Mukesh Kalu Ram Revision Petition by Ashtosh

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
(CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION)
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
(Presently confined in Central PETITIONER
Jail No.8/9, Tihar, New Delhi)
VERSUS
The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT
INDEX
S.NO PARTICULARS Page No

1. Certificate
2. Urgent Application
3. Memo of Parties
4. Notice of Motion
5. Revision Petition under section 397 and 401 of Code of

Criminal Procedure along with supporting Affidavit.
6. Application U/s 389 Cr. P. C. for suspension of
sentence and released the petitioner on bail Along with
supporting Affidavit
7. Application under section 482 Cr.PC seeking exemption
from filling certified copy of Impugned Judgment.
8. Impugned Judgment and order dated 11/03/2015
passed by Ld. Sessions Court in Crl. Appeal No.
05/2015
9. Annexure P-1: Judgment and order on Sentence dated
22/06/2012 & 17/08/2012 passed by the Ld. Trial
Court.
Drafted & Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER
Ashutosh Kaushik (Ad.) Mukesh S/o Kaluram

D.H.C.L.S.C Presently Confined at Central
Jail Visiting Advocate Jail No.9, Tihar, New Delhi)
Jail No.9, Tihar
Tihar – New Delhi.
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
CERTIFICATE
I, Mukesh S/O Kaluram presently confined in Central Jail No.-
9, Tihar, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:-
1. That I have not engaged any private counsel to pursue my
matter.
2. That I am filing the present appeal from the Jail, prepared
by the Jail Visiting Advocate. My matter will be pursued by
the counsel appointed/nominated by the D.H.C.L.S.C. and
he will pursue the same till final disposal of the appeal.

Jail No.9, Tihar
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
Urgent Application
To,
The Hon’ble Registrar,

Hon'ble High Court of Delhi,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Kindly treat the accompanying appeal as an urgent
one as per High Court rules. The grounds of urgency are:
a. That the petitioner is in jail and is innocent.

b. As mentioned in the present petition.

Jail No.9, Tihar
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
Memo of Parties
Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
R/o: B18/265, Indra Camp,
Kalyanpuri, Delhi-91
Versus

Jail No.9, Tihar
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
Notice of Motion
To,
The Standing Counsel,
State of N.C.T. of Delhi.
Please take note that the above noted Petition will be
listed on ___/___/2015 before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. It
is therefore requested you to please enter your appearance on the
said date

Jail No.9, Tihar
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mukesh S/o Kaluram

R/o B18/265, Indra Camp,
Kalyanpuri, Delhi-91
VERSUS
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION UNDER SECTION 397 &
401 OF CR.P.C. AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & ORDER
DATED 11/03/2015 PASSED BY SH. SANJAY BANSAL, LD.
COURTS ASJ-03, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, SHAHDARA,
DELHI IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 05/2015 TITLED AS
“MUKESH Vs. STATE”
To
The Hon'ble Chief Justice and His Companion Judges of the
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, At New Delhi
The Petition/Revision of
Above named Petitioner
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the present Revision Petition is being preferred

against the impugned Judgment and order dated
11.03.2015 passed by Sh. Sanjay Bansal, Ld. ASJ-03,
Karkardooma Courts, Shahdara, Delhi in Criminal Appeal
no. 05/2015 whereby the Ld. Appellate Court has been
pleased to dismiss the same and confirm the sentence
passed by the Ld. Trial Court.
2. The facts and circumstances leading to the present Revision
Petition are as follows:
3. Facts of the case
i. That the facts of the case as per the prosecution are that the
complainant Samsuddin Ansari (PW1) alleged that four
known persons committed trespass and theft at his house,
who were named in the complaint.

ii. That the theft related to articles of clothing and jewellary.
The petitioner/appellant along with co-accused was charged
with section 457, 380, 34 IPC.

iii. All the accused persons claimed their innocence during their
statements under section 313 Cr.PC.
Grounds
A. Because the impugned judgment passed by the Ld. Trial
Court is bad in law and hence it is not sustainable in the
eyes of law.
B. Because the judgment passed by the Ld. Trial Court is
based on conjectures, surmises, and is not supportable from
the facts and circumstances of the case.

C. Because the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt as such, the Ld. Trial Court should have
given the benefit of doubt to the appellant and should have
acquitted him.
D. Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to observe the fact that
the PW1 had recounted the recoveries only during the cross-
examination and that too upon the prompting of the
prosecutor.
E. Because PW1 could not be considered a reliable witness in
view of his uncertain deposition during examination in chief.

F. Because the PW1 has himself stated during his cross-
examination that he could not remember as to which
articles were recovered from which of the accused persons.
In absence of any certainty and due to inability of the
complainant to connect the allegedly recovered articles to
any specified individual, the recovery and the allegation of
the complainant dose not seem established.

G. Because the Ld. Trial Court has not considered the fact that
PW4 had turned hostile. This witness had allegedly seen the
accused persons escape from the spot but he has denied
that he had seen anything and further denied that the police
had recorded his statement. He also denied the recovery of
any property in his presence.

H. The Ld. Trial Court has overlooked the inconsistency in the
statement of PW1 and as well as the fact that the testimony
of PW4 was completely adverse to the case of the
prosecution.
I. Because the benefit of doubt lies in favor of the accused
persons who should not have convicted on the basis of false
case and the benefit of doubt should have been given to
them.
J. Because the Ld. Trial Court has taken cognizance of the fact
that PW1 wrongly stated that one silver pazeb (ornament)
was recovered from co-accused Sewak whereas the charge
against him related to a silver tikka and two karas and not a
silver pazeb. The Ld. Trial Court has further held that only
upon the suggestions during the cross examination of PW1,
by the Ld. APP, the PW1 could affirm the fact of recovery of
certain articles. In such circumstances, the entire testimony

of PW1 and the recoveries at the behest of PW1 seem very
questionable and it can not be said conclusively that the
PW1 was able to recognize any of the recovered articles.

K. Because the accused persons deserve the benefit of doubt as
no recovery has been proved ether by PW1 nor by other
public witness i.e. PW4.

L. Because even otherwise the sentence awarded to the
petitioner is too excessive and unreasonable. The Ld. Trial
Court ordered sentence of 3 years under section 457 and a
sentence of 2 years under section 380 to run consecutively
and not concurrently. Had the sentence been ordered to run
concurrently the petitioner would have completed his
sentence by now.
M. Because the Ld. Sessions Court in the Appeal has not
appreciated the merits of the case and has dismissed the
appeal on the grounds of delay. The Ld. Appellate Court has
not condoned the delay in filing the appeal and has
summarily dismissed it without going into the merits of the
same.
N. Because Ld. Appellate Court has failed to consider the fact
that the Petitioner was lodged in Jail and wasn’t aware
about his legal right and the procedure to file an appeal.

O. Because the Petitioner was under the impression that his
sentence might get enhanced if he files an appeal before the
Sessions Court and therefore the delay was caused in filing
the Appeal before the Ld Sessions Court. After counseling by
the Legal Aid Cell of Central Jail, Tihar he decided to file an
appeal at the Ld. Sessions Court.

P. Because the Petitioner had told his parents to file an Appeal
before the Ld. Sessions Court and he was under an

impression that his appeal had been filed. He was not aware
that his appeal has not been filed. When he came to know
that his appeal has not been filed then he approached the
Legal Aid Cell of Central Jail, Tihar where he was told that
he could file an appeal from inside the jail through the Legal
Aid Cell. Accordingly his appeal was forwarded and filed
through the Legal Aid Cell to the Court of Ld. Sessions
Judge.
PRAYER
In view of the facts and circumstances stated
hereinabove it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may graciously be pleased to;
(a) Set aside the impugned judgment and order of
conviction dated 11/03/2015 passed by Sh. Sanjay
Bansal, Ld. ASJ, Karkardooma in Criminal Appeal
No.05/2015 titled as “Mukesh Vs. State” and also
set aside the Judgment and Order on Sentence
dated 22.06.2012 and 17.08.2012 passed by Sh.
Vishal Gogne the LD. MM(03) East Delhi in FIR
No.516/2004; PS- Kalyanpuri, and/or
(b) In the alternative, without prejudice to the aforesaid,
release the appellant on the period already
undergone by him in incarceration after making
concurrent the sentences awarded to him vide the
order on Sentence dated 17.08.2012, and/or
(c) Pass any other orders/reliefs as deemed fit and proper
to secure the ends of justice.


Jail No.9, Tihar
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Mukesh S/o Kaluram, presently confined in Central Jail
No.8/9, Tihar, New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under:-
1. That I am the appellant in the captioned matter and fully aware
of facts and circumstances of the case and am competent to
swear the affidavit on oath.
2. That the contents of accompanying Crl. Revision Petition u/s 397
& 401 Cr.P.C. has been drafted by Jail Visiting Advocate of
D.H.C.L.S.C. at my instance and the contents mentioned therein
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
3. That I have not moved any other similar appeal before this
Hon’ble High Court or any other High Court or the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India through private counsel or otherwise.
Deponent
LTI of Mukesh S/o Kaluram
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi, on this __day of ___2015 that the
contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and nothing material has been concealed there from.
DEPONENT
CRIMINAL M.A. NO.________/2015
IN
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
“APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 389 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING
SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE AND RELEASE OF THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL DURING THE PENDENCY OF REVISION
PETITION”
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the Petitioner has filed the above mentioned Revision
Petition before this Hon'ble Court which is pending
adjudication.
2. That detailed submissions made in the accompanying
Petition may please be read as part and parcel of this
application as the same are not being repeated herein for
the sake of brevity.
3. That the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case
and is languishing in the judicial custody since 22.06.2012

and before that he had under gone for 03 years 05 months
imprisonment during trial.
4. That the Petitioner belongs to a very poor family and cannot
afford to have a private lawyer. The present Petition is being
filed through Jail.
6. That the Petitioner has been advised that the orders of
conviction and sentence are erroneous and are liable to be
set aside.
7. That the hearing of the Petition filed by the Petitioner will
take reasonable time and there is no likelihood of appeal
being heard in near future.
8. That no useful purpose would be served by keeping the
Petitioner in Judicial Custody during pendency of Petition
before this Hon'ble Court.
9. That the Petitioner has already undergone about three years
five and months in the judicial custody.
10. That the Petitioner is a sole bread earner of his family and
there is no other male member to look after his family.

11. That the Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions
imposed by this Hon'ble Court for suspension of the
sentence and consequent release on bail.
PRAYER
In view of the above stated submissions, it is
respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to:-
a) Stay the conviction Order and the consequent Order of
sentence dated 11.03.2015.
b) Suspend the sentence and grant bail to the Petitioner on
such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this
Hon'ble Court during pendency of the Petition;
c) Pass such other or further Orders as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

Jail No.9, Tihar
IN
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Mukesh S/o Kaluram, presently confined in central jail No.

9,Tihar, New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1. That I am the applicant in the captioned matter and fully aware
2. That the contents of accompanying application U/S-389 Cr. P.C.
seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail has been
drafted by Jail Visiting Advocate of D.H.C.L.S.C. at my instance
and the contents mentioned therein are true and correct to the
best of my knowledge.
3. That the contents of accompanying bail application have been
explained to me in Hindi by Jail Visiting Advocate of D.H.C.L.S.C.
who is forwarding the present bail application from jail with the
Appeal.
4. That I have not moved any other similar Application before this
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi, on this __day of ___2015 that the contents

of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
nothing material has been concealed there from.
DEPONENT
IN
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh
S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
APPLICATION U/s 482 Cr.P.C. FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING OF

CERTIFIED COPIES OF IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 11.03.2015
IN CRL. APPEAL NO. 05/2015 AND COPY JUDGMENT AND ORDER
ON POINT OF SENTENCE DATED 22.06.2012 AND 17.08.2012
PASSED BY THE LD. MM IN FIR 516/2004, PS-KALYANPURI .
Most Respectfully Showeth:
1. That the above noted Crl. Revision Petition has been filed by the
appellant who has been convicted by the Hon’ble Court of Sh.
Sanjay Bansal, ASJ, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in Criminal.
Appeal No. 05/2015 on 11/03/2015 and vide judgment dated
22.06.2012 and order on sentence dated 17.08.2012 by the Ld.
Trial Court.
2. That the appellant has been wrongly convicted by the court of Sh.
Sanjay Bansal, ASJ, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi against which the
appellant has filed the accompanying revision petition.
3. That the appellant applied for certified copy of the impugned

judgment and certified copies of Trial Court record along with
judgment and order on point of sentence but the appellant did not
receive the judgment and order on point of sentence. The appellant
is having the photocopy of the impugned judgment and judgment
and order on point of sentence which was given to him and the
same is being placed on record along with the present revision
petition and the same be considered.
4. That the appellant undertakes that he shall file the certified copy of
impugned judgment and judgment and order on point of sentence
whenever he receives the same.
PRAYER
It is therefore prayed that in the interest of justice, the appellant be

exempted from filing of certified copy of impugned judgment and
judgment and order on point of sentence till the availability of the same.
Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER

Jail No.9, Tihar
IN
Crl. Revision Petition No._______/2015
IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh S/o Kaluram
VERSUS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Mukesh S/o Kaluram, presently confined in central jail No.

9,Tihar, New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1. That I am the applicant in the captioned matter and fully aware
2. That the contents of accompanying application for exemption for
certified copy has been drafted by Jail Visiting Advocate of
D.H.C.L.S.C. at my instance and the contents mentioned therein
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
3. That the contents of accompanying application have been
explained to me in Hindi by Jail Visiting Advocate of D.H.C.L.S.C.
who is forwarding the present bail application from jail with the
Appeal.
4. That I have not moved any other similar Application before this
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi, on this __day of ___2015 that the contents

of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
nothing material has been concealed there from.
DEPONENT

Mukesh Kalu Ram Revision Petition by Ashtosh

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Mukesh Kalu Ram Revision Petition by Ashtosh

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

S.NO PARTICULARS Page No

5. Revision Petition under section 397 and 401 of Code of

Drafted & Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER

Ashutosh Kaushik (Ad.) Mukesh S/o Kaluram

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

I, Mukesh S/O Kaluram presently confined in Central Jail No.-

9, Tihar, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as

1. That I have not engaged any private counsel to pursue my

2. That I am filing the present appeal from the Jail, prepared

by the Jail Visiting Advocate. My matter will be pursued by

the counsel appointed/nominated by the D.H.C.L.S.C. and

he will pursue the same till final disposal of the appeal.

Drafted & Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER

Ashutosh Kaushik (Ad.) Mukesh S/o Kaluram

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

The Hon’ble Registrar,

a. That the petitioner is in jail and is innocent.

Drafted & Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER

Ashutosh Kaushik (Ad.) Mukesh S/o Kaluram

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

Drafted & Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER

Ashutosh Kaushik (Ad.) Mukesh S/o Kaluram

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

Please take note that the above noted Petition will be

listed on ___/___/2015 before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. It

is therefore requested you to please enter your appearance on the

Drafted & Forwarded by: LTI of PETITIONER

Ashutosh Kaushik (Ad.) Mukesh S/o Kaluram

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.________/2015

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mukesh S/o Kaluram

The State (NCT) of Delhi RESPONDENT

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION UNDER SECTION 397 &

401 OF CR.P.C. AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & ORDER

DATED 11/03/2015 PASSED BY SH. SANJAY BANSAL, LD.

COURTS ASJ-03, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, SHAHDARA,

DELHI IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 05/2015 TITLED AS

“MUKESH Vs. STATE”

The Hon'ble Chief Justice and His Companion Judges of the

Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, At New Delhi

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the present Revision Petition is being preferred

Petition are as follows:

3. Facts of the case

complainant Samsuddin Ansari (PW1) alleged that four

known persons committed trespass and theft at his house,

who were named in the complaint.

The petitioner/appellant along with co-accused was charged

with section 457, 380, 34 IPC.

listed on _/_/2015 before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. It