JUDGMENT

1. Anand and Rahul challenge the impugned judgment dated 10th October 2017 convicting them for offences punishable under Section 392/34 IPC and the order on sentence dated 12th October 2017 directing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months each.

2. Assailing the sentence, Learned Counsel for Anand prays that Anand be released on the period already undergone.

3. Learned Counsel for Rahul contends that Ct. Hemraj (PW-2) in his cross-examination stated that they reached the spot at 5:30 P.M. whereas the complainant in his testimony stated that Rahul was arrested at 5:30 P.M. Ct. Hemraj also deposed that Rahul was arrested from a nearby metro station however the case of the prosecution is that it was a railway track. The Investigating Officer has also not recorded the statements of any eye-witnesses. He further submits that the recovered mobile phone was identified by the complainant but no bill has been produced that shows that it belonged to the complainant. He further prays that Rahul be released on the period already undergone.

4. Learned APP for the State on the other hand submits that Rahul was apprehended on the same day at the instance of the complainant. The mobile phone was also recovered from the appellant. The complainant also produced the original bill in court and provided its photocopy to the police. Furthermore, the appellants were correctly identified in court by the complainant.

5. Process of law was set into motion on 12th June 2013 at about 5:00 P.M., on receipt of information regarding robbery of the caller's mobile phone and some money at Railway Line, Old Seelampur, Delhi. Aforesaid information was recorded vide DD No.24A (Ex.PW-7/A) and entrusted to ASI Beg Raj Singh. He alongwith Ct. Hemraj reached the spot where they met the complainant Pradeep Saxena who stated that on 12th June 2013 he was coming from Moradabad to Delhi by train. He was supposed to get off at Shahdara Station but the train did not stop there. When the train was moving slowly at train signal in front of Seelampur Metro Station, he got down and started walking on railway tracks towards Shahdara. At around 4:45 P.M., when he was between railway and metro station, Seelampur he suddenly came saw two persons aged about 21-22 years coming towards him. One of them pushed him and the other one caught hold of his neck and put a knife on his neck. The other person who had pushed him took out his mobile make Nokia X2, black colour with SIM No.8010441349 from his right side pocket and snatched away Rs.200/- kept in his back pocket. Thereafter, both of them ran away from the spot. Aforesaid statement was recorded vide Ex.PW-1/A. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, FIR No. 260/2013 (Ex.PW-5/A) was registered at PS Seelampur for the offence punishable under Section 392/34 IPC.

6. The site plan was prepared at the instance of the complainant Pradeep Saxena vide Ex.PW-7/C. Thereafter, ASI Beg Raj Singh alongwith the complainant went in search of the accused persons at the Seelampur jhuggi. Rahul (Appellant herein) was spotted by the complainant near Jhuggi No.104, Gali No.1, Seelampur. He was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW-1/B and his personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW-1/C. One mobile phone make Nokia X2, black colour with a blue colour cover and Rs.200/- cash was recovered from him. The complainant identified the recovered mobile phone as his own. The recovered articles were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-1/D. His disclosure statement was recorded vide Ex.PW-2/A wherein he disclosed the name of his associate as Anand.

7. On 9th July 2013, an information was received vide Ex.PW-7/D regarding the arrest of the co-accused Anand in FIR No.268/2013 registered at PS Gandhi Nagar. Anand was formally arrested in this case on 12th March 2013 vide arrest memo Ex.PW