants in Crl. Appeal No. 226/2005 I have requested learned counsel to act as amicus for appellant Ashok Kumar. Since learned counsel have prepared the brief they have agreed to assist the Court in Crl. Appeal No. 265/2005 as well.

( 7 ) CRIMINAL investigation commenced when PW-3 Raghunath lodged a complaint which resulted in registration of FIR No. 410/1999 PS Mehrauli informing that in the intervening night of 17. 6. 1999 and 18. 6. 1999 he was proceeding from Village Manger in Haryana to his house in Vasant Kunj in his maruti Esteem car bearing No. DL-3cv-9810. At around 12. 30 in the night he crossed Jaunapur village on main Delhi-Gurgaon road. He wanted to ease himself. Stopping the car by the roadside he indulged in the usual habit of urinating on the road. Not only was he relieved of the pressure on his bladder but was even relieved of his car, his gold ring, his gold chain, his mobile telephone, his briefcase, his watch and the money he was carrying in his wallet. He stated that 5 boys came in maruti car bearing No. DL-3cb-5254 and so relieved him. He stated that leaving behind the maruti car, his car was carjacked by said persons. FIR No. 410/99 P. S. Mehrauli, Ex. PW1/a was registered at 3. 40 A. M. pursuant to D. D. No. 76 B recorded at 1. 55 A. M.

( 8 ) PW-2, K. A. Singh visited the scene of the crime on 18. 6. 1999 and lifted chance finger prints from the maruti car. They later on matched with the finger prints of Ashok. The maruti car was seized at the site of the crime vide seizure memo Ex. PW-7/b.

( 9 ) 2 days thereafter information was received that the car of PW-3 had met with an accident near Dadri. Accompanied by PW-3, the investigating officer reached Dadri. The car was taken into custody.

( 10 ) ANOTHER 2 days thereafter, Jagbir and Ajit were arrested by the police. Statedly, Ajit made a disclosure statement at the first instance followed by a disclosure statement made by Jagbir. The two statedly not only confessed to the carjack and the dacoity, implicating besides self, Ravinder kumar @ Ravi, Ashvir, Ashok Kumar and Manoj. Stately, Ajit Singh further disclosed to the police that the booty was shared as follows:- (1) Ravinder. . . . Briefcase. (2) Ashvir. . . . Gold ring. (3) Jagbir. . . . Watch (4) Ashok. . . . Cash (Rs. 1,200/-) (5) Manoj. . . . Gold Chain. (6) Ajit. . . . Mobile.

( 11 ) ACCOMPANIED by Head Constable Satyawan, PW-6 recoveries as per disclosure statement of Ajit was statedly made from the persons named by Ajit in his






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top