acquitted for the offence U/s 25/54/59 of Arms Act. 437(A) of Cr.P.C. File be consigned to record room. File be consigned

Transcription

1 State Vs. Pawan Vicky FIR No:342/2012 U/s 25/54/59 Arms Act P. S. Kalkaji/AATS/SED Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused on bail along with counsel. Statement of accused recorded today. Accused chosen not to lead DE. Final argument heard. Vide my separate judgment, dictated and announced in the open court, accused Pawan Vicky is acquitted for the offence U/s 25/54/59 of Arms Act. On oral request for the counsel for accused, the previous bail bonds of the accused are accepted in compliance of Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. File be consigned to record room. File be consigned to record room. New Delhi/

2 FIR No. 85/2008 PS: EOW/New Delhi State vs. Pratap Singh etc (2:15 p.m.) Present: Niab Court for the State. Since Ld. Regular APP for the state is on Half Day Leave (After post lunch session), therefore, the matter is adjourned for consideration and IO be called for New Delhi/

3 FIR No. 257/07 PS: Defence Colony State vs. Kuldeep Singh(PO) (2:40 p.m.) Present: Ld. Substitute APP for the State. Accused is PO. PW Kamal Kishore, Chief Manager, Vijay Bank and PW Sh. Arvind Kumar Bhartiya are present. Since, Ld. Regular APP is on leave after lunch session and ld. Substitute APP is busy in recording evidence in other case. It is already 2:40 p.m. Aforesaid two witnesses are discharged unexamined for today only. They along with other PWS be summoned for PE on New Delhi/

4 FIR No. 208/2006 PS: NFC/EOW State vs. Iqbal Parvez Siddiqui (2:15 p.m.) Present: Niab Court for the State. Since Ld. Regular APP for the state is on Half Day Leave (After post lunch session), therefore, the matter is adjourned for consideration and IO be called along with police file on New Delhi/

5 FIR No. 416/13 PS: Jamia Nagar/AATS State vs. Abdul Raheem etc (2:15 p.m.) Present: Niab Court for the State. Since Ld. Regular APP for the state is on Half Day Leave (After post lunch session), therefore, the matter is adjourned for consideration and IO be called for clarifications on New Delhi/

6 FIR No. 106/2010 PS: Crime Branch State vs. Rashid Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused absent. NBWs issued against the accused and notice to his surety u/s 446 Cr.PC remained unexecuted. Reports perused. Issue fresh NBWs against the accused Rashid and notice u/s 446 Cr.PC to his surety, through IO concerned, for PWS be also summoned for PE. New Delhi/

7 CC No: Statement of on oath. RO&AC New Delhi/

8 State Vs. FIR No: PW Statement of on oath. Xxxxxxxxxby ld. Counsel for accused. RO&AC New Delhi/

9 FIR No. PS: State vs. Present: Ld. APP for the State. New Delhi/

10 FIR No. PS: State vs Present: Ld. APP for the State. New Delhi/

11

12 FIR No. 632/11 PS: Jamia Nagar State vs. Sanjeev Kumar PW 2: Ct. Ravinder PIS PS Crime Branch, Kamla Market, New Delhi. On SA On I was posted at SOS, Crime Branch as Ct. On that day I alongwith ASI Ragender and HC Deepak were investigating the present case. During investigation accused Sanjeev got recovered one motorcycle bearing no and one car Indica bearing No and one car Honda City bearing No from D block, Ashok nagar. I do not remember the house number. IO prepared the seizure memo of motorcycle of bearing no. DL 5SAF 5565 which is already Ex PW1/A bearing my signature at point B. At this stage witness request to refresh his memory. Allowed. Be called after 10 minutes. RO&AC

13 FIR No. 632/11 PS: Jamia Nagar State vs. Sanjeev Kumar PW 2: Ct. Ravinder PIS PS Crime Branch, Kamla Market, New Delhi.(recalled after 10 minutes). On SA After recovery of two cars and one motorcycle accused Sanjeev got other accused Babbal arrested from Welcome Metro station at about 10:00 PM. We returned back to our office. On accused Babbal got recovered two cars i.e (1) Lancer 5100 (2) I do not remember the other car but it was not having any registration no. from Sant Nagar. On I alongwith ASI Ragender and HC Deepak went to Kithor Meerut to the house of one Fareed who was not present there however one I 10 car was recovered from his house. We brought the car and deposited the same in the Malkhana of Crime Branch. At this stage Ld. APP seeks permission to cross examine the witness as he is not remembering all facts of the prosecution case. Heard. Allowed. XXX by Ld APP for the State. It is correct that our raiding team had met at ISBT. It is correct that we had gone to house no. 1079, Gali No. 8, Ashok Nagar for conducting raid. Discloser statement of Babbal and Sanjeev which are Ex PW2/A and already Ex PW1/B bears my signatures at point A and point B respectively. Seizure memo of Lancer car, Indigo car, Honda city car and

14 2 Indica car, Santro, Alto, Baleno, Tavera and I 10 car which are Ex PW2/B to Ex PW2/J all bearing my signatures at point A. Arrest memo and personal search memo of Babbal and Sanjeev which are Ex PW2/K, already Ex PW1/C, already Ex PW1/D and Ex PW2/L all bearing my signatures at point A and B respectively. Further cross examination is deferred for the want of case property and identification of accused. RO&AC

15 FIR No. 215/04 PS: C.R. Park State vs. Devkinandan Etc PW4: WASI Jyoti PIS No PS Rajori Garden, New Delhi. On SA On I was posted as Ct. in LBR section EOW. On that day Inspector R. C. Meena took me for a raid to 10A, Shatabdi Vihar, sector 21, Noida where the accused namely Chandrakanta and R. P. Prasad who were to be arrested were not present. However, we met their daughter Shalu and Neeru were present. Inspector R. C. Meena told them about the case and conducted search of the house. During search some property related documents were recovered which were seized vide seizure memo Ex PW4/A bearing my signature at point A. IO recorded my statement. At this stage Ld. APP seeks permission to cross examine the witness as she is not remembering all facts of the prosecution case. Heard. Allowed. XXX by Ld APP for the State. It is correct that copy of seizure memo was given to Shalu and Neeru. XXX by Sh. Kamal Bhardwaj Ld counsel for accused Gurmeet Barar and Rameshwar. Nil. Opportunity given. XXX by Sh. Umesh Tomar Ld counsel for accused Chandrakanta.

16 2 Nil. Opportunity given. XXXXX by accused Roop Chand. Nil. Opportunity given. RO&AC

17 FIR No. 215/04 PS: C.R. Park State vs. Devkinandan Etc PW5 Statement of Sh. Riyasat Ali S/o Sh. Rehmat Ali R/o H. No. H269 C, H block, Sector 12, Super MIG, Pratap Vihar, Vijay Nagar, Gaziabad. On SA On person namely Devkinandan Gautam was residing in 266 C, H block, and he was known by the name of Guruji in the whole locality. He was working as property dealer. About 8 or 10 years back police officials came and took him alongwith them. I do not know anything else about this case. At this stage Ld. APP seeks permission to cross examine the witness as he is not remembering all facts of the prosecution case. Heard. Allowed. XXX by Ld APP for the State. It is correct that I was doing the work of Plumber during that time. It is correct that Devkinandan Gautam alongwith his family which includes his son namely Gopal Gautam was residing in front of my house. It is correct that Devkinandan Gautam was not known as Gurbachan Lal. It is correct that during those period Devkinandan Gautam looked nervous. I do not remember whether my statement was recorded or not. XXX by Sh. Kamal Bhardwaj Ld counsel for accused Gurmeet Barar and Rameshwar. Nil. Opportunity given.

18 2 XXX by Sh. Umesh Tomar Ld counsel for accused Chandrakanta. Nil. Opportunity given. XXXXX by accused Roop Chand. Nil. Opportunity given. RO&AC

19 FIR No. 215/04 PS: C.R. Park State vs. Devkinandan Etc PW6 Statement of Sh. Mahesh Bhati S/o Sh. Om Prakash R/o Village Aminabad (Niyana), Salempur, Gautam Buddh Nagar, UP. On SA I met Rajinder Pal in the year 2001 and at that time I was supplying milk. Rajinder asked for loan so I introduced him to Surender Kumar who gave a loan of Rs. 2,00,000/. For some time Rajinder used to pay the interest of that amount but afterwords he stopped so Surender contacted me. I asked Rajinder to pay back the money but he told that he will sell one of his property at M block, Greater Kailash and then pay back the loan amount. It was when Rajinder asked me to come to registrar office Kashmiri Gate alongwith I card as he wanted to deal with some property. I had signed on GPA as a witness. Thereafter nothing else happened. I do not anything more about this case. At this stage Ld. APP seeks permission to cross examine the witness as he is not remembering all facts of the prosecution case. Heard. Allowed. XXX by Ld APP for the State. It is correct that GPA dated which is marked 6X bears my signature at point A. It is correct that when I went to Kashmiri Gate registrar office I met one person namely Gurbacchan Lal. It is correct that I came to know that Gurbacchan Lal alongwith other persons had sold a property to one person namely Sehgal and Milakraj after preparing

20 2 some forged documents. It is correct that they had taken Rs. 28,00,000/ from Sehgal and Milakraj. It is correct that Sehgal and Milakraj came to me and told that their money was not refunded by Rajinder Pal so I must make his understand to return back my money. It is correct that when I talked to Rajinder Pal he told that his wife Chandrakanta and her brother Sewa Ram were dealing with the matter and I must not intervene in this matter. It is correct that Rajinder asked from his wife and they entered into an argument over this issue. However, he told that he had taken Rs. 28,00,000/. It is correct that Chandrakanta used to change her residence frequently. It is correct that IO recorded my statement in this case. I can identify accused Chandrakanta if shown to me. Further examination chief is deferred for identification of accused Chandrakanta. RO&AC

21 FIR No. 297/08 PS: H. N. Din Crime Branch State vs. Anil Ratan PW4 Statement of Ex Ct. Ajay Rana recalled for further cross examination after On SA I cannot tell the time when secret informer came to our office and informed regarding the secret information and it may be known only to HC Rajeev Mohan. I was carrying my own arms and ammunition. It is correct that judicial file is not having the details of weapons in my possession as the same is available in the Malkahan register. I cannot tell the room number in which secret informer approached to HC Rajeev Mohan, there is no numbering given to rooms of SOS office. Further cross examination is deferred as it is lunch time. RO&AC

22 CC No. 449/1 Ishak Khan versus Rajeev Aggarwal Present: Counsel for the complainant. Counsel for the proposed accused. In the order dated passed by Sh. Vinay Kumar Khanna, Ld. ASJ, the case was remanded back with the directions to hear the complainant after obtaining report from the SHO PS Sangam Vihar. In compliance of the said order, report be called from the SHO PS Sangam Vihar for

23 FIR No. 308/04 State versus Ishak Khan etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused Ishaque Khan and Mahender Singh on bail with Counsel. Accused Udaybir is absent. Process of accused Udaybir received back with the report that he is in JC in Faridabad jail. In view of the said report, issue production warrants against the accused Udaybir as per the details furnished in the warrants for

24 CC No. 17/01 Jasper Infotech versus Arjun Chouhan Present: Counsel for the complainant. ASI Ravinder Kumar in person. Status report filed. As per the report the present complaint has been sent back to DCP, South East on on the point of jurisdiction. Let action taken report be called from DCP, South East for

25 CC No. 174/1 Kirin Suri versus State Present: Ld. APP for the State. IO in person. Counsel for the complainant. IO is directed to file the status report with regard to the resignation letter on

26 FIR No. 09/11 PS: GK I, Crime Branch State vs. Adarsh Kumar etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. All accused on bail with their respective Counsels. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of accused Girish Mehra, Harish Mehra and Nidhi Mehra. IO is not present. However IO has sent the request on the ground that he is on medical rest for 10 days. Copy of the application u/s 91 CrPC is not supplied to the accused persons. Same be supplied. An application u/s 207 CrPC is also pending. Since the IO is not present, IO be called with deficient copies and reply to the application u/s 91 CrPC on

27 FIR No. 17/12 PS: EOW State vs. Sudesh Kumar Arora etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. IO is not present. However he has sent exemption application in which it is mentioned that the order of quashing of the FIR has already been passed on , subject to the release of money deposited by the accused with the trial court. Since no such order has been received, IO be called for clarifications on

28 FIR No. 123/07 PS: OIA State vs. Dalip Singh Rawat etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. Both accused on bail with their respective Counsels. An application u/s 207 CrPC is moved on behalf of the accused Saurabh Chander. IO be called with deficient copies on

29 FIR No. 88/11 PS: CR Park State vs. Somnath Sapra etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. All accused on bail. However adjournment sought on behalf of the accused persons on the ground that their Counsels are not available and they have to prepare for arguments on charge. Heard the submissions. Case be fixed for arguments on charge on

30 CC No. 13/01 Ramesh Kumar Kapur versus Anil Kumar Kapur CW 7, Shyam Sunder, Assistant Manager at Indian Bank, 10174/1, Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. On SA I have brought the letter dated written by the Chief Manager of Indian Bank, 10174/1, Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. I have brought the document handling and retention policy, of our bank and also copy of register folio containing records related to old records destroyed on by our branch. The copy of aforesaid documents attested by Chief Manager, India Bank is Ex. CW 7/C (collectively). I submit that the documents pertaining to account maintained at our branch by Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd has been destroyed on There is no document available pertaining to accounts maintained by Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd with our branch. I undertake that I shall bring a certificate from the Chief Manager of our branch stating that the documents pertaining to Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd has been destroyed as aforesaid. It is further stated that on the documents pertaining to account of Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd has been destroyed till the year The documents pertaining to aforesaid account from 1994 onwards is still being searched and shall be produced before this Court. Further examination deferred for want of abovesaid document. RO&AC

31 CC No. 13/01 Ramesh Kumar Kapur versus Anil Kumar Kapur CW 8, Sunder Lal, Single Window Operator / Clerk, at Allahabad Bank, New Industrial Town, NIT, Faridabad, Haryana. On SA I have been instructed to submit before this Hon ble Court the copy of the documents of account maintained by Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd at my aforesaid bank. I have brought photocopy of statement of account of Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd from 1992 to The copy of the said documents are running into 36 pages and are marked as A collectively. The further statement of account of Napco Bevel Gears of India Ltd and also some other statement are missing which I may produce on the next date of hearing. Further examination deferred for want of abovesaid documents. RO&AC

32 CC No. 13/01 Ramesh Kumar Kapur versus Anil Kumar Kapur Present: Counsel for the complainant. Further examination of CW 7 Shyam Sunder and CW 8 Sunder Lal are partly recorded. Their further examination deferred for want of certain documents. Put up for remaining CE on Let concerned witness from Bank of Patiala and Income Tax with relevant record be called on filing of PF for date fixed alongwith CW 7 Shayam Sunder and CW 8 Sunder Lal.

33 FIR No. 07/05 U/s 25 Arms Act PS Amar Colony, AATS CHARGE I, Veena Rani,, South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, do hereby charge you Chenu S/o Mehrajuddin as under : That on at about 5:30 am at Red light, Okhla Mandi, Captain Gaur Marg, New Delhi, within jurisdiction of PS Amar Colony, AATS, you were found having in possession of one desi katta and three live cartridges in contravention of notification issued by Delhi Administration and thereby committed an offence punishable under section u/s 25 Arms Act and within my cognizance. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this court for the above said offence. (Veena Rani) South East District, Saket Courts New Delhi/ The Charge has been put and explained to the accused in simple Hindi. He is questioned as under: Q. Do you plead guilty or claim trial? A. I plead not guilty and claim trial. RO&AC (Veena Rani) South East District, Saket Courts New Delhi/

34 FIR No. 07/05 U/s 25 Arms Act PS Amar Colony, AATS Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused produced from JC alongwith Sh. Gautam Chakravarty, Counsel for the accused from Legal Aid. Heard on charge. Prima facie case is made out against the accused u/s 25 Arms Act. Charge framed. Accused does not plead guilty. Put up for PE on , rehnumai on PWs be summoned for date fixed. At this stage it is submitted by the Counsel for the accused from Legal Aid that bail application of accused is pending for today. Heard on the application. It is submitted by the Counsel for the accused that accused was arrested on and thereafter he was sent to JC and since then he has been languishing in JC. Moreover investigation in the present matter has already been completed and chargesheet has also been filed, hence accused be admitted on bail. On the other hand the present bail application of the accused has been vehemently opposed by the Ld. APP for the State on the ground that accused is a habitual offender and if he is admitted on bail he may try to influence the witnesses. Heard the submissions. Keeping in view that the investigation in the present matter has already been completed, charge sheet has been filed and

35 cognizance has already been taken and that the accused is languishing in JC since last about 2 months, no purpose would be served to keep the accused behind the bars, hence accused is admitted on bail on furnishing bail bond in a sum of Rs. 20,000/ alongwith one surety in the like amount. Bail bond not furnished. Accused be sent to JC. (Veena Rani) South East District, Saket Courts New Delhi/

36 FIR No. 1033/06 PS: Kalkaji, Crime Branch State vs. SD Sharma Statement of complainant Sh. Jai Bhagwan, Age 62 years, S/o DS Sharma, R/o B 104, Vijay Nagar, Bawana, Delhi 39 I am the complainant in the present case. I have settled the present matter with the accused for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/. Out of the said amount I have already received a sum of Rs.50,000/ from the accused and today I have received the balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/ by way of demand draft bearing no dated for Rs. 1,00,000/ and another demand draft bearing no dated for Rs.1,00,000/, totalling Rs. 2 lacs, both drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank. Now nothing remains pending against the accused after receiving the full and final payment from the accused. I have no objection of the present case is compounded. The offence may be disposed off as compromised / compounded in relation to my grievance against the accused. I am giving the statement voluntarily and without any undue influence. RO&AC

37 FIR No. 214/01 PS: OIA, Crime Branch State vs. Raja Ram Present: Ld. APP for the State. Both accused on bail with proxy Counsel. Time sought for arguments on charge as main Counsel is not available today. Submissions heard. Put up for arguments on charge on

38 FIR No. 342/12 U/s 25 Arms Act PS: Kalkaji, AATS State versus Pawan Kumar Statement of accused Pawan Vicky S/o Raj Kumar, u/s 313 CrPC in the manner prescribed u/s 281 CrPC, without oath All the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against the accused are put to you that on at about 08:30 pm in front of Metro station, Nehru Place, New Delhi you were found in possession of one country made pistol alongwith two live cartridges Ex. P1 to P2. The sketch of the country made pistol and live cartridges is Ex. PW 1/A, which were seized vide memo Ex. PW 1/B with the seal of VS. You were arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW 1/C and your personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW 1/D. Rukka Ex. PW 4/A was prepared by SI Vikram and on which FIR Ex. PW 2/B was registered. Site plan Ex. PW 8/A was prepared by SI Ehtsham Abbas and thereafter he recorded your disclosure statement Ex. PW 8/B. Q: What do you have to say? Ans. I have been falsely implicated in the present case and the witnesses who have deposed against me are interested witnesses. I have nothing to do with the above said offence. I am innocent. That nothing has been recovered from me nor at my instance. Q. Do you want to lead defence evidence? Ans. No. I do not want to lead my DE. RO&AC CMM/SED/ND/

39 Certified that the above statement of accused was recorded in my presence and hearing and the above records contains the true the full account of the statement made by the accused. South East District, Saket Court New Delhi/

40 FIR No. 73/11 PS: Kalkaji State vs. Rajender Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused absent. Proxy Counsel for the accused who has moved an exemption application on behalf of the accused. It is pertinent to mention here that from the last 4 / 5 dates of hearing accused is not appearing and he is being exempted from personal appearance. On last date of hearing in the morning session accused was not present, however his proxy Counsel was present who moved an exemption application on his behalf and and matter was fixed for evidence for 12:30 pm as one witness was present and Ld. APP for the State was busy in recording evidence in some other case. At 12:30 pm when the matter was called again neither accused was present nor his Counsel or proxy Counsel were present and NBWs were issued against the accused and today also neither accused is present nor his Counsel is present, however proxy Counsel is moving an exemption application on behalf of the accused. In view of the aforesaid, exemption application of the accused is dismissed. Issue fresh NBW against the accused with notice to his surety through IO concerned for

41 RC No. 3 (S)9/95 CBI versus Rajiv Khanna etc Present: Ld. APP for the CBI. All accused on bail. One of the Regular Stenographer is on leave today and other Stenographer is busy in recording evidence. Hence case is fixed for recording SA on

42 FIR No. 25/08 PS: HN Din, Crime Branch State vs. Raj Pratap Saxena etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. Both accused absent. Counsel for the both the accused persons. PW HC Rajkumar is present for his evidence. An exemption application moved on behalf of both the accused. In view of the reason mentioned in the application the exemption is allowed for today only. As both the accused persons are not present, PW present is discharged unexamined for today only. Put up for remaining PE on PWs be summoned for date fixed.

43 FIR No. 215/04 PS: CR Park State vs. Devkinandan etc Present: Ld. APP for the State. Proceedings against the accused Devki Nandan Gautam stands abated vide order dated IO Inspector SM Sharma in person. Remaining accused on bail with their respective Counsels except accused Chandrakanta and Roop Chand. Accused Roop Chand is also present on bail. An exemption application moved on behalf of accused Chandrakanta. In view of the reason mentioned in the application the exemption is allowed for today only with directions to produce the accused on the next date of hearing. Examination of PW 4 Lady ASI Jyoti is recorded. Cross examined on behalf of accused Gurmeet Barar and Rameshwar. Opportunity granted to Counsel for the accused Chandrakanta and accused Roop Chand to cross examine the witness which is nil. Examination of PW 5 Riyasat Ali is recorded. Opportunity granted to Counsel for the accused Gurmeet Barar, Rameshwar, Chandrakanta and accused Roop Chand to cross examine the witness which is nil. Examination in chief of PW 6 Mahesh Bhati is partly recorded. His further examination in chief deferred for identification of accused Chandrakanta. No other PW is present. Put up for remaining PE on 02 nd June, 15. PWs be summoned for date fixed.

44 FIR No. 86/11 PS: Crime Branch State vs. Abhishek Kaushik etc File taken up today on an application of the accused Hiren Manilal Nagar to travel out of India Present: Ld. APP for the State. Counsel for the applicant / accused. Counsel for the accused seeks adjournment for filing itinerary. In view of the same put up on

45 FIR No. 297/08 PS: H. N. Din Crime Branch State vs. Anil Ratan PW4 Retired Constable Ajay Rana recalled for further cross examination after lunch time. On SA XXXX by Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Counsel for the accused. I do not remember whether all the members of the raiding team were present at the time DD entry was prepared. It is correct that the DD entry number 8 dated is the true copy of departure entry which is now mark PW 4/DA. It is correct that as per the DD entry first I went to A Block, Sant Nagar alongwith SI PC Yadav and thereafter I went to Sarai Kale Khan alongwith SI PC Yadav directly but I do not remember the exact time when we reached at the spot. It is correct that as per DD entry the time mentioned in it is 2:05 pm. (Vol.) Better clarifications regarding DD entry will be given by SI PC Yadav. HC Raghender Singh took the personal search of the accused. I cannot tell what else except revolver were recovered from the accused. The recovery memo and sketch of the revolver were prepared at the spot only. I do not remember who wrote the FIR number on the recovery memo and sketch of the revolver. It is wrong to suggest that all recovery memo and sketch of the revolver were prepared at the police station. I cannot tell where and when the disclosure statement was recorded. It is correct that no FSL slip is on judicial record. I cannot tell gender of the public persons to whom IO asked for joining the investigation. The public persons refused to give their names and addresses on the asking of the IO. The seal was handed over to me after

46 putting it on the pulanda of the revolver and same was handed over back to the IO on the same day. It is further wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely at the instance of the IO. It is wrong to suggest that accused has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further wrong to suggest that accused was apprehended from the house of his friend at Dhankari colony. It is also wrong to suggest that it is a concocted story. RO&AC

47 DD No. 13 PS: Crime Branch State vs. Kamal Upadhyay on superdari. Application for releasing the vehicle bearing no. DL3CBM 6891 Present: Ld. APP for the State. None for the applicant. IO is not present, however request received on his behalf. In view of the same IO be called again for

48 MCA No. 43/14 Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s Summit Aviation Present: Counsel for the applicant. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that matter is still pending before the Ld. DRT for settlement and the next date of hearing is Submissions heard. Put up for purpose of settlement / further proceedings on

49 FIR No. 422/01 PS: NFC, Crime Branch State vs. Om Dutt Sharma etc File taken up today on an application of the accused Om Dutt Sharma and Manmohan Swaroop Bhatnagar for cancellation of NBWs Present: Ld. APP for the State. Counsel for both the accused persons. Both the accused persons are absent. However in view of the facts and circumstances as stated in the application NBWs issued against the abovesaid accused persons are stayed till next date of hearing with the directions to produce the accused persons on next date of hearing. Copy of the order be given to the Counsel for the accused persons as prayed for.

50 FIR No. 297/08 PS: H. N. Din Crime Branch State vs. Anil Ratan PW 5, ASI Raghender, No East, East District Line, Farsh Bazar, New Delhi. On SA On I was posted at SOS, Crime Branch, Sunlight Colony. I was instructed by Inspector KP Singh in the evening to go to Sarai Kale Khan as a team there has under custody an accused for further investigation. I left at around 8:30 pm from the office and reached at the spot at about 8:45 pm. I met SI PC Yadav, HC Rajeev Mohan, HC Narender, HC Kuldeep, Constable Ajay Rana, Constable Devender and Constable Vikal at the spot and they have taken accused Anil Rattan (who is present in the court and correctly identified) in custody. It was disclosed to me by HC Rajiv Mohan that accused was caught with the six round revolver and handed over the sealed pulanda with the seal of RM of the revolver to me. I do not remember the seal. Thereafter seizure memo of revolver, sketch of the revolver and accused was handed over to me by HC Rajeev Mohan, first IO. I interrogated the accused where he made his disclosure statement which is already Ex. PW 4/A bearing my signatures at point X. I prepared the sketch plan at the instance of first IO which is already Ex. PW 2/DA bearing my signatures at point X. Thereafter I arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW 5/A bearing my signatures at point X and his personal search was also conducted vide personal search memo Ex. PW 5/B bearing my signatures at point X. Then Constable Ajay Rana brought the rukka and copy of FIR from the police station at the spot. Then I deposited the pulanda in the malkhana and deposited the copies of seizure memo and personal search also. Then I came to the office alongwith the accused and recorded the report of the arrest of the accused in the office and informed Inspector KP Singh about the investigation. Then information of arrest of the accused was given to his family members and next day his medical examination was got conducted at the Safdarjung hospital.

51 Thereafter accused was sent to JC from Patiala House Courts. On I sent the pulanda of the revolver to FSL through constable Ajay Rana. I recorded the statement of Constable Ajay Rana and he said that he did not made any tampering with the sealed pulanda and deposited it safely and in fit condition in the FSL. Thereafter charge sheet was filed in the court. XXXX by Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Counsel for the accused. I made departure entry at the office while leaving for the spot on at 8:30 pm. It is correct that no such entry is on the judicial record. Inspector KP Singh orally instructed me to leave for the spot in the SOS office and no written order was received from Inspector KP Singh to this effect. Further cross examination deferred as no time left. RO&AC

52 FIR No. 632/11 PS: Jamia Nagar State vs. Sanjiv Kumar Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused Babbal Aggarwal has already been discharged vide order dated Accused Sanjiv Kumar absent. An exemption application moved on behalf of accused. In view of the reason mentioned in the application the exemption is allowed for today only with directions to produce the accused on next date of hearing. Examination in chief of PW 2 Constable Ravinder is partly recorded. His further examination in chief deferred for want of case property and identification of the accused. MHCM is directed to produce the accused on next date of hearing. Put up for remaining PE on

53 FIR No. 632/05 PS: Kalkaji State vs. SD Sharma Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused on bail. Accused seeks adjournment for arguments on charge as today his Counsel is not available today. Submissions heard. Put up for arguments on charge on

54 FIR No. 297/08 PS: HN Din, Crime Branch State vs. Anil Rattan Present: Ld. Substitute APP for the State. Accused on bail with Counsel. PW 4 Ex Constable Ajay Rana is cross examined during the pre lunch session as well as post lunch session. PW 5 ASI Raghender is examined and partly cross examined and further cross examined deferred as no time left. No other PW is present. PW 5 ASI Raghender is bound down for next date. Put up for remaining PE on PWs be summoned for date fixed.

55 FIR No. 297/08 PS: H. N. Din Crime Branch State vs. Anil Ratan PW 5, ASI Raghender, No East, East District Line, Farsh Bazar, New Delhi. On SA On I was posted at SOS, Crime Branch, Sunlight Colony. I was instructed by Inspector KP Singh in the evening to go to Sarai Kale Khan as a team there has under custody an accused for further investigation. I left at around 8:30 pm from the office and reached at the spot at about 8:45 pm. I met SI PC Yadav, HC Rajeev Mohan, HC Narender, HC Kuldeep, Constable Ajay Rana, Constable Devender and Constable Vikal at the spot and they have taken accused Anil Rattan (who is present in the court and correctly identified) in custody. It was disclosed to me by HC Rajiv Mohan that accused was caught with the six round revolver and handed over the sealed pulanda with the seal of RM of the revolver to me. I do not remember the seal. Thereafter seizure memo of revolver, sketch of the revolver and accused was handed over to me by HC Rajeev Mohan, first IO. I interrogated the accused where he made his disclosure statement which is already Ex. PW 4/A bearing my signatures at point X. I prepared the sketch plan at the instance of first IO which is already Ex. PW 2/DA bearing my signatures at point X. Thereafter I arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW 5/A bearing my signatures at point X and his personal search was also conducted vide personal search memo Ex. PW 5/B bearing my signatures at point X. Then Constable Ajay Rana brought the rukka and copy of FIR from the police station at the spot. Then I deposited the pulanda in the malkhana and deposited the copies of seizure memo and personal search also. Then I came to the office alongwith the accused and recorded the report of the arrest of the accused in the office and informed Inspector KP Singh about the investigation. Then information of arrest of the accused was given to his family members and next day his medical examination was got conducted at the Safdarjung hospital.

56 Thereafter accused was sent to JC from Patiala House Courts. On I sent the pulanda of the revolver to FSL through constable Ajay Rana. I recorded the statement of Constable Ajay Rana and he said that he did not made any tampering with the sealed pulanda and deposited it safely and in fit condition in the FSL. Thereafter charge sheet was filed in the court. XXXX by Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Counsel for the accused. I made departure entry at the office while leaving for the spot on at 8:30 pm. It is correct that no such entry is on the judicial record. Inspector KP Singh orally instructed me to leave for the spot in the SOS office and no written order was received from Inspector KP Singh to this effect. Further cross examination deferred as no time left. RO&AC

57 FIR No. 830/14 PS: Kalkaji State vs. Amit Gupta Bail application of accused Amit Gupta. Present: Ld. Substitute APP for the State. IO in person. Counsel for the complainant. Counsel for the accused. Arguments heard. Put up for orders on