Interim Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 36 Cr Cases 8889/2022
STATE Vs. MANOHAR
91/2022 (Chanakaya Puri)
28.04.2025
This Court is functioning without Regular Stenographer since 14.02.2025.
Present: Ld. APP for State.
Accused in person.
Arguments on the point of charge heard.
Ld. Counsel for accused submits that the accused has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The case property has been falsely implanted upon
the accused by the police official. There is no independent/public eye witness of
the recovery. No photography of videography was conducted during the recovery
proceedings.
Per contra, Ld. APP submits that there are sufficient materials on
record to frame charge against the accused for the offence as alleged in the charge-
sheet.
I have heard the arguments and perused the materials available on
record.
It should be noted that it is a settled proposition of law that at the
stage of framing of charge, the prosecution is only required to establish a prima
facie case against the accused and is not required to prove his guilt beyond
reasonable doubt.
In the present case, it should be noted the illicit liquor in large
quantity has been recovered from the possession of the accused by the police
officials. The consequences of non examination of public witnesses during the
course of investigation is a subject matter of trial. Thus, I find that there are
sufficient materials on record to frame charge against accused for the offence
punishable u/s 33 Delhi Excise Act.
Accordingly, charge is framed against the accused to which he pleads
not guilty and claims trial.
Separate statement of accused recorded u/s 294 CrPC and
accordingly, corresponding witnesses at serial no.2, 4 and 5 are dropped from the
list of witnesses.
Let complainant and IO be summoned for PE on 30.06.2025.
Let notice be also issued to MHC(M) to produce case property, if
any, on the next date of hearing.
(Animesh Kumar)
JMFC-02/PHC/New Delhi
28.04.2025
-- 1 of 1 --