Back
2017 Supreme(Del) 4455
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRATIBHA RANI, J.
Neeraj Kumar & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State, N.C.T. of Delhi - Respondent
CRL.A. 519, 520 of 2011, 1005 of 2011
Decided On : 05-12-2017
For the Appellant : Appellant in person.
For the Respondent: Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP, with SI H.P. Mudgal PS P. Vihar
The consistent testimony of prosecution witnesses and the recovery of incriminating evidence are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.
Headnote:
Conviction - Criminal Law - IPC, Arms Act - Section 379/411 IPC, Section 307/186/353/411/34 IPC, Section 25/27/54/59 Arms Act - The judgment discusses the conviction and sentence awarded under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act. The court's decision is influenced by the prosecution's evidence, including witness testimony and material evidence such as the recovery of firearms and the stolen car. The court also considers the individual roles of the convicts and their shared intention in committing the offenses.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for offenses related to theft, possession of stolen property, and use of firearms. The prosecution presented evidence including witness testimony and material evidence. The appellants pleaded not guilty but were convicted based on the prosecution's evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellants guilty based on the consistent testimony of prosecution witnesses and the recovery of incriminating evidence. The court also considered the individual roles of the convicts and their shared intention in committing the offenses.
Issues: The main issue was the guilt of the appellants regarding the offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the consistent testimony of prosecution witnesses and the recovery of incriminating evidence to establish the guilt of the appellants. The court also considered the individual roles of the convicts and their shared intention in committing the offenses.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the appellants' convictions were upheld.
Pratibha Rani, J.
Crl.A.519/2011 & Crl.M.A.No.4944/2011 & Crl.M.B.No.685/2011
Crl.A.520/2011 & Crl.M.A.No.4945/2011 & Crl.M.B.No.686/2011
1. The appellant/convict Neeraj Kumar has filed these two appeals assailing his conviction and sentence awarded to him in case FIR No. 358/2005 under Section 379/411 IPC, PS Paschim Vihar and in case FIR No. 422/2005 under Section 307/186/353/411/34 IPC& under Section 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, PS Nangloi.
2. By filing Crl.A. No. 519/2011, the appellant/convict Neeraj Kumar has impugned the judgment dated 19th February, 2011 and order on sentence dated 28th February, 2011 passed in SC No. 1116A/09 (pertaining to case FIR No.358/2005 under Section 379/411 IPC, PS Paschim Vihar) whereby he has been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 411 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for three years.
3. By filing Crl.A. No.520/2011, the appellant/convict Neeraj Kumar has impugned the judgment dated 19th February, 2011 and order on sentence dated 28th February, 2011 passed in SC No. 1116/09 (pertaining to case FIR No. 422/2005 under Section 307/186/353/411/34 IPC& under Section 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, PS Nangloi) whereby he has been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 186 r/w Section 353/34 IPC and sentenced as under :-
(i)
U/S 186 IPC
to undergo RI for three months.
(ii)
U/S 353 IPC
to undergo RI for two years.
4. Pursuant to the order dated 22nd November, 2017, fresh Nominal roll of the appellant has been received from the Jail as per which the appellant has already been released on 18th May, 2013 after completion of sentence awarded to him in this case.
5. Today appellant Neeraj Kumar is present in person. He submits that he has already undergone the sentence awarded to him in SC No.1116A/09 (pertaining to case FIR No. 358/2005 under Section 379/411 IPC, PS Paschim Vihar) and SC No.1116/09 (pertaining to case FIR No.422/2005 under Section 307/186/353/411/34 IPC& under Section 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, PS Nangloi). The appellant submits that he does not want to continue with these appeals and he may be permitted to withdraw these two appeals.
6. Accordingly, Crl.A. No.519/2011 and Crl.A. No.520/2011 are dismissed as withdrawn.
Crl.A. No.1005/2011
1. This Crl.A.No.1005/2011 has been preferred by appellants/convicts Rajesh Kumar and Somvir impugning the judgment dated 19th February, 2011 and order on sentence dated 28th February, 2011 passed in Session Case No.1116/09 (pertaining to case FIR No. 422/2005 under Section 307/186/353/411/34 IPC& under Section 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, PS Nangloi) whereby they alongwith co-convict Neeraj Kumar have been convicted and sentenced as under :-
Appellant Rajesh Kumar
(i)
U/S 186 IPC
to undergo RI for three months.
(ii)
U/S 353 IPC
to undergo RI for two years.
(iii)
U/S 25/54/59 Arms Act
to under RI for two years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month.
(iii) U/S 25/54/59 Arms Act to under RI for two years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month.
Appellant Somvir
(i)
U/S 186 IPC
to undergo RI for three months.
(ii)
U/S 353 IPC
to undergo RI for two years.
(iii)
U/S 307 IPC
to undergo RI for five years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month.
(iv)
U/S 25/27/54/59 Arms Act
to undergo RI for five years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month.
2. None has appeared on behalf of the appellants Rajesh Kumar and Somvir.
3. Pursuant to the order dated 22nd November, 2017, fresh Nominal rolls of the appellants have been received.
4. As per nominal roll of appellant Rajesh Kumar, he has already been released on 20th March, 2013 after completion
