Back
2016 Supreme(P&H) 1366
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SNEH PRASHAR, J.
DINESH CHANDER - APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB - RESPONDENT
CRA-S-1690-SB of 2003
Decided On : 10-08-2016
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Surjeet Singh Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that direct, substantive evidence is sufficient to prove the charges against an accused, and lack of independent corroboration or medical evidence does not necessarily undermine the credibility of witnesses.
Headnote:
Robbery - Criminal Law - 397 IPC, 25 of the Arms Act - The judgment upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code for committing robbery and under Section 25 of the Arms Act for possessing and using an illegal firearm. The court found that the evidence established beyond doubt that the appellant entered the house armed with a deadly weapon with the intention to commit robbery, and therefore, the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for committing robbery and possessing an illegal firearm based on the prosecution's evidence that he entered a house armed with a pistol and attempted to rob the occupants.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant, finding that the evidence established his guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the prosecution witnesses and the lack of independent corroboration of their testimony, as well as the absence of medical evidence to support the victim's injury.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the direct and substantive evidence provided by the prosecution was sufficient to prove the charges against the appellant, and the lack of independent corroboration or medical evidence did not undermine the credibility of the witnesses.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's bail/surety bonds were cancelled. The court ordered the convict to be arrested and committed to prison for serving the remaining sentence.
SNEH PRASHAR, J.
1. This appeal was preferred by appellant Dinesh Chander, assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.08.2003 recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, in Session Case No.71 dated 19.12.2002 based on First Information Report No.199 dated 22.10.2002 registered at Police Station Division No.8, Ludhiana, by virtue of which he (appellant) was sentenced as under:-
| Sr.No. | Under Section | Sentence |
| 1. | 397 IPC | To undergo R.I. for 7 years. |
| 2. | 25 of the Arms Act | To undergo R.I. for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo R.I. for month. |
2. It was ordered that all the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.
The story of the prosecution was as under:-
3. On 22.10.2002, Rajneesh Aneja son of Baldev Aneja, resident of 13-B Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana alongwith his mother Prem Lata, wife Suman Aneja and sister-in-law Sapna Aneja was present in his house when at about 11:45 a.m., a clean shaven person entered his house and on pistol point directed the ladies in the house to go in one room. He asked them to take of all their ornaments, failing which they shall be shot dead. Rajneesh Aneja tried to apprehend the robber, who with an intention to kill him, fired a shot but that hit the wall. Suman Aneja also tried to catch the robber who gave a bite on her finger of right hand and injured the same. Their shouts attracted the neighbours. Rajneesh Aneja snatched the pistol from the hand of the assailant and as the people gathered, he was apprehended.
4. On query, the robber (appellant) disclosed his name as Dinesh Chander son of Dulare Lal, resident of Akaipur, District Farukhabad (U.P.) at present resident of 'Pandit Da Makann' near Big Gate, Sahnewal. On receipt of information, the police reached the spot and arrested the appellant. On personal search of the appellant, three live cartridges of .32 bore were recovered from his right pocket. On unloading the pistol, an empty cartridge was also recovered. The pistol, the empty and the three live cartridges were taken into possession by the police.
5. Statement Ex.PA of Rajneesh Aneja was recorded by Sub Inspector Devinder Kumar and based on the same the First Information Report Ex.PA/2 was registered at Police Station Division No.8, Ludhiana. On completion of investigation and other formalities, the appellant was challaned and sent to the Court for trial.
6. The appellant was charge-sheeted and subjected to face trial for commission of offence punishable under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “I.P.C.”) and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
7. To substantiate the charge, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses namely PW1 Rajneesh Aneja, PW2 Suman Aneja, PW3 Usha Rani Clerk, PW4 S.I. Devinder Kumar, PW5 H.C. Gurmohan Singh, PW6 ASI Gurmit Singh, PW7 Constable Darshan Singh, PW8 CII Ram Saran and PW9 ASI Surinder Pal.
8. After closure of evidence of the prosecution, in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), the appellant denied the case of the prosecution and pleaded that he being the sole proprietor of M/s Dulare Lal Mahesh Chand used to collect arrears and dues from various places throughout India. In the month of October, he came to Punjab to collect dues from various persons and on account of his stay took on rent a place at village Sahnewal from Sham Lal Pandit. His munim Parmod Kumar son of Hori Lal was also with him. The appellant further stated that on 22.10.2002, his car was stolen from Sahnewal parking and when he was in the process of reporting the matter to the police at Police Station Sahnewal, the police raided his house and arrested him in this false case. Huge cash amount was taken by the police from him and his gold chain, wrist watch and gold ring
