CRL.A.--279/2012. Case: MURLIDHAR Vs. STATE. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | CRL.A.--279/2012 |
| Citation | NA |
| Judgement Date | June 01, 2018 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on :26th May,, Date of decision : 1st June, + CRL.A. 279/2002
MURLIDHAR ..... Appellant
Through Mr. M. L. Yadav, Adv along with appellant in person.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP for the State with SI Sachin Dahiya, PS Subhash Place.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J.
-
The present appeal arises out of judgement dated 9th November passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi by which the Appellant been convicted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred as IPC) and Section 397 IPC and sentenced on November 2001 to rigorous imprisonment for five years and imprisonment for seven years, both sentences to run concurrently.
-
The incident dates back to 31st May, 1999 when Mrs. Kamlesh present in her house along with her daughter Miss. Jyoti and son, Kartik. Her husband was not at home. Her daughter saw three entering the house. Two of them were armed with knives and one pistol. They threatened them and took away gold bangles and mangalsutra. Mrs. Kamlesh was also threatened and made to open the of the Almirah. The three persons removed jewellery, and cash
CRL.A.279/2002 Page 1 of
Rs.30,000/- from the Almirah and they locked Mrs. Kamlesh, Miss.
and Master Kartik in the store room. The victims were finally able to out only when Mrs. Kamlesh’s elder son Master Deepak came from and opened the lock from outside. On coming out, they also noticed that the Philips T.V. and Tape recorder was also missing. On the next complaint was lodged with the PS, Saraswati Vihar which was registered FIR No. 372/99. A few months later, the Accused was spotted by Kamlesh in the neighbourhood. Information was given to the police apprehended and arrested the accused. Another accomplice was also into custody but Mrs. Kamlesh could not identify him and was hence let off. The third accomplice was not traced.
-
The accused were charged under Sections 392/397 IPC. In the Court, the Prosecution produced the following witnesses:
PW-1 – Mrs. Kamlesh
PW-2 – Ms. Joyti
PW-3 – H.C. Brijpal Singh
PW-4 – Const. Kailash Kumar
PW-5 – Const. Ashok Kumar
PW-6 – Const. Pardeep
PW-7 – Mr. Subhash Chander
PW-8 – S.I. Rajesh Sharma
PW-9 – Const. Vasudev
The statement of the Accused under Section 313 of the Code of Procedure, 1973. was also recorded, in which apart from pleading Guilty the accused did not effectively answer any of the questions suggestions.
CRL.A.279/2002 Page 2 of
-
Mrs. Kamlesh deposed as PW-1. She deposed that she was at home on 31st May, 1999 with her daughter Jyoti and her son Kartik. At about pm, her daughter informed her that three boys had entered the house, which two were armed with knives and one had a pistol. They them and asked Mrs. Kamlesh to give the four gold bangles, Mangalsutra of gold and four rings which she was wearing. Thereafter demanded that they give the other gold articles and made her open almirah. Jewellery of gold and silver along with cash of Rs. 30,000/-taken away. They also removed the money lying in the children’s bank (Gulak) and the money in her purse. They were then locked in the store room from outside. Her elder son Deepak returned from tuition and opened the store room. They then found that the Philips TV and recorder, which were lying in the bedroom and drawing room, were found missing. She then called the PCR and got her statement Thereafter, after 6 months, when she visited Rani Bagh for her check with her doctor she spotted the accused. PW-1- Mrs. Kamlesh him, and her husband informed the police officials. He was apprehended by the police.
-
Mrs. Kamlesh’s daughter Jyoti appeared as PW-2. She confirmed sequence of events described by her mother PW-1. She was however specific that one of the intruders kept the knife on her and the other kept knife on her mother. She also said that when her mother was made to the almirah, the accused themselves removed the jewellery and other articles from the almirah. She stated “Murlidhar is present in the Court. He having knife which he had shown to my mother”.
-
The roznamcha has been produced by PW-9 Constable Mr.
CRL.A.279/2002 Page 3 of
and is exhibited as Ex. PW 9/A. PW-8, SI Rajesh Sharma, deposed 16th December, 1999, the Accused was interrogated and thereafter he them to his house at Plot-9, Gali No. 3, Siri Nagar, Shakoor Basti. there, according to PW-8, the complainant and her husband indentified Mangalsutra and the Philips T.V. belonging to them and a pair of tops also recovered. Based upon the statement of the Accused, another Mr. Ajay was also arrested from Railway Colony on the same day i.e. December, 1999.
-
On the basis of the statements of PW-1 and PW-2, as also recovery that was made from the house of the Accused, the Appellant convicted under Section 392 IPC and 397 IPC. PW-1 did not identify person named Mr. Ajay and the third accused i.e. Mr. Om Prakash never apprehended. Since, Ajay was not identified, he was acquitted giving him the benefit of doubt.
-
Learned counsel Mr. Yadav, engaged by Legal Aid Committee appearing for the Accused submits that since there was recovery of knife, there is no way of establishing as to what kind of weapon it was. In view of the non-recovery of knife, the conviction under 397 IPC ought to be set aside. He relies upon Ghanshyam @ Bablu State1 and Jitender @ Jitu Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)2.
-
He also submits that the accused, as per the...
To continue reading
Request your trial