Crl. Appeal Nos.948/2013 & 144/2014 Page 1 of 12

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

+

CRL.A. 948/2013

VIRENDER PRATAP SINGH

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. S.N.Pandey, Advocate

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

.....Respondent

Through

Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for

the State

+

CRL.A. 144/2014

RAJESH KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. V.K.Tandon, Advocate

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

.....Respondent

Through

Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for

the State

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

INDERMEET KAUR, J.

1

The appeal filed by Virender Pratap Singh is directed against the

Crl. Appeal Nos.948/2013 & 144/2014 Page 2 of 12

impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 13.03.2013 and

20.03.2013 respectively wherein the appellant Virender Pratap Singh

stands convicted under Section 392 read with Sections 394 & 397 of the

IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 7 years and to

pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo

SI for one month.

2

The appeal filed by the co-convict Rajesh Kumar has impugned

the judgment and order on sentence dated 10.12.2013 and 14.12.2013

respectively wherein the appellant Rajesh Kumar had also been

convicted under Section 392 read with Section 394 of the IPC as also

Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act. He has been sentenced to undergo

RI for a period of 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default

of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month for his conviction under

Section 392 of the IPC. For his conviction under Sections 25/54/59 of

the Arms Act, he has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 2

years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine,

to undergo SI for one week.

3

Benefit of Section 428 of the Cr.PC had been granted to both the

convicts. The judgment of Rajesh Kumar had followed subsequent to

Crl. Appeal Nos.948/2013 & 144/2014 Page 3 of 12

the judgment already delivered qua Virender Pratap Singh and this was

for the reason that Rajesh Kumar had been absconding; he had been re-

arrested and thereafter a supplementary challan had been filed against

him.

4

The version of the prosecution is that on 28.05.2012, a PCR call

was received at police station Keshav Puram. This was regarding

robbery and apprehension of one person. The person apprehended was

Virender Pratap Singh. This DD was marked to SI Deepak Bhardwaj.

He along with constable Bijrender Dhama reached the spot i.e. A-17,

Lawrence Road Industrial Area. The complainant Manohar Lal (PW-10)

and the injured Vinod Bohra (PW-13) were present there. Virender

Pratap Singh had been apprehended by them. He had two country-made

pistol with him. The statement of the complainant was recorded.

Investigation was set into motion.

5

The version of the complainant being that on 28.05.2012,

Monohar Lal working as a Cashier was present in his office when at

about 12:00 pm two boys came to his cabin; they were accompanied by

Vinod Bohra, who was the chowkidar working in the company. One of

the two boys sat in front of him and other boy kept standing near the

Crl. Appeal Nos.948/2013 & 144/2014 Page 4 of 12

door. The boy sitting in front took out a pistol and pointed towards the

complainant and asked him to hand over the cash or else he would be

killed. The complainant caught the barrel of the pistol but in the

meanwhile the said boy pushed him as a result, he fell down. The

complainant was hit by the butt of the pistol. The cash which was lying

on the table was taken away. The boy carrying the bag fell down on the

stairs. The other boy who was keeping watch at the door lifted the said

bag and ran away but in this process, his pistol dropped at the spot.