JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “Cr.P.C.”) is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 17.09.2014, passed by the learned Special Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, in connection with FIR No.575/2002 registered at Police Station Paharganj, Delhi for offence punishable under Sections 379/356/411 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (in short “IPC”).

2. The prosecution case in short is that on 20.11.2002, complainant Raja Singh was attending the marriage ceremony of his colleague at Ambedkar Bhawan, Rani Jhansi Road, Paharganj, Delhi. At about 11:15 PM, when he tried to take out his mobile phone (make Trium IMH No.382198842868206) from the mobile cover, which was tied with his waist belt. He realised that the accused had stolen the mobile phone (hereinafter referred to as respondent) from his waist. Further, the complainant stated that after his phone got stolen, he and his associates (friends) chased the respondent and subsequently, with the help of the Constable Budh Singh, the respondent was apprehended. Name of the accused was disclosed as Narender S/o Nathu Ram (respondent) and along with him, the belongings of the complainant were recovered. The FIR for offences punishable under Sections 379/356/411 of the IPC was registered against him. After investigation, charge-sheet for offences punishable under Section 379 of the IPC was filed.

3. The respondent pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The learned trial court vide Judgment dated 17.09.2014 convicted the appellant under Section 379 IPC, and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 year and fine of Rs.10,000/- was imposed. In lieu of fine, further simple imprisonment has been directed.

4. The respondent challenged the conviction and the sentence before the learned Special Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, whereby the impugned judgment was reversed in the favour of the respondent and hence the State is in revision before this court.

5. To prove its case, the prosecution had examined the complainant Raja Singh as (PW-1), the associate of the complainant Dr. Atul Kohil was examined as PW-3 and Constable Bedh Singh was examined as PW-4. The witness/complainant, (PW-1) during his cross examination has stated that he when was dancing with his friends, he realised that his mobile phone was not in the mobile cover of his belt. In search for his mobile, he came out of the Shamiyana (tent) and he noticed that a person (respondent) under suspicious condition was fleeing the spot. Then, (PW-1) along with (PW-3) chased the respondent and later, he was apprehended by Constable Bedh Singh (PW-4) coming from the opposite side. PW-1, further deposed that his mobile phone was recovered. When the witness PW-1 was asked whether he can recall the date or month of the incident, PW-1 stated that he does not remember the date or month of the incident, but it was winter season of year 2002 and he was not sure that the incident occurred on 21.11.2002.

6. PW-3 deposed that he was attending the marriage with the PW-1, where the mobile of the PW-1 was stolen. He stated that after the mobile was snatched, PW-1 started running after the respondent and during the chase, Constable Bhud Singh (PW-4) from the opposite side apprehended the respondent. Then the witness PW-3 was asked whether he can identify the accused/respondent, but he failed to do so, due to lapse of time. The other witness PW-4, was examined on 20.11.2022, where he deposed that he heard noise of “Pakro-Pakro’ from opposite end, on which he saw a boy, i.e., respondent running towards him and other men chasing him. Then PW-4 coming from the opposite end apprehended the respondent and the belongings of the complainant (PW-1) was recovered from the respondent.

7. Section 379 of the IPC requires four essentials viz. (a) that the accused had taken the movable property dishonestly, (b) property was taken out of possession of the complainant, (c) property was taken out without consent