JUDGMENT

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. The instant appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) arises out of the impugned judgment dated 21.03.2009 and order on sentence dated 24.03.2009 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Central, Delhi (‘Trial Court’) whereby the appellant was convicted in case FIR bearing number 590/1998 under Sections 328/379/411 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (‘IPC’) registered at Police Station I.P. Estate. 2. To summarise briefly the facts of the case, the present FIR was lodged on 11.11.1998, on the complaint of one Sh. Tek Chand who was driver by profession. The complainant had stated that his car was hired by the accused from Ballabhgarh to Delhi on 07.11.1998, and they had reached I.T.O, Delhi at about 1:00 pm. Upon reaching there, the accused had told the complainant to stop the car near a rehri and he had allegedly administered certain stupefying drug to the complainant by mixing the same in juice and had told the complainant to take the car behind Hans Bhawan by the side of a Hotel/Dhaba. The complainant stated that thereafter, he had lost consciousness and had regained consciousness only at about 10:00 am and he could not find the alleged person and his car was also missing. The complainant kept on searching his car and being unable to find the same, he lodged a report on 11.11.1998 at Police Station I.P. Estate, upon which present FIR was registered under Sections 328/379 IPC. During the course of investigation, the police was unable to either apprehend the accused or recover the stolen car and on 17.02.99 an untraced report was filed in the case. However, on 22.03.1999, information was received from Police Station Hari Nagar about recovery of stolen car no. DNA 6200 from possession of the appellant and arrest of the appellant pursuant to registration of case FIR no. 216/1999 under Section 411 IPC at Police Station Hari Nagar. Subsequently, the said FIR was clubbed with the present FIR registered with Police Station I.P. Estate.

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed for offences punishable under Sections 411/379 IPC and initially, charge under Section 379 IPC was framed against the appellant by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on 11.05.2001 with the alternative charge for offence punishable under Section 411 IPC and the appellant was put to trial.

4. A perusal of record shows that the complainant was examined as PW-2 before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and on the basis of his deposition, the file was sent to Court of Sessions as the learned Metropolitan Magistrate was of the view that the appellant was to be tried for offence punishable under Section 328 IPC. After the committal of the file to the Court of Sessions/Trial Court, a charge under Sections 328/34 IPC was framed against the appellant on 26.10.2006 and the trial was conducted.

5. The prosecution examined inasmuch as eight witnesses including the complainant and after the closure of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

6. Upon hearing arguments by the State as well as the learned counsel for the accused, the learned Trial Court was pleased to convict the appellant for offence punishable under Section 328 I.P.C. vide impugned order dated 21.03.2009. Subsequently upon hearing the arguments on point of sentence, the learned Trial Court vide order dated 24.03.2009 was pleased to direct the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months, for offence punishable under Section 328 IPC with fine of Rs.20,000/- out of which Rs.10,000/- was to be paid to the complainant, and in default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

7. The appellant in compliance of order dated 24.03.2009 has already deposited fine amount of Rs.20,000/- with the learned Trial Court on 25.03.2009. The appellant being aggrieved by the