Back
2017 Supreme(Del) 793
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
Bhim Kumar @ Raju - Appellant
Versus
State (GNCT of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.A. 75 of 2017 & Crl.M.A. 1126 of 2017
Decided On : 07-03-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Tanu B. Mishra, Mr. Sarthak Maggon
For the Respondent: Mr. Amit Ahlawat
The central legal point established in the judgment is the principle of 'benefit of doubt' based on the lack of confidence in the prosecution's evidence.
Headnote:
Convicted - Offence Punishable under Section 379 IPC - [Section 379 IPC] - The court discussed the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the statement of the victim, the medical evidence, and the discrepancies in the description of the stolen mobile phone. The court found that the nature of evidence and the victim's version did not inspire confidence, leading to the appellant being entitled to the benefit of doubt. The impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence were set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Bhim Kumar @ Raju, was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. The prosecution's case was based on the statement of a police officer and the victim, who alleged that the appellant drugged and stole from him. However, discrepancies in the evidence led the court to doubt the appellant's guilt.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt due to the nature of evidence and the victim's version not inspiring confidence.
Issues: The main issue was the credibility of the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the victim's statement and the medical evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of confidence in the prosecution's evidence, leading to the appellant being entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Final Decision: The impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence were set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released.
1. Convicted for offence punishable under Section 379 IPC Bhim Kumar @ Raju challenges the impugned judgment dated 14th October, 2015 and the order on sentence of the even date directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years for offence punishable under Section 379 IPC.
2. Assailing the conviction, learned counsel for Bhim Kumar @ Raju submits that the prosecution has failed to establish any supporting evidence against Bhim @ Raju. Neither any eye witness nor the CCTV footage has been produced in evidence. Further, the phone allegedly recovered from Bhim @ Raju was of Samsung make and not Chinese make as per the seizure memo. PW-1, Pankaj the victim failed to produce any bill of the aforesaid mobile phone to prove that it belonged to him. Alternatively, it was prayed that the appellant be released on the period already undergone.
3. Learned APP for the State on the other hand submits that the impugned judgment suffer from no illegality and the appeal be dismissed.
4. The prosecution case springs out of the statement made by PW-5 SI H.C. Krishan wherein he stated that on 14th March, 2014 around 9:00 P.M., when he along with PW-7 Ct. Mungesh was patrolling at Kishan Ganj Railway Station, they noticed a boy aged 18 years carrying two bags on platform no. 01-02. Being suspicious, they enquired his name and address. At first, the boy revealed his name as Raju and later on as Bhim and stated that the two bags belonged to him. Since he was looking nervous, SI Jai Masih and Ct. Mungesh told him to accompany them. While they were walking towards Sarai Rohilla, they noticed a person in semi conscious condition standing by the pillar. On enquiring, he pointed out towards Bhim @ Raju and stated that while he was sitting with him in the train, Bhim @ Raju made him eat some biscuits containing some intoxicating substance and stole Rs.9,000/-, his bag and his black and red coloured mobile phone. However, he stated that the two bags which Bhim @ Raju was carrying do not belong to him. On enquiring about the mobile phone, Bhim @ Raju took out the mobile phone from his right side pocket of his pant which was red and black in colour. The person in semi conscious condition, whose name was disclosed as Pankaj, identified the mobile phone and stated that it belonged to him. Thereafter, they took Bhim @ Raju and Pankaj to Kishan Ganj police station whereafter, Pankaj was taken to Hindu Rao Hospital. Consequently, FIR No. 31/2014 was registered under Sections 328, 379, 411 IPC at PS Sarai Rohilla Station on the statement of PW-1 Pankaj vide Ex.PW-6/A.
5. PW-1 Pankaj deposed in Court that on 13th March, 2014 he boarded the Awadh Assam Express train from Lalgarh for going to his native place. Bhim @ Raju, who was also present in the train, told him that he is also a resident of Hazipur and requested him to eat biscuits and stated that they will eat dinner later. After eating the biscuits, Pankaj felt dizziness and later became unconscious. He gained some consciousness at Kishan Ganj Railway Station, Delhi. Bhim @ Raju along with his associate brought him down at the station. He further stated that he was carrying a bag, Rs.9000/- cash which were found missing when he got down from the train. He was also having a mobile phone make Chinese which was removed by Bhim from his pocket. The mobile phone was recovered from the pocket of the pant of Bhim @ Raju. While he was de-boarding the train at the station, he saw two police officials, he narrated them the incident and pointed out towards Bhim @ Raju after which he again became unconscious. Thereafter, he regained consciousness in the hospital. During his cross examination, he deposed that he was having the journey ticket but he did not handover the same because the Investigating Officer did not ask for it. He stated that he had the purchase bill of mobile phone Ex.P-1 with him in the bag which was stolen on the date of incident. He denied the suggestion that the mobile pho
