Partly allowed

Rafiq Ahmad v. State

Delhi HC19 May 2018CRL.A./987/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant challenged his conviction for dacoity (Section 395 IPC) and sentencing. The Court acquitted him of dacoity due to lack of direct evidence, maintaining only the conviction for safe custody of stolen articles (Section 412 IPC). The sentence for Section 412 was commuted to time already served.

What did the court decide?

Conviction under Section 395 IPC acquited; conviction under Section 412 IPC maintained; sentence for Section 412 IPC reduced to time already undergone.

Rafiq Ahmad Vs State — Property and Title | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~R-1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ CRL.A. 987/2002
RAFIQ AHMAD			.....	Petitioner
	Through:	Mr.Sumeet	Verma	& Ms.Preeti
		Jakhar, Advs.
	versus

¶4

			..... R	esponde	nt
Through:	Mr.Ra	vi Nayak,	APP	for the	State
	with	Mr.Tulli	Tam,	ASI,	P.S.
	Badar	pur

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

¶6

O R D E R

¶7

% 19.05.2018

¶8

This appeal has been filed by the appellant Rafiq Ahmad challenging the order dated 04.05.2002 convicting the appellant of offences under Section 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the order dated 07.05.2002 in case FIR No. 390/1997 (Sessions Case No. 31/1998) sentencing the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years under Section 412 and imprisonment for 7 years under Section 395 IPC with fine of Rs. 10,000/- for each of these offences and in default rigorous imprisonment of one year. Both sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

¶9

The case of the prosecution is that on the night intervening 7^th and 8^th June, 1997, a robbery took place at F-2-B1, Mohan Cooperative Indl. Area, Mathura Road, Badarpur in the office of Euro Link which was a computer manufacturing company. After ten days of the dacoity, police received secret information about the alleged dacoits and the looted articles being at Sangam Vihar. The premises were raided alongwith witnesses and nine

¶10

persons, including the appellant, were found sleeping in the premises and some of the looted goods were found lying at the premises. At the instance of the appellant, looted articles were recovered vide memo Ex PW1/A. Further articles were also recovered at the instance of the appellant vide memo Ex PW8/J from servant quarters of M.P. Flats. These recoveries were proved through the testimony of PW1, PW3, PW16 and PW18.

¶11

The counsel for the appellant has taken me through the evidence, however, I find that recoveries of the stolen articles at the instance of the appellant have been duly proved by the prosecution.

¶12

The counsel for the appellant then submitted that only a charge under Section 412 IPC had been framed against the appellant, however, he has been convicted under Section 395 IPC. He submits that there was no evidence led before the Trial Court showing involvement of the appellant in the dacoity. He submits that the appellant has been convicted only on the basis of presumption because the stolen articles were recovered at his instance. He submits that similar was the position of the co-accused from whom also the stolen articles were recovered, however, they have been awarded sentence of only three years rigorous imprisonment for offences under Section 395 IPC and 412 IPC.

¶13

I find merit in the contention raised by the counsel for the appellant. In the present case, the appellant had been charged only for offence under Section 412 IPC. There is no evidence led before the Trial Court which would prove beyond reasonable doubt the involvement of the appellant in the offence of dacoity. In such circumstances, presumption only on the basis of recovery of articles could not have been drawn against the appellant.

¶14

In view of the above, I give the benefit of doubt to the appellant and acquit him of the offence under Section 395 IPC while maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Section 412.

¶15

Before being granted suspension of sentence vide order dated 15.03.2004 read with order dated 18.05.2004, appellant had undergone almost two years and seven months imprisonment including remission earned. Pursuant to order dated 23.07.2003 a report from the Probation Officer was filed, which indicates that the accused is feeling remorseful and there is a chance of reform of the accused. In view of the said report, the sentence awarded to the appellant for the offence under Section 412 IPC is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶16

The appeal is partially allowed in the above terms.

¶17

Trial Court record be sent back.

¶18

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶19

MAY 19, 2018/ rv

Rafiq Ahmad v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rafiq Ahmad v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

PNB Housing Finance Limited Vs Venus Exports & Ors.

PNB Housing Finance Limited Vs Arowana Consulting Ltd. & Ors.

PNB Housing Finance Limited Vs Naveen Jindal & Ors.

Attam Prakash Vs Ram Kishan

Rajender @ Raju @ Ganju Vs State

Mohan Singh Vs State