Delhi District Court
State vs Sachin on 19 May, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. SHIVALI BANSAL
LD. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-02,
DWARKA COURTS, S-W DISTRICT, NEW DELHI.
In the matter of: -
State Vs. 1. Sachin
S/o Sh. Satpal
R/o V.P.O. Khewra
SHIVALI P.S. Rai, District Sonepat,
BANSAL Haryana.
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:31 +0530
2. Parvesh
S/o Sh. Satbir Singh
R/o V.P.O. Khewra
P.S. Rai, District Sonepat,
Haryana.
3. Sachin
S/o Sh. Inder Jeet
R/o V.P.O. Khewra
P.S. Rai, District Sonepat,
Haryana.
4. Vicky @ Pushkar
S/o Sh. Manoj
R/o H. No.RZ-105,
West Krishna Vihar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
5. Pawan Pandey
S/o Sh. Shesh Mani Pandey
R/o H. No.89,
East Krishna Vihar, Khaira Road,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
6. Lagan Sharma (Since Deceased)
S/o Sh. Devki Nandan Sharma
R/o VPO Kheda Dabar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 1
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
7. Pradeep @ Pradhan @ Boda
(PROCLAIMED OFFENDER)
S/o Sh. Shiv Narayan
R/o Plot No.102, Gali No.11,
Dabas Enclave, Rawta Mor,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
........Accused Persons
Sessions Case No. 55/19
SHIVALI FIR No. 421/2018
BANSAL
Digitally signed by PS Chhawla
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:30 +0530 CNR No. DLSW01-001077-2019.
Charge-sheet filed U/s 396/302/120B IPC & u/S
25/27/54/59 Arms Act
Charges framed against accused U/s 396/302/34 IPC & U/s
Sachin S/o Satpal, Parvesh, Sachin 25/27 Arms Act
S/o Inderjeet, Vicky @ Pushkar,
Pawan Pandey and Lagan Sharma
Date of institution of case 11.01.2019
Date of case received to Sessions 22.01.2019
Court
Date of arguments 16.05.2026
Date of judgment 19.05.2026
Decision ACQUITTAL
JUDGMENT
1. Accused persons are facing trial for commission of offences
punishable U/ss. 396/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(in short ‘IPC‘) & U/s 25/27 Arms Act.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.10.2018, DD No.
28A was assigned to SI Prakash Kashyap, wherein it was
recorded that a PCR call had been received regarding a firing
incident in which 3-4 persons sustained injuries at
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 2
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
Corporation Bank, Khera Branch, Delhi. Upon receipt of the
said information, SI Prakash Kashyap, accompanied by
Constable Ram Swaroop, proceeded to the spot. On reaching
the bank premises, they found a live cartridge lying near the
main gate of the bank and noticed blood scattered on the
floor. The glass pane of the Branch Manager’s cabin was
found broken, and a fired cartridge shell was lying outside the
SHIVALI said cabin. A pool of blood was also found inside the
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
bathroom. During the course of inquiry at the spot, it was
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:29 +0530 revealed that one injured person, namely Santosh Kumar,
who was working as a cashier, had been shifted to Vikas
Hospital, Najafgarh, where he was declared “brought dead.”
It further came to light that the deceased Santosh Kumar had
sustained a gunshot injury on the back of his right shoulder.
Thereafter, Inspector Aishvir Singh, along with other police
staff, reached the spot. The Crime Team and the FSL Team
were called, and both teams conducted their respective
proceedings at the scene of occurrence.
3. It is further the case of the prosecution that Sh. Prabhakar
Kumar, Senior Manager of the aforesaid bank and
complainant in the present case, made a statement to the
police. In his statement, he stated that on 12.10.2018, he was
on duty in the bank from 10:00 A.M. onwards along with
other members of the bank staff, namely, Sh. Nitin (Assistant
Manager), Sh. Santosh Kumar Sharma (Cashier-cum-Clerk),
Sh. Praveen Kumar (Peon), Sh. Akhilesh Kumar (official),
and Sh. Dev Narayan Mehto (Security Guard). According to
the complainant, the functioning of the bank remained
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 3
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
normal and smooth until about 3:00 P.M., when three young
boys entered the bank, one of whom was carrying a pistol in
his hand. Immediately upon entering the bank, they started
scuffling with the security guard, Sh. Dev Narayan Mehto. In
the meantime, three more boys entered the bank, joined the
others, and collectively overpowered the security guard and
snatched his gun. Thereafter, all the said boys, who were
SHIVALI armed with pistols, pushed aside two customers present in the
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
bank along with the security guard and forced them towards
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:33 +0530 a corner near the cash counter. The remaining staff members
were threatened with dire consequences at gunpoint and were
directed to move inside the cabin. The complainant further
stated that one of the assailants pointed a pistol at him and
threatened him to remain seated. During the course of the
incident, at the instance of the other assailants, one of them
fired a gunshot, which struck Sh. Santosh Kumar, the cashier,
on the back side of his right shoulder. Within a span of 2-3
minutes, after committing dacoity of cash from the cash
counter, all the assailants fled away from the bank.
Thereafter, when the complainant came out of his cabin, he
found Sh. Santosh Kumar lying in the staff bathroom in an
injured condition. He immediately took him to Vikas
Hospital, Najafgarh, where he was declared “brought dead.”
Upon returning to the bank from the hospital and checking
the cash, it was found that a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- had been
robbed by the dacoits. It also came to light that the dacoits
had taken away the gun of the security guard and fled towards
Kharkhari Canal on two motorcycles, one being a black
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 4
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
coloured Splendor and the other a yellow coloured
motorcycle. The complainant further stated that one of the
dacoits was wearing a helmet, while two of them had their
faces muffled, which, however, got uncovered repeatedly
during the commission of the offence, making their faces
visible. All the assailants appeared to be in the age group of
20 to 25 years, and the complainant stated that he would be
SHIVALI able to identify them if produced before him. On the basis of
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
the statement of the complainant, FIR No. 421/18 under
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:30 +0530 Sections 396/302/120B IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 of the
Arms Act was registered at Police Station Chhawla.
4. During the course of investigation, suspicious persons were
found roaming outside the bank. A bike Pulsar in abandoned
condition, having registration No.DL9SAG8828 was found
and the name of the owner of said bike got revealed as
accused Pawan Pandey. Another bike of yellow colour, in
abandoned condition, was also found at Ujwa Road which
was parked with having no number plate at back side and
with broken number plat at front side. On the basis of the
chassis, engine number and then tracing the chain of
purchasers, the said bike was found lastly to be purchased by
accused Sachin son of Satpal. Accused Sachin son of Satpal
made a disclosure statement and admitted his involvement in
the crime. He also revealed that accused Parvesh and Sachin
were also involved in the commission of offence of dacoity
with him. Accordingly, all these accused persons were
arrested. During interrogation, accused Lagan Sharma, Vicky
and Pradeep @ Pradhan @ Boda were also found involved in
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 5
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
the crime and it revealed that all these persons had hatched a
criminal conspiracy to commit dacoity in the bank with
pistols. During investigation, site plans were prepared; case
property/exhibits were collected and sent to FSL; and CCTV
footages were procured of the alleged offence. On the basis
of the investigation, the accused persons were charge-sheeted
for commission of offences punishable under Sections U/ss.
SHIVALI 396/302/120B/34 of the IPC & U/s 25/27/54/59 Arms Act.
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
5. Accused Pradeep @ Pradhan @ Boda was declared
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:32 +0530 Proclaimed Offender vide order dated 17.2.2020.
6. Vide order dated 5.8.2022, charge for offence punishable u/s
396/302/34 IPC as well as u/s 25/27 Arms Act against
accused persons Sachin son of Satpal, Parvesh, Sachin son of
Inderjeet, Vicky @ Pushkar, Pawan Pandey and Lagan
Sharma was framed to which they pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial.
7. It is relevant to mention here that after framing of charge and
during the trial, accused Lagan Sharma expired on
22.03.2026 and vide order dated 21.4.2026, the proceedings
against him stood abated.
8. To prove its case, prosecution examined 14 witnesses whose
details are as hereunder:
Prosecution Name of witness Description
Witness No.
PW-1 Prabhakar Kumar Branch Head of
Corporation Bank, Kheda
Branch
PW-2 Pandit Rajeev Customer of the bank
present during the incident
PW-3 Akhilesh Kumar Official of the bank
present during the incidentFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 6
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
PW-4 Nitin Assistant Manager of the
Bank present during the
incident
PW-5 Rakesh Sweeper who took out gun
from drainage
PW-6 Dr. Parvindra Singh Conducted Post-mortem of
the body of deceased-
Santosh Kumar
PW-7 Dr. J. Touthang Proved MLC of security
guard-Dev Narayan Mehto
SHIVALI PW-8 Rajender Yadav Customer of the Bank
BANSAL present in the bank during
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
the incident
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:29 +0530
PW-9 Praveen Kumar Clerk of the Bank present
during the incident
PW-10 Dev Narayan Mahto Security Guard of the
Bank present during the
incident
PW-11 Inspector Aishvir Singh Investigating Officer of the
Case
PW-12 Ins. Manmohan Singh Participated in the
investigation of the case
PW-13 SI Prakash Kashyap Participated in the
investigation of the case
PW-14 Inspector Jagmohan Participated in the
investigation of the case
9. PW1 Prabhakar Kumar (complainant) deposed that while he
was posted as Branch Head of the Corporation Bank, Branch
Khera, Najafgarh, on 12.10.2018 at about 3.00 P.M, a dacoity
took place in the said branch in his presence. PW1, from his
cabin, saw that few persons were manhandling Security
Guard namely Dev Narayan Mehto and his gun was snatched
by those persons. When PW1 stood and reached near the door
of his cabin, a person threatened him to kill if he did not sit.
PW1 along with two others officials present in his cabin, were
made to sit on the floor. In the meantime, window pane of his
cabin was broken and he also heard noise of a gun shot. After
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 7
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
few minutes, customers shouted that dacoits had left the bank.
PW1 further deposed that dacoits had locked 4-5 of his staff
members as well as one customer in the washroom. Cashier
of the bank namely Santosh Kumar was found locked inside
the washroom with bullet injury. PW1 made a call to the
Police. Cashier Santosh Kumar was immediately taken to the
hospital by PW1 but he was declared ‘brought dead’. After
SHIVALI checking, it revealed that Rs.3.18 lakhs had been robbed by
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
dacoits from the bank. According to PW1, dacoits were 6 in
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:34 +0530 number, one was wearing helmet while rest were wearing
masks. Entire incident of dacoity took place in 4-5 minutes
and PW1 had no time to identify any of those dacoits. During
his testimony, PW1 proved following documents:
S.No. Description of Document Exhibit
Number
1 Statement of PW1 Ex.PW1/A
2 Site Plan Ex.PW1/B
3 Seizure memo of one live and fired Ex.PW1/C
cartridge
4 Sketch of bullets Ex.PW1/D
5 Seizure memo of one piece of floor Ex.PW1/E
tile
6 Seizure memo of blood stained floor Ex.PW1/F
tile
7 Seizure Memo of Blood gauze Ex.PW1/G
8 Seizure memo of DVR of the CCTV Ex.PW1/H
installed in the bank
9 Seizure memo of duty roster of bank Ex.PW1/I
and photocopy of RC of PW1’s car
10 Attendance Ex.PW1/I-1
11 Photocopy of RC of PW1’s car Ex.PW1/I-2
12 Bank statement showing stolen Ex.PW1/J
amount of Rs.3.18 lakhsFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 8
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
13 Cartridges Ex.P1
14 Tiles Ex.P2 and
Ex.P3
15 DVR Ex.P4
16 Pen Drive containing CCTV Footage Ex.P5
17 Duty Register of relevant date Ex.PW1/K
regarding car No. DL2C AX 1590
18 Registration Certificate of Car Ex.PW1/L
No.DL2C AX 1590
SHIVALI
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
10. As PW1 did not support the case of the prosecution qua
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:32 +0530
identification of accused persons, he was cross-examined by
Ld. Addl. PP for State wherein he stated that on 15.10.2018
in the Police Station, he was shown accused Parvesh @ Lalu
@ Kera and Sachin S/o Satpal and Police told him that these
persons were amongst others who had committed dacoity in
the bank. PW1 denied that he had identified them as robbers
and was confronted with statement Ex.PW1/X1 in this regard
but to no avail. He further deposed that on 18.10.2018, police
brought accused Parvesh S/o Satbir, Sachin S/o Satpal and
Vicky S/o Manoj; on 22.10.2018 accused Sachin s/o Inderjit
and on 7.11.2018 accused Pawan Pandey (who allegedly shot
the cashier Santosh Kumar Sharma), to Bank but PW1 denied
the suggestion that he had identified them as
dacoits/assailants who had committed dacoity in the bank as
their masks got removed during the incident and their faces
became visible. PW1 was confronted with statement dated
18.10.2018 (Ex.PW1/X-2), dated 22.10.2018 (Ex.PW1/X-3)
and 7.11.2018 (Ex.PW1/X-4) in this regard but his testimony
remained intact. PW1 denied the suggestion that he was notFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 9
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
identifying accused persons due to fear of his life of himself
and also of his family members.
11. In cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for accused persons,
PW-1 stated that he saw a person snatching the gun from the
guard. He admitted that bank does not allow persons entering
the bank with covered face. PW1 did not remember the exact
number of documents signed by him during investigation of
SHIVALI the case. He even did not know which agency was
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
maintaining the DVR in respect of the CCTV footage. PW1
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:28 +0530 did not know about certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence
Act and also could not tell number of currency notes robbed
from the bank. He did not depute anyone to take care of crime
scene before leaving for hospital. PW1 denied the suggestion
that has made false complaint or that none of the allegations
made in Ex.PW1/A are correct.
12. PW-2 Pandit Rajeev, who was present in the bank being a
customer, deposed that at about 3.00 P.M., he was standing at
the deposit counter of bank to deposit cash. In the meantime,
three persons entered the bank and one of them was having a
pistol in his hand. They started manhandling the security
guard. In the meantime, three more persons entered the bank
out of two were also having pistols with them. One person
was also having one black colour bag with him. PW2 also
gave description of clothes worn by all of those persons. As
per PW2, all the six persons snatched gun from the guard and
made him, along with other customers, sit near the corner of
the cash counter. One of the robber directed the Bank
Manager to sit down threatening him to kill. One person
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 10
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
wearing black T shirt fired a gun shot towards cashier
Santosh Kumar with his pistol on the instigation of other
associates. Two robbers were standing at the entry gate; one
of them was holding the snatched gun of security guard and
said gun was also pointed out towards them. PW2 further
deposed that within 2-3 minutes, dacoits ran away after
committing dacoity in the bank along with gun of the security
SHIVALI guard. After dacoity, PW2 noticed that cashier Santosh
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
Kumar was lying in the washroom in the pool of blood. He
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:28 +0530 was taken to hospital by bank manager with the assistance of
customer but he his life could not be saved. As per PW2, one
robber was wearing helmet; five were in muffled faces and
during the incident their faces turned unmuffled. Robbers
were aged about 20-25 years. When CCTV footage of the
dacoity was shown to the witness, though he identified
himself in the said footage; he stated that due to lapse of time,
he is unable to identify the persons who committed dacoity in
the bank. Even when all the accused persons were pointed out
and shown to PW2, he failed to identify them to be the
persons involved in the incident of dacoity. This witness was
declared hostile on the point of identification of accused
persons and was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. P.P. for State.
In his cross-examination, PW2 denied the suggestion that he
is intentionally not identifying accused persons due to fear or
being won over by them or their relatives. He voluntarily
added that due to lapse of time, he is unable to identify
assailants.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 11
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
13. In his cross-examination by Ld. Defence Counsel for all the
accused persons, PW2 stated that though he is having his
account in the Corporation Bank but he did not remember his
account number. He admitted that the persons who entered
the bank were having masks on their faces and one of them
was wearing helmet. PW2 denied the suggestion that incident
did not take place in his presence.
SHIVALI 14. PW-3 Akhilesh Kumar, an employee of the Bank, deposed
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
that on 12.10.2018 at about 3.00 P.M., three boys entered the
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:30 +0530 bank. One of them was wearing yellow shirt and blue jeans;
second one was in dark red shirt and white pant and was
having a pistol in his hand; and third one was wearing a red
shirt and light grey pant. All of them started scuffling with
guard Dev Narayan Mehto. Meanwhile, three more persons
entered the bank and attacked the guard. They snatched gun
of the guard. The boy in blue shirt and black pant was wearing
helmet on his head and was also having pistol in his hands.
One boy wearing black T shirt was having a black colour bag
and a pistol in his hand. Another boy who was in half sleeves
shirt and light blue jeans was also having a pistol in his hand.
The dacoits thrashed two customers and security guard in the
corner near cashier counter. The boy in black T shirt pointed
pistol towards the Manager and threatened him to sit
otherwise he will shoot him. At the behest of other associates,
the boy in black T shirt, shot cashier Santosh Kumar. Within
2-3 minutes, dacoits looted the cash counter and fled away
from the bank. PW3 further deposed that he found Santosh
Kumar in the pool of blood in the bathroom. Sh. Prabhakar
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 12
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
Kumar shifted Santosh Kumar to the hospital where he was
declared ‘brought dead’. It revealed that a sum of Rs.3 lakhs
had been looted from the bank. Dacoits had fled away
towards Kharkhari Nahar on two motorcycles out of which
one was black colour Splendor and second bike was of yellow
colour. One of the boy was wearing helmet and two were in
muffled faces. Their face masks/clothes were getting down
SHIVALI again and again due to which their faces got visible during
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
the incident. As per PW3, all the dacoits were aged about 20-
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:34 +0530 25 years.
15. PW3 further deposed that during investigation, Police along
with three boys, came to the Bank on 18.10.2018 and told
names of those three persons as Parvesh, Sachin S/o Satpal
and Vicky. Police told PW3 that these three were the persons
out of six, who had committed dacoity in the bank. Police
asked PW3 to identify them but he could not identify them as
assailants were wearing helmet and were in muffled faces on
the day of incident. On 22.10.2018, Police brought Sachin
S/o Inderjeet to Bank telling PW3 that he had committed
dacoity in the bank with other persons but he also could not
identify him. On 7.11.2018, Police brought Pawan Pandey
stating the same fact but PW3 also could not identify him
reiterating his same plea. PW3 deposed that he cannot
identify the assailants in the court as faces of the assailants
were muffled and one persons was wearing helmet. When
CCTV footage (Ex.P5) of the incident of dacoity in the bank
was played in the court and shown to the witness, he
identified himself in the said footage but stated that as
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 13
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
assailants were wearing masks and one was in helmet, he
cannot identify any of them.
16. PW3 was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for State as
witness had not supported the case of the prosecution on the
point of identification. Accused Parvesh, Sachin S/o Satpal,
Vicky, Sachin S/o Inderjeet and Pawan Pandey were
specifically pointed out in the court but witness after seeing
SHIVALI them, still stated that he cannot identify them as assailants
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
had muffled their faces with helmet and cloth and, hence, he
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:30 +0530 was not able to see their faces on the date of incident. PW3
denied the suggestion that he had identified accused persons
when they were brought to the bank by the Police to be the
assailants who committed dacoity in the bank. PW3
voluntarily added that names of those persons were told to
him by Police. PW3 denied the suggestion that accused
Parvesh along with other associates namely Sachin S/o Satpal
and Vicky were having arms in their hands and threatened the
bank staff and public persons. PW3 denied statement u/s 161
Cr.PC (Mark PW3/A) recorded by Police in toto. PW3 denied
that on 22.10.2018 he had identified accused Sachin S/o
Inderjeet as one of the assailants as mentioned in statement
(Mark PW3/B) or on 7.11.2018 he had identified Pawan
Pandey as one of the assailants. PW3 denied statement u/s
161 Cr.PC (Mark PW3/C) in toto.
17. PW3 was not cross-examined by Ld. Defence Counsel for
any of the accused persons despite opportunity granted.
18. PW4 Nitin, Asstt. Manager of the Bank, deposed on the same
lines as deposed by PW3. He deposed that on 12.10.2018 he
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 14
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
was present in the bank with other staff and at around 3.00
P.M., three boys entered the bank. PW4 gave the description
of the clothes of the assailants. He further deposed that
assailants snatched gun from the guard; one boy was in
helmet and others had covered their faces and were having
pistols in their hands. Assailants made bank staff and
customers thrashed in the corner; one boy pointed pistol
SHIVALI towards Manager and one of the assailant in black T-shirt
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
fired gun shot towards cashier Santosh Kumar who was
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:31 +0530 declared ‘brought dead’ when shifted to the hospital.
Assailants had looted Rs.3 lakhs from the bank and had fled
away on two motorcycles, one of black and second of yellow
colour, along with gun of the security guard. On 18.10.2018,
22.10.2018 and 7.11.2018, accused persons were brought to
the bank and were shown to this witness but PW4 could not
identify them on the ground that one assailant was wearing
helmet and others had muffled their faces. When CCTV
footage of incident in Pen Drive (Ex.P5) was shown to him,
though PW4 identified himself in the footage, he did not
identify accused persons to be assailants and involved in the
commission of dacoity in the bank taking the similar plea that
one assailant was wearing helmet and rest were in muffled
faces.
19. PW4 was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for State like PW1,
PW2 and PW3, as this witness had also not supported the case
of the prosecution on the point of identification. During this
cross-examination, accused Parvesh, Sachin S/o Satpal,
Vicky, Sachin S/o Inderjeet and Pawan Pandey were
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 15
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
specifically pointed out in the court and shown to the witness
but PW4 after seeing them, still stated that he is unable to
identify them as assailants had covered their faces with
helmet and cloth and he could not see their faces on the date
of incident. PW4 denied the suggestion that he had identified
accused persons when they were brought to the bank by the
Police to be the assailants who committed dacoity in the bank.
SHIVALI PW4 voluntarily added that names of accused persons were
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
told to him by Police. PW4 denied the suggestion that
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:34 +0530 accused Parvesh along with other associates namely Sachin
S/o Satpal and Vicky were having arms in their hands and
threatened the bank staff and public persons. PW4 denied
statement u/s 161 Cr.PC (Mark PW4/A) recorded by Police
in toto. PW4 further denied that on 22.10.2018 he had
identified accused Sachin S/o Inderjeet as one of the assailant
or on 7.11.2018 he had identified accused Pawan Pandey as
one of the assailants in his statement (Mark PW4/B). PW4
also denied statement u/s 161 Cr.PC (Mark PW4/C) in toto.
20. PW4 was not cross-examined by all the Ld. Defence Counsel
for accused persons despite opportunity granted.
21. PW5 Rakesh deposed that he worked as Sweeper in Kheda
Dabar Hospital and on 17.10.2018 at the instance of one
Police Official namely Sudhir, he took out a gun from a
drainage with the help of rope and shovel. PW5 Rakesh
cleaned himself as well as gun with water. This witness
correctly identified accused Vicky to be with the Police at the
time of recovery of gun and correctly identified the said gun
as Ex.P1.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 16
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
22. PW5 was cross-examined by Ld. Defence Counsel for
accused Lagan Sharma and Vicky wherein he stated that he
had never seen accused Vicky in his life and had identified
him only at the instance of Police. Photograph of accused
Vicky was shown and he was asked to identify him in PS as
well as in Court. This witness stated that his signatures were
never obtained by the Police nor his statement was recorded.
SHIVALI PW5 stated that he cannot say whether any videography or
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
photography of the recovery proceedings of gun (Ex.P1) was
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:36 +0530 conducted. He further admitted that there was no specific
identification mark on the recovered gun (Ex.P1) by which
it can be identified.
23. When PW5 resiled from his previous statement regarding
identification of accused Vicky, Ld. Addl. P.P. cross-
examined him during which he admitted that he had
identified accused Vicky in the court on 12.11.2024 but
clarified that he had done so at the instance of Police. He
denied the suggestion that he had deposed falsely either due
to the reason that he has been won over by accused persons
or has been threatened by them. After his cross-examination
by Ld. Addl. P.P., PW5 was not cross-examined by Ld.
Counsel for accused persons despite opportunity granted to
them.
24. PW6 Dr. Parvindra Singh proved the post-mortem report of
deceased Santosh Kumar as Ex.PW6/A and opined the cause
of death due to hemorrhage and shock consequent to the
injuries mentioned in Ex.PW6/A.
25. In his cross-examination conducted by Ld. Defence Counsel,
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 17
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
PW6 stated that he had not removed clothes from the dead
body. He also did not remember the name of the person who
had assisted him in conducting the post-mortem.
26. PW7 Dr. J Touthang proved the MLC of guard-Dev Narayan
Mehto as Ex.PW7/A vide which nature of injuries was opined
as ‘simple’. The patient was brought with alleged history of
physical assault. In his cross-examination conducted by Ld.
SHIVALI Defence Counsel, PW7 voluntarily stated that patient as well
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
as Constable Sanjay had informed him about the alleged
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:35 +0530 history of physical assault.
27. PW8 Rajender Yadav, deposed that on 12.10.2018 when he
was present in Corporation Bank, two persons in muffled
faces; one having gun in his hand, entered the bank and they
snatched gun of the guard. They directed all the customers
present in the bank to stand silent in a corner. PW8 stated that
due to lapse of time, he is unable to tell about the clothes worn
by said robbers. PW8 further deposed that thereafter 2-3 more
persons, in muffled faces entered the bank. All bank staff
entered into a room. A gun shot took place. Robbers looted
cash and then fled away from the bank with gun of the guard.
PW8 informed the bank staff about fleeing away of the
robbers from the bank. PW8 came to know that one bank
official had sustained gun shot injury who was immediately
taken to a nearby Hospital by Manager of the bank.
According to PW8, he was unable to identify any of the
assailants as they were in muffled face and incident had taken
place in few minutes.
28. PW-8 was cross-examined by Ld. Addl. PP for State as he did
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 18
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
not support case of the prosecution on material aspects. In his
cross-examination, PW8 stated that on 13.10.2018, his
statement was recorded by the Police and he proved the same
as Ex.PW8/A. He remained intact to the fact that at about
3.00 PM, two boys and not three, had entered the bank. He
again stated that he cannot comment on the clothes worn by
the said assailants. PW8, however, admitted that first boy
SHIVALI started scuffling with the guard of the bank and also gave
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
beatings to him. PW8 further admitted that thereafter three
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:31 +0530 more boys entered the bank and one of them was wearing
helmet. As per PW8, he cannot tell whether the person
wearing helmet, was having pistol in his hand or not. This
witness also could not state which of the boy was having bag.
However, PW8 admitted that one of those assailants
threatened, “Niche beth jaa nahi to goli maar denge “. The
bank staff members did not sit and started running towards a
room and at that time, one of the assailant fired which hit
cashier of the bank namely Santosh Kumar. PW8 admitted
that robbers had looted the cash within 2-3 minutes from the
bank and then fled away. PW8 further admitted that age of
assailants was around 20-25 years. PW8 denied that clothes
from the faces of the assailants were getting off during the
incident and he was able to see their faces. As per PW8, he
was not sure that assailants were six, they might be five or
six. He clarified that even if those assailants are shown to him
with bare faces or with muffled faces, he will not be able to
identify them as the incident had taken place very quickly and
he was terrified. He stated that the fact mentioned in his
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 19
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
statement (Ex.PW8/A) that he saw the faces of assailants, is
not correct. PW8 denied the suggestion that he has been
deposing falsely being won over by accused persons or due
to pressure or coercion imparted upon him by the accused
persons.
29. In his cross-examination by Ld. Defence Counsel, PW8
voluntarily added that he had not stated in his statement
SHIVALI (Ex.PW8/A) about the identification of the assailants before
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
the IO.
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:32 +0530 30. PW9 Praveen Kumar was posted as clerk in the Corporation
Bank, Branch Kheda who also deposed on the same lines as
PW1, PW3 and PW4. PW9 deposed that on 12.10.2018 at
3.00 PM, two persons caught hold of the gun of the guard at
the gate of the bank. Thereafter, two more persons entered the
bank. They set aside 3-4 customers present in the bank. The
assailants were pointing guns towards them. Five officials of
the bank present rushed towards the toilet of the bank.
Manager of the bank was in his cabin. Cashier was the last
person who entered the toilet and he had sustained gun shot
injury. PW9 clearly stated that he cannot identify the
assailants who entered the bank on the day of incident. When
all the six accused persons were shown to this witness, he
failed to identify them and stated that he could not recognize
them as robbers had come with covered faces.
31. PW9 was declared hostile and was cross-examined by Ld.
Addl. PP for State, however, in his cross-examination, he
denied the suggestion that he had seen one of the robber
entering the bank with a pistol. He denied the suggestion that
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 20
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
assailants had threatened the staff at the gun point or one
assailant snatched gun of the guard or when cashier was shot,
he sat down due to fear. However, he admitted that robbers
had committed robbery in the bank after which they fled
away. Thereafter, it revealed that cashier Santosh Kumar had
died. Manager told PW9 that around Rs.3 lakhs had been
robbed from the bank. This witness denied the suggestion that
SHIVALI face mask/cloth wrapped on the faces of robbers had slipped
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
from their faces during the incident and their faces became
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:28 +0530 visible. PW9 was not aware whether dacoits fled away from
the spot on two motorcycles. PW9 denied the suggestion that
in his statement-Ex.PW9/A, he had stated that he could
recognize the robbers if shown to him. He voluntarily stated
that Police might have recorded this statement on their own.
He denied the suggestion that during investigation he had
identified accused persons when shown to him by the Police
on different dates in the bank. He denied that he deposed
falsely due to fear or pressure. This witness was not cross-
examined by any of the Ld. Defence Counsel despite
opportunity granted.
32. PW10 Dev Narayan Mahto was posted as security guard in
the Corporation Bank on the day of incident. He deposed that
on 12.10.2018 at about 3.00 PM, two persons came inside the
bank and caught hold of his gun. Thereafter, two more
persons came at the gate and snatched his gun. At gunpoint,
those persons forced the customers present in the bank to
move aside. After seeing those persons, bank staff including
cashier rushed to the toilet. Manager was still in his cabin.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 21
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
PW10 was made to sit at the side of cash counter. Those four
persons left the premises after looting the bank. Later, PW10
came to know that cashier was shot by the robbers. According
to this witness, he had not seen anyone shooting the cashier.
PW10 further deposed that he cannot identify the persons
who entered the bank on the day of incident. When accused
persons were shown to him in the court, he failed to identify
SHIVALI any of them. He further deposed that during investigation his
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
gun (Ex.PW10/2) was recovered which he got released on
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:30 +0530 superdari vide order dated 29.11.2018 (Ex.PW10/1).
33. PW10 was declared hostile and was cross-examined by Ld.
Addl. PP for State. In his cross-examination, he admitted that
he had seen pistols in the hands of 2-3 robbers entering the
bank. PW10 denied that those persons threatened the staff at
gun point or one of the boy had fired upon one bank official.
Later he came to know that a sum of Rs.3 lakhs were looted
from the bank and cashier Santosh Kumar had died. He
showed ignorance that robbers had fled away on two
motorcycles. He also denied that face masks/cloth wrapped
on the faces of robbers had slipped from their faces during
the incident and their faces became visible and they were seen
by them. He further denied that he had identified accused
persons when they were brought by the Police in the bank on
different dates as the persons who had committed robbery in
the bank. PW10 denied that he is deposing falsely due to fear
or pressure. This witness was not cross-examined by any of
the Ld. Counsel for accused persons despite opportunity
granted.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 22
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
34. PW11 IO Inspector Aishvir Singh deposed while being
posted as SHO, PS Chhawla, on 12.10.2018, vide DD
No.28A, he came to know that a firing incident had taken
place in the Corporation Bank, Branch Khera Village.
Accordingly, he reached there and came to know that Cashier
Santosh Kumar had sustained bullet injuries and already
shifted to Vikas Hospital by Bank Manager Sh. Prabhakar
SHIVALI Kumar. Crime and FSL teams were called at the spot. One
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
live and one fired cartridge were found lying on floor. Blood
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:33 +0530 was also scattered on the floor. SI Prakash Kashyap, who had
gone to Vikas Hospital, informed him that Cashier Santosh
Kumar was declared ‘brought dead’ by the doctor. PW11
carried out the investigation and prepared site plan
(Ex.PW1/B). PW11 further deposed that during inspection,
one Pulsar motorcycle of black colour bearing regn. No.
DL9SAG 8828 was found in abandoned condition near the
bank. PW11 checked the CCTV footage and on the basis of
the same deposed that three persons were seen entering the
bank with weapons in their hands and they had started scuffle
with guard. In the meantime, 3 more persons entered the bank
and all of them, made two customers as well as the security
guard sit in the corner near Cash Counter. Two robbers stood
near the gate of the bank; one near customers and guard; one
broke the glass of the cabin of Bank Manager and one person
aimed towards bank officials rushing towards washroom and
had fired. As per PW11, two boys out of six entered the cash
counter, one was having black colour bag was him. The
person carrying bag was the same person who had fired upon
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 23
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
the bank official. They looted the bank within 4-5 minutes
and then fled away towards Kharkhardi Nahar Village on two
motorcycles, one Apache (yellow colour) and another
Splendor (black colour).
35. PW11 further deposed that one Apache Motorcycle of yellow
colour was found in abandoned condition near Bus Stand on
Khera Dabar to Ujwa Village Road. CCTV footage showed
SHIVALI two boys of the same description as seen in the bank CCTV
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
footage, were seen roaming in the street near bank on
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:34 +0530 motorcycle, just prior to incident. One another motorcycle
model Pulsar with missing number plates, was found in
abandoned condition, and the same was found belonging to
accused Pawan Pandey. On search, he was found missing
from his home. The owner of Apache Motorcycle, which was
also not having number plate, was searched and following the
trail, Police came to know that lastly the said motorcycle was
sold to accused Sachin son of Satpal. Accordingly, this
accused was interrogated who disclosed that he along with
Parvesh, Sachin son of Inderjeet, Lagan Sharma, Vicky,
Pradeep @ Boda and Pawan Pandey had looted the bank in
criminal conspiracy with one another. One by one, all the
accused persons were arrested. Accused Sachin made
disclosure statement that Apache Motorcycle bearing
registration No.HR10P2278 belonged to him. Finger prints
from the said motorcycle were lifted by the Crime Team.
Accused Parvesh got recovered one pistol from the bushes
near Apache Motorcycle. Accused Sachin son of Satpal also
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 24
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
got recovered one loaded countrymade pistol and one live
cartridge.
36. PW11 further deposed that on 15.10.2018 Bank Manager
Prabhakar Kumar visited the PS and after seeing accused
Parvesh and Sachin, identified them. Accused Parvesh got
recovered his clothes worn by him during the dacoity. PW11
deposed that on different dates, he showed all the accused
SHIVALI persons to the bank officials in the bank and they had
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
identified them as persons who had committed dacoity in the
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:34 +0530 bank and their statements in this regard were recorded. Case
property ie DVR, 4 countrymade pistols etc were sent to FSL.
PW11 correctly identified all the accused persons in the court.
37. PW11 IO Inspector Aishvir Singh proved the following
documents:
S.No. Description of Document Exhibit
Number
1 Seizure memo of blood lifted in Ex.PW11/A
gauze
2 Seizure memo of DVR of Radha Ex.PW11/B
Krishan Mandir
3 Seizure memo of Pulsar Motorcycle Ex.PW11/C
4 Arrest Memo of Sachin son of Ex.PW11/D
Satpal
5 Personal Search Memo of Sachin Ex.PW11/E
son of Satpal
6 Arrest Memo of Parvesh Ex.PW11/F
7 Personal Search Memo of Parvesh Ex.PW11/G
8 Seizure memo of cash and Samsung Ex.PW11/H
Mobile Phone from accused
Parvesh
9 Disclosure Statement of accused Ex.PW11/I
Parvesh
10 Seizure memo of Apache Ex.PW1/JFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 25
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
Motorcycle No. HR10P2278
11 Sketch of pistol recovered at the Ex.PW1/K
instance of accused Parvesh
12 Seizure memo of pistol belonging Ex.PW1/L
to Parvesh
13 Sketch of pistol recovered at the Ex.P11/L1
instance of accused Sachin son of
Satpal
14 Seizure Memo of pistol recovered at Ex.PW11/L2
SHIVALI the instance of accused Sachin son
BANSAL of Satpal
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
15 Pointing Out Memo of spot Ex.PW11/L3
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:36 +0530
and
Ex.PW11/L4
16 Pointing Out Memo of spot of Ex.PW11/L5
abandoning Pulsar Motorcycle and
prepared at the instance of accued Ex.PW11/L6
Parvesh and Sachin
17 Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/L7
Lagan Sharma made at the instance and
of accused Parvesh and Sachin Ex.PW11/L8
18 Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/L9
Pradeep made at the instance of and
accused Parvesh and Sachin Ex.PW11/L1
0
19 Seizure Memo of clothes worn by Ex.PW11/M
accused Parvesh
20. Seizure Memo of clothes and shoes Ex.PW11/M1
recovered at the instance of accused
Sachin
21. Seizure Memo of number plates of Ex.PW11/M2
Apache Motorcycle Bearing regn
No. HR10P2278 recovered at the
isntance of accused Sachin son of
Satpal
22 Arrest Memo of accused Vicky Ex.PW11/M3
23 Personal search memo of accued Ex.PW11/M4
Vicky
24. Disclosure statement of accused Ex.PW11/M5
VickyFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 26
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
25. Sketch of the gun of the guard of Ex.PW11/M6
the bank
26 Pointing out cum seizure memo of Ex.PW11/M7
gun of guard recovered at the
instance of accused Vicky
27. Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/M8
accused Pradeep W Pradhan
prepared at the instance of accused
Vicky
28. Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/M9
SHIVALI accused Lagan Sharma prepared at
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
the instance of accused Vicky
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19 29. Pointing out memo of the place Ex.PW11/
where Pulsar Motorcycle was left M10
16:13:33 +0530by accused Pawan Pandey, prepared
at the instance of Vicky
30. Pointing Out Memo of spot ie Bank Ex.PW11/N
prepared at the instance of accused
Vicky
31 Pointing Out Memo of spot from Ex.PW11/N1
where Vicky had stolen Splendor
Motorcycle
32 Pointing out memo of spot where Ex.PW11/N2
Splendor Motorcycle was left
abandoned
33 Sketch of the pistol recovered at the Ex.PW11/N3
instance of accused Vicky
34 Seizure Memo of pistol recovered at Ex.PW11/N4
the instance of accused Vicky
35. Pointing out of spot prepared at the Ex.PW11/N5
instance of accused Pawan Pandey
36. Pointing Out memo of place where Ex.PW11/N6
Pulsar Motorcycle was left,
prepared at the instane of accused
Pawan pandey
37 Pointing Out memo of house of Ex.PW11/N7
accused Lagan Sharma, prepared at
the instance of accused Pawan
Pandey
38 Pointing Out memo of house of Ex.PW11/N8FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 27
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
accused Pawan Pradhan, prepared at
the instance of accused Pawan
Pandey
39. Seizure of cloth used for muffling Ex.PW11/N9
the face during commission of
dacoity, recovered at the instance of
accused Pawan Pandey
40. Pointing out Memo of place of Ex.PW11/
recovery of Apache Motorcycle, N10 and
recovered at the instance of accused Ex.PW11/N1
SHIVALI Parvesh and Sachin son of Satpal 1
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
41 Seizure Memo of Bullet Motorcycle Ex.PW11/O
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
No. DL1SAA9086
16:13:28 +0530
38. During his cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for accused
Sachin son of Satpal, Parvesh and Pawan, PW11 deposed that
beat staff Satyanarayan had informed him that Pulsar bike,
found parked at road side in front of Jhor, belonged to
accused Pawan Pandey. PW11 admitted that statement of
Satyanarayan was not recorded in the present case. There is
no public witness who had seen accused Pawan Pandey
driving the said bike. There is no photograph of Pulsar bike
parked outside the bank. There is no public person who had
seen accused Pawan Pandey, Parvesh and Sachin son of
Satpal entering or exiting the bank on the day of incident.
PW11 denied the suggestion that accused persons have been
falsely implicated in the present case.
39. PW12 Inspector Manmohan Singh deposed that on
13.10.2018, while being posted at PS Chhawla, he had joined
the investigation of the present case with IO Inspector Aishvir
Singh and other Police Officials. Accused Parvesh was
caught near Shipra Mall Market with the help of his cousin
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 28
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
namely Anshu. This witness corroborated the testimony of
PW11 qua investigation conducted on 13.10.18, 14.10.2018,
17.10.2018, 18.10.2018 and 19.10.2018 as he was
accompanying the IO on these days. PW12 further deposed
that on 23.10.2018, he conducted the investigation of the
present case as concerned IO was on leave. PW12 took
accused Sachin son of Inderjit to his village Khewra, Sonipat
SHIVALI and he led the Police Team to his house from where he got
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
recovered one countrymade pistols along with 2 live
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:29 +0530 cartridges, one sky blue colour jeans and cash amount of
Rs.55,500/- from the iron almirah lying at the first floor of
his house. PW12 proved the following documents:
S.No. Description of Document Exhibit
Number
1 Sketch of pistol and two live Ex.PW12/1
cartridges recovered at the instance of
Sachin son of Inderjit
2 Seizure memo of pistol and live Ex.PW12/2
cartridges recovered at the instance of
Sachin son of Inderjit
3 Seizure memo of cash of Rs.55,500/- Ex.PW12/3
4 Seizure memo of blue jeans Ex.PW12/4
5 Pointing out memo of spot prepared at Ex.PW12/5
the instance of accused Sachin son of
Inderjit
6 Seizure memo of cloth piece used by Ex.PW12/6
accused Sachin s/o Inderjit to muffle
his face during dacoity
7 Number Plates of motorcycle bearing Ex.PW12/
registration No.HR10P2278 A-1 (colly.)
40. Besides above, Ld. Defence Counsel did not dispute the
identity of remaining case properties and, accordingly, theFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 29
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
identification of remaining case properties was dispensed
with. During his cross-examination by Ld. Defence Counsel
for accused Sachin son of Satpal, Parvesh and Pawan, PW12
admitted that site plan of the place of arrest of accused was
not prepared by IO in his presence. He further admitted that
no signature of brother of accused Parvesh namely Anshu or
any other public person was obtained on arrest memo of
SHIVALI accused Parvesh. PW12 could not tell whether disclosure
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
statement of accused Parvesh was recorded at the spot or not.
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:33 +0530 PW12 stated that he cannot tell whether the arrival and
departure entry of 13.10.2018 were placed on the judicial file
or not. This witness further admitted that no site plan of the
spot of recovery of the broken number plate of the Apache
motorcycle was made by the IO in his presence. He further
admitted that there is no signature of any public person on the
seizure memo of the broken number plate.
41. PW-13 SI Prakash Kashyap deposed that on 12.10.2018,
while being posted at PS Chhawla, he received DD No. 12A
regarding firing in Corporation Bank, Kheda Branch. He
along with Ct. Ram Swaroop reached the spot and found one
live cartridge at the entrance of the bank, blood lying on the
floor inside the bank, broken glass of the Manager’s cabin
and one empty shell outside the cabin. On learning that the
injured had been shifted to hospital, he left Ct. Ram Swaroop
at the spot and proceeded to the hospital, where he obtained
the MLC of the injured, who had been declared ‘brought
dead’. SI Sumit also reached there and the dead body was
shifted to RTRM Hospital. Thereafter, he returned to the spot
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 30
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
and met the SHO and other police officials. He recorded the
statement (Ex. PW1/A) of the Senior Branch Manager
Prabhakar Kumar and prepared rukka (Ex.PW13/A) on the
basis of the statement. He further deposed that he called the
Crime Team and FSL Team, which inspected the spot in his
presence. The IO prepared sketches of the live cartridge and
empty cartridge (Ex. PW1/D), and seized them vide seizure
SHIVALI memo (Ex. PW1/C). He further stated that on the next day
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
post-mortem of the deceased was conducted. This witness
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:30 +0530 further accompanied the IO to a place about 100 meters from
Radha Krishan Mandir, where an abandoned motorcycle
bearing No. 8828 was found and which was seized vide
seizure memo (Ex. PW11/E). This witness was not cross-
examined by Ld. Defence Counsel for all the accused persons
despite opportunity granted.
42. PW-14 Inspector Jagmohan, while being posted as PS
Chhawla as SI, deposed that on 21.10.2018 the case file of
the present case was handed over to him for further
investigation. On receipt of secret information, he along with
other Police Staff reached near Peeragarhi Metro Station
where he arrested accused Sachin. On 6.11.2018, PW14
formally arrested accused Pawan Pandey from the office of
Special Staff. Accused Sachin as well as Pawan Pandey
refused to participate in TIP Proceedings. On 16.11.2018,
PW14 arrested accused Lagan Sharma also. PW14 proved the
following documents:
S.No. Description of Document Exhibit
Number
1 Arrest Memo of accused Sachin Ex.PW14/AFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 31
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
2 Personal Search Memo of accused Ex.PW14/B
Sachin
3 Disclosure Statement of accused Ex.PW14/C
Sachin
4 Seizure Memo of Rs.20,000/- Ex.PW14/D
recovered from accused Sachin
5 Arrest Memo of accused Pawan Ex.PW14/E
Pandey
6 Disclosure statement of accused Ex.PW14/F
SHIVALI Pawan Pandey
BANSAL 7 Arrest Memo of accused Lagan Ex.PW14/G
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
Sharma
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:32 +0530 8 Disclosure Statement of accused Ex.PW14/H
Lagan Sharma
9 Pointing out memo of Bank prepared Ex.PW14/I
at the instance of accused Lagan
Sharma
10 Pointing out memo of spot where Ex.PW14/J
looted money was shared among
accused persons
11 Seizure memo of bike No. Ex.PW14/K
DL1SAA9086
12 Pointing out memo of house of co- Ex.PW14/L
accused Pradeep
43. In his cross-examination conducted by Ld. Defence Counsel
for accused Sachin S/o Satpal, Parvesh and Pawan Pandey,
PW14 admitted that in the arrest memo-Ex.PW14/E it is not
mentioned that accused Pawan Pandey was arrested from the
office of Special Staff of Delhi Police. This witness further
admitted that in murder case, investigation is carried out by a
Police official at Inspector level.
44. On 27.4.2026, at the request of Ld. Addl. PP for State
witnesses mentioned at Sr. No. 7,8, 9, 10, 11, 24 to 32, 34,
35, 40 to 43, 45, 46, 48, 51 were dropped from list of
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 32
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
witnesses as witnesses having similar testimony had already
been recorded.
45. In their statement recorded u/s 294 CrPC, accused persons
namely Sachin S/o Inderjeet; Sachin S/o Satpal; Vicky;
Parvesh and Pawan Pandey admitted the following
documents:
CHART OF ADMITTED DOCUMENTS
SHIVALI
BANSAL Document Description of Document
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL Ex.PX1 FIR
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:32 +0530
Ex.PX2 Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian
Evidence Act
Ex.PX3 GD No. 28 dated 12.10.2018
Ex.PX4 Dead body handed over memo
Ex.PX5 Crime scene report
Ex.PX-6. TIP proceeding of accused Sachin s/o sh.
Inderjeet
Ex.PX-7 TIP proceeding of accused Vicky
Ex.PX-8 TIP proceeding of accused Pawan
Ex.PX-9 TIP proceeding of accused Sachin s/o sh.
Satpal
Ex.PX-10 TIP proceeding of accused Parvesh
Ex.PX-11 Report of Chance print in case DD No.
28A dated 12.10/2018
Ex.PX-12 Road Certificate No. 7/21/19
Ex.PX-13 Acknowledgment slip of Bio
Ex.PX-14 CAF and CDR of mobile no. 8851800650
(Colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-15 CAF and CDR of mobile no. 8447561824
colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-16 CAF and CDR of mobile no 8684020018
(colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 BFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 33
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
Ex.PX-17 CAF and CDR of mobile no. 8743071452
(colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-18 FSL report of Physics division of CCTV
dated 28.06.2019
Ex.PX-19 Seizure memo of document of Kavita
hotel
Ex.PX-20 The document of kavita Hotel
Ex.PX-21 Photographs of hotel Kavita
Ex.PX-22 FSL report of Ballistic Division dated
SHIVALI 09.08/2019
BANSAL Ex.PX-23 FSL report of Bio division along with
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
Allelic data dated 30.01.2019
16:13:35 +0530
Ex.PX-24 FSL report of CO division dated
31.05.2019 alongwith Certificate U/s 65 B
IEA
Ex.PX-25 FSL report of Ballistic division dated
05.08.2019
Ex.PX-26 Sanction U/s 39 Arms Act dated
02.02.2019 and 28.08.2019
Ex.PX-27 MLC No. 1041/18 of deceased Santosh
Kumar Sharma
46. In view of statement of accused persons recorded u/s 294
Cr.PC, witnesses at serial number 14 to 18, 23, 33, 37, 38, 44,
47, 49 and 50 and serial number 1 to 6, 9 & 10 from
supplementary charge sheet were also dropped at the request
of Ld. Addl. PP for State and on the submission of Ld. Addl.
PP that no other witness remained to be examined,
prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 27.4.2026.
47. Statement u/s 313 CrPC of accused persons Sachin S/o
Satpal, Parvesh, Sachin s/o Inderjeet, Vicky @ Pushkar and
Pawan Pandey were recorded, wherein accused persons were
briefed on all the incriminating ocular and documentary
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 34
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
evidence to which they denied and further deposed that they
are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case.
48. Final arguments were advanced by Ms. Rajesh Kumari, Ld.
Addl. PP for the State; Sh. Prince Sharma, Ld. Counsel for
the accused persons Sachin son of Satpal, Parvesh and
Pawan; and Sh. Vipin Sehrawat, Ld. Counsel for accused
Vicky, Sachin son of Inderjeet.
SHIVALI
BANSAL 49. Ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that the prosecution through
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL public witnesses i.e. PW1 Prabhakar Kumar, PW2 Pandit
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:37 +0530
Rajeev, PW3 Akhilesh Kumar, PW4 Nitin, PW8 Rajender
Yadav, PW9 Praveen Kumar and PW-10 Dev Narayan Mahto
have proved that offences of dacoity and murder of cashier
Santosh Kumar had taken place in the Corporation Bank,
Kheda Branch on 12.10.2018. It is further contended that
bank official witnesses had identified the accused persons
before Police to be the persons who committed dacoity in the
bank as their faces became visible during the incident but due
to fear of life, they did not support the case of the prosecution
qua their identification in the court. Ld. Addl. PP has
furthered contended that other circumstances ie recovery of
motorcycles used in the commission of offence; recovery of
pistols from the possession of the accused persons; cloth
piece used for covering their faces and the clothes worn by
them during the incident match with the CCTV footage of the
dacoity; and recovery of currency notes from the possession
of accused persons; all these facts establish that these were
the accused persons who had committed dacoity as well as
murder of cashier Santosh Kumar in furtherance of their
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 35
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
common intention after hatching criminal conspiracy. PW11
IO Aishvir Singh, PW12 Inspector Manmohan, PW13 SI
Prakash Kashyap and PW14 Inspector Jagmohan have also
supported the case of the prosecution. It is further contended
that PW11 also identified accused persons to be the assailants
involved in the commission of dacoity. CCTV footages show
that these were accused persons who committed dacoity in
SHIVALI the bank. Two motorcycles used in the commission of the
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
crime were found belonging to two accused persons. It is
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:35 +0530 further argued that the fact discovered after recovery at the
instance of accused persons is admissible u/S 27 of the Indian
Evidence Act. It is argued that prosecution has proved its case
beyond reasonable doubt against all the accused persons and,
hence, all the accused persons should be convicted under all
the Sections of law under which charges have been framed
against them.
50. Per Contra, Sh. Prince Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the accused
persons Sachin son of Satpal, Parvesh and Pawan argued that
the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against
accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. To substantiate his
point, he argued that none of the public witnesses have
identified any of the accused persons to be assailants involved
in the commission of bank dacoity and murder of cashier
Santosh Kumar. Two motorcycles have been falsely planted
upon the accused persons to show the present case as solved.
It is also argued that the police officials have made a false
case against the accused persons. It is further argued that
investigation is faulty and there are major contradictions in
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 36
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
the testimonies of police witnesses. No public witness was
joined at the time of recovery of bikes, as per prosecution
story, allegedly to be used in the commission of crime. It is
also argued that the prosecution story cannot be relied upon.
Disclosure statements shown to have been made by accused
persons, are not admissible under the law. Money shown to
have been recovered at the behest of accused persons cannot
SHIVALI be connected with the currency notes looted in the bank
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
dacoity as there is no detail of the serial numbers of the
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:29 +0530 currency notes. Ld. Counsel also argued that since the
prosecution has failed to prove its case against accused
Sachin son of Satpal, Parvesh and Pawan beyond reasonable
doubts, they should be acquitted under all sections of law
under which charges have been framed against them.
51. Similarly, Sh. Vipin Sehrawat, Ld. Counsel for accused
Vicky, Sachin son of Inderjeet also argued that the
prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against
these two accused persons beyond reasonable doubt and both
the accused persons are liable to be acquitted in the present
case.
52. In the present case, besides sections 25/27 Arms Act, charges
under Sections 396/302/34 IPC have been framed against the
accused persons. These Sections have been elaborated as
under:-
“396. Dacoity with murder.–If any one of five or more
persons, who are conjointly committing dacoity, commits
murder in so committing dacoity, every one of those
persons shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for
life, or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend
to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine..
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 37
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
302. Punishment for murder.–Whoever commits murder
shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and
shall also be liable to fine.
34. Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common
intention.–When a criminal act is done by several persons
in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such
persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were
done by him alone.
53. I have thoughtfully considered the arguments advanced,
SHIVALI perused the material available on record, scrutinized the
BANSAL evidence led by the prosecution and gone through the relevant
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19 provisions of law.
16:13:35 +0530
54. In the present case, PW1 Prabhakar Kumar (Branch Head),
PW2 Pandit Rajeev (customer), PW3 Akhilesh Kumar
(official of bank); PW4 Nitin (Asstt. Manager of Bank), PW8
Rajender Yadav (Customer), PW9 Praveen Kumar (official of
bank) and PW10 Dev Narayan Mahto (Security Guard) have
proved that an incident of dacoity and murder of cashier
Santosh Kumar had taken place in the Corporation Bank,
Kheda Branch but none of these witnesses identified any of
the accused person to be involved in the commission of
dacoity and murder in the Bank. All these witnesses have not
supported the case of the prosecution qua identification of
accused persons. Though in their statements before Police,
these witnesses stated that during the incident of dacoity and
murder, the cloth/masks worn by dacoits had put off from
their faces and their faces became visible, however, in the
court during their deposition, these witnesses in one voice
deposed that all dacoits had covered their faces with
masks/cloth and one was wearing helmet and that is why they
could not see the faces of the dacoits and, hence, were not
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 38
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
able to say that dacoity and murder was committed by
accused persons.
55. The investigating agency tried to establish and connect the
motorcycles to be used in the crime with the accused persons.
However, PW11 IO Aishvir Singh admitted that no public
witness was joined during recovery of both the motorcycles
or their number plates. The clear connection between
SHIVALI motorcycles allegedly stated to be belonging to accused
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
persons and its use before, during and after commission of
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:28 +0530 dacoity and murder, could not be established. Even the
currency notes, recovered at the instance of accused persons,
could not be matched with the currency notes looted from the
bank as no such witness to complete the chain of
circumstances has been examined by the prosecution in this
regard.
56. It has come on record in the testimony of PW6 Dr. Parvindra
Singh that cashier Santosh Kumar had died due to bullet
injury in the gunshot fired by one of the assailant. However,
there is nothing on record to show that the bullet was fired
from any of the countrymade pistol recovered at the instance
of any of the accused persons. Even otherwise, no public
person was made a witness either to the recovery and seizure
of both the motorcycles or to the recovery of countrymade
pistols allegedly recovered at the instance of accused persons.
57. So far as gun snatched from the security guard is concerned,
PW5 Rakesh though initially deposed that accused Vicky was
present with the Police at the time of recovery of gun from
drainage near to Khera Khurd Hospital but later on in his
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 39
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
cross-examination conducted by Ld. Defence Counsel for
accused Vicky, he stated that he had identified accused Vicky
in the court at the instance of Police. He stated that
photograph of the said person was shown to him and he was
asked to identify him in the PS as well as in the Court. He
also stated that he had never seen accused Vicky in his life. It
has also come on record that there was no specific
SHIVALI identification mark on the recovered gun (Ex.P1) by which it
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
could be identified. Despite his cross-examination by Ld.
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:33 +0530 Addl. PP for State qua identification of accused Vicky, though
he admitted that he had identified accused Vicky on
12.11.2024 before this Court as the person who was in Police
custody at the time of recovery of gun (Ex.P1), this witness
volunatrily added that he had identified accused Vicky at the
instance of Police and he had not seen accued Vicky prior to
that day at the place of recovery. He denied the suggestion
that he has been won over by accused Vicky or his family
members or has been threatened by them.
58. Even the investigation in the present case suffers from
various infirmities. They are:-
(a) Absence of public witnesses
59. It is a well-settled proposition that non-joining of public
witness shrouds doubt over the fairness of the investigation
by police. No public witness was joined at the time of
recovery of pistols or currency notes allegedly recovered at
the instance of accused persons. Section 100(4) of Cr.P.C also
casts a statutory duty on an official conducting search to join
two respectable persons of the society. Same has not been
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 40
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
done in the present case. This casts a doubt on the fairness of
the investigation. Reliance is placed on paragraph 6 of the
judgment in Pawan Kumar Vs. The Delhi Administration,
1989 Cri.L.J. 127, wherein the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
had observed as under:-
“… According to Jagbir Singh, he did not join any public
witness in the case while according to Kalam Singh, no
public person was present there. It hardly stands to
SHIVALI reason that at a place like a bus stop near Subhas Bazar,
BANSAL there would be no person present at a crucial time like
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
07.30 p.m. when there is a lot of rush of commuters for
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:36 +0530
boarding the buses to their respective destinations.
Admittedly, there is no impediment in believing the
version of the Police officials but for that the prosecution
has to lay a good foundation. At least one of them should
deposed that they tried to contact the public witnesses or
that they refused to join the investigation. Here is a case
where no effort was made to join any public witness
even though number of them were present. No plausible
explanation from the side of the prosecution is
forthcoming for not joining the independent witnesses in
a case of serious nature like the present one. It may be
that there is an apathy on the part of the general public to
associate themselves with the Police raids or the
recoveries but that apart, at least the I.O. should have
made an earnest effort to join the independent witnesses.
No attempt in this direction appears to have been made
and this, by itself, is a circumstance throwing doubt on
the arrest or the recovery of the knife from the person of
the accused.”
60. This Court is, however, conscious that the prosecution case
cannot be thrown out or doubted on the sole ground of non-
joining of public witnesses as public witnesses keep
themselves away from the Court unless it is inevitable, as has
been held in Appabhai & Another Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR
1988 SC 696. However, in the present case, it is not only the
absence of public witnesses which raises a doubt on the
prosecution but there are other circumstances too, as
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 41
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
discussed hereinafter, which raise suspicion over the
prosecution version.
(b) Departure entry not proved
61. Police officials are under a statutory duty to mark their
departure and arrival in the register kept in the police station
for the purpose as per the Punjab Police Rules. It is relevant
here to reproduce Chapter 22 Rule 49 of the Punjab Police
SHIVALI Rules, 1934, which reads as under: –
BANSAL
Digitally signed by “22.49 Matters to be entered in Register No. II- The
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
following matters shall, amongst others, be entered: –
16:13:29 +0530
The hour of arrival and departure on duty at or from a
police station of all enrolled police officers of whatever
rank, whether posted at the police station or elsewhere,
with a statement of the nature of their duty. This entry shall
be made immediately on arrival or prior to the departure
of the officer concerned and shall be attested by the latter
personally by signature or seal.
The term Police Station will include all places such as
Police Lines and Police Posts where Register No. II is
maintained.”
62. Since public persons were not joined in the investigation, the
departure entry of the aforesaid police official, who were
allegedly on patrolling duty at the relevant time and had
apprehended the accused with case property, becomes a vital
piece of evidence. No departure entry is stated to have been
made while going for the recovery of the bikes in the present
case. No such daily diary entry regarding departure of police
is, however, present on record. The prosecution has not
brought on record any proof of the said entries, and the same
is indispensable as the present case rests solely on the alleged
recovery made by the aforesaid police officials.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 42
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
63. Lastly, despite availability of CCTV footage, no steps were
taken by the prosecution qua establishing identification of
accused persons through any other mode. It has also not come
on record that the currency notes allegedly recovered from
the possession of the accused persons were the part of the
money looted from the bank. The prosecution has mainly
relied upon the evidence of public witnesses/bank
SHIVALI officials/customers of the bank rather than scientific
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
evidence. No chance prints have been matched from the
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:34 +0530 finger prints of the accused persons from the place of
incident.
64. The entire case of the prosecution is built upon the testimony
of police witnesses in whose testimonies there are material
inconsistencies. However, for conviction of accused persons
it is essential that the prosecution proves its case beyond
doubt. Upon close scrutiny of testimony of abovesaid
witnesses, it is clear that except for police officials, there is
no independent witness/public person, who had joined the
investigation at the time of recovery of alleged weapons, at
any point in time. There is no witness who had seen police
officials recovering the bikes. There is no DD entry showing
the departure time or arrival time of the police officials at the
time of recovery and for carrying out investigation of the
present case.
65. All these casts doubt as to the manner of investigation and
these contradictions and lacuna in the investigation gives
indication of certain manipulation by the police officials for
the reasons best known to them. There is no independent
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 43
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
recovery witness examined by the prosecution.
66. It is a settled proposition of law that while the prosecution is
required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts, the
defence of the accused persons has to be considered on the
scale of preponderance of probabilities. The accused persons
in the present case have been able to create doubt upon the
story of the prosecution for which benefit has to be given to
SHIVALI them. Accordingly, the accused persons are entitled to benefit
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
of doubt.
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:36 +0530 67. To prove the prosecution case, the testimony of the
prosecution witnesses must be reliable. It is not the quantity
but the quality of the testimony of the witness that helps a
court in arriving at a conclusion in any case. The test in this
regard is that the evidence adduced by the parties must have
a ring of truth. In a criminal trial, the prosecution has to prove
the case beyond reasonable doubt and it is possible only when
the testimony of prosecution witnesses is cogent, trustworthy
and credible. To secure a conviction of accused, the testimony
of the prosecution witness must be of sterling quality.
68. In case titled as Rai Sandeep @ Deepu Vs. State (NCT of
Delhi), (2012) 8 SCC 21, it is held that: –
“22. In our considered opinion, the “sterling witness”
should be of a very high quality and caliber whose
version should, therefore, be unassailable. The court
considering the version of such witness should be in a
position to accept it for its face value without any
hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status
of the witness would be immaterial and what would be
relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such
a witness. What would be more relevant would be the
consistency of the statement right from the starting point
till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes
the initial statement and ultimately before the court. It
should be natural and consistent with the case of the
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 44
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any
prevarication in the version of such a witness. The
witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-
examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it
may be and under no circumstances should given room
for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the
persons involved, as well as the sequence of it. Such a
version should have corelation with each and every one
of other supporting material such as the recoveries made,
the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the
scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said
version should consistently match with the version of
SHIVALI very other witness. It can even be stated that it should be
BANSAL akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial
Digitally signed by evidence where there should not be any missing link in
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of
16:13:36 +0530
the offence alleged against him. Only, if the version of
such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other
such similar tests to be applied, can it be held that such a
witness can be called as a “sterling witness’ whose
version can be accepted by the court without any
corroboration and based on which the guilty can be
punished. To be more precise, the version of the said
witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain
intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral,
documentary and material objects should match the said
version in material particulars in order to enable the court
trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the
other supporting materials for holding the offender guilty
of the charge alleged.”
69. Similarly, in case of Ramdas Vs. State of Maharashtra,
(2007) SCC 170, it is held that: –
“23.It is no doubt true that the conviction in a case of rape
can be based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix,
but that can be done in a case where the court is convinced
about the truthfulness of the prosecutrix and there exist
no circumstances with cast of shadow of doubt over her
veracity. It the evidence of the prosecutrix is of such
quality that may be sufficient to sustain an order of
conviction solely on the basis of her testimony. In the
instant case we do not fine her evidence to be of such
quality.”
70. Thus, from the above said judgments, it is clear that the
version of the witness should be natural one and it must
corroborate the prosecution case. Such version must match
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 45
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
with the testimony of other prosecution witnesses. It should
be of such a quality that there should not be any shadow of
doubt upon it.
71. In the instant case, prosecution witnesses had not inspired
confidence and their evidence cannot be said to be of sterling
quality.
72. It is established principle of law that if two views are
SHIVALI possible, the view favourable to the accused must be
BANSAL
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
accepted. The benefit of doubt must always go to the accused
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:31 +0530 as the prosecution has to prove the case beyond reasonable
doubt.
73. The Hon’ble Apex court in Rang Bahadur Singh Vs. State of
U.P. reported in AIR 2000 SC 1209 has held as follows: –
“The timetested rule in that acquittal of a guilty person
should be preferred to conviction of an innocent person.
Unless the prosecution establishes the guilt of the ac-
cused beyond reasonable doubt a conviction cannot be
passed on the accused. A criminal court cannot afford to
deprive liberty of the appellants, lifelong liberty, without
having at least a reasonable level of certainty that the
appellants were the real culprits.”
74. In yet another decision in State of U.P. Vs. Ram Veer Singh
and Another, 2007 (6) Supreme 164 the Hon’ble Apex Court
has held as follows: –
“The golden thread which runs through the web of ad-
ministration of justice in criminal cases is that if two
view are possible on the evidence adduced in the case,
one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to
his innocence, the view which is favourable to the ac-
cused should be adopted. The paramount consideration
of the Court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is
prevented. A miscarriage of justice which may arise
from acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the con-
viction of an innocent. In a case where admissible evi-
dence is ignored, a duty is cast upon the appellate Court
to reappreciate the evidence where the accused has beenFIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 46
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
acquitted, for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether
any of the accused really committed any offence or not.”
75. For the reasons stated above, this court is of the considered
opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the
ingredients of offence punishable under Sections 396/302/34
IPC or u/s 25/27 Arms Act against accused persons namely
Sachin S/o Satpal, Parvesh, Sachin s/o Inderjeet, Vicky @
Pushkar and Pawan Pandey beyond reasonable doubt.
SHIVALI
BANSAL 76. Accordingly in view of the aforesaid discussion, accused
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL persons namely Sachin S/o Satpal, Parvesh, Sachin s/o
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:31 +0530
Inderjeet, Vicky @ Pushkar and Pawan Pandey are acquitted
for commission of offences punishable U/ss.396/302/34 IPC
as well as u/s 25/27 Arms Act. Their bail bonds are cancelled
and sureties are discharged. Documents, if any, be returned to
the sureties against proper acknowledgment.
77. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
(SHIVALI BANSAL)
Announced in the open ASJ-02, DWARKA COURTS,
Court today on 19.5.26. S-W DISTRICT, NEW DELHI (SA)
Annexures: 1. Chart of witnesses examined.
2. Chart of exhibited documents.
3. Chart of admitted documents.
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 47
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
APPENDIX
CHART OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
Prosecution Name of witness Description
Witness No.
PW-1 Prabhakar Kumar Branch Head of
Corporation Bank, Kheda
Branch
PW-2 Pandit Rajeev Customer of the bank
present during the incident
SHIVALI PW-3 Akhilesh Kumar Official of the bank
BANSAL present during the incident
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL PW-4 Nitin Assistant Manager of the
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:28 +0530 Bank present during the
incident
PW-5 Rakesh Sweeper who took out gun
from drainage
PW-6 Dr. Parvindra Singh Conducted Post-mortem of
the body of deceased-
Santosh Kumar
PW-7 Dr. J. Touthang Proved MLC of security
guard-Dev Narayan Mehto
PW-8 Rajender Yadav Customer of the Bank
present in the bank during
the incident
PW-9 Praveen Kumar Clerk of the Bank present
during the incident
PW-10 Dev Narayan Mahto Security Guard of the
Bank present during the
incident
PW-11 Inspector Aishvir Singh Investigating Officer of the
Case
PW-12 Ins. Manmohan Singh Participated in the
investigation of the case
PW-13 SI Prakash Kashyap Participated in the
investigation of the case
PW-14 Inspector Jagmohan Participated in the
investigation of the case
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 48
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
CHART OF EXHIBITED DOCUMENTS
Proved Description of Document Exhibit
by/atteste
d by Number
PW1 Statement of PW1 Ex.PW1/A
PW1 Site Plan Ex.PW1/B
PW1 Seizure memo of one live and fired Ex.PW1/C
cartridge
PW1 Sketch of bullets Ex.PW1/D
SHIVALI PW1 Seizure memo of one piece of floor Ex.PW1/E
BANSAL tile
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL PW1 Seizure memo of blood stained Ex.PW1/F
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:35 +0530 floor tile
PW1 Seizure Memo of Blood gauze Ex.PW1/G
PW1 Seizure memo of DVR of the Ex.PW1/H
CCTV installed in the bank
PW1 Seizure memo of duty roster of Ex.PW1/I
bank and photocopy of RC of
PW1's car
PW1 Attendance Ex.PW1/I-1
PW1 Photocopy of RC of PW1's car Ex.PW1/I-2
PW1 Bank statement showing stolen Ex.PW1/J
amount of Rs.3.18 lakhs
PW1 Cartridges Ex.P1
PW1 Tiles Ex.P2 and
Ex.P3
PW1 DVR Ex.P4
PW1 Pen Drive containing CCTV Ex.P5
Footage
PW1 Duty Register of relevant date Ex.PW1/K
regarding car No. DL2C AX 1590
PW1 Registration Certificate of Car Ex.PW1/L
No.DL2C AX 1590
PW1 Statement/complainant of PW1 Ex.PW1/X1
PW1 Statement of PW1 dated 18.10.2018 Ex.PW1/X2
PW1 Statement of PW1 dated 22.10.2018 Ex.PW1/X3
PW1 Statement of PW1 dated 7.11.2018 Ex.PW1/X-4
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 49
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
PW6 Post-mortem report of deceased Ex.PW6/A
Santosh Kumar
PW7 MLC of guard-Dev Narayan Mehto Ex.PW7/A
PW8 Statement of PW8 Ex.PW8/A
PW9 Statement of PW9 Ex.PW9/A
PW10 Gun Ex.PW10/2
PW10 Superdari order dated 29.11.2018 Ex.PW10/1
PW11 Seizure memo of blood lifted in Ex.PW11/A
SHIVALI
BANSAL gauze
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
PW11 Seizure memo of DVR of Radha Ex.PW11/B
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:35 +0530
Krishan Mandir
PW11 Seizure memo of Pulsar Motorcycle Ex.PW11/C
PW11 Arrest Memo of Sachin son of Ex.PW11/D
Satpal
PW11 Personal Search Memo of Sachin Ex.PW11/E
son of Satpal
PW11 Arrest Memo of Parvesh Ex.PW11/F
PW11 Personal Search Memo of Parvesh Ex.PW11/G
PW11 Seizure memo of cash and Samsung Ex.PW11/H
Mobile Phone from accused
Parvesh
PW11 Disclosure Statement of accused Ex.PW11/I
Parvesh
PW11 Seizure memo of Apache Ex.PW11/J
Motorcycle No. HR10P2278
PW11 Sketch of pistol recovered at the Ex.PW11/K
instance of accused Parvesh
PW11 Seizure memo of pistol belonging Ex.PW11/L
to Parvesh
PW11 Sketch of pistol recovered at the Ex.P11/L1
instance of accused Sachin son of
Satpal
PW11 Seizure Memo of pistol recovered Ex.PW11/L2
at the instance of accused Sachin
son of Satpal
PW11 Pointing Out Memo of spot Ex.PW11/L3
and
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 50
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
Ex.PW11/L4
PW11 Pointing Out Memo of spot of Ex.PW11/L5
abandoning Pulsar Motorcycle and
prepared at the instance of accued Ex.PW11/L6
Parvesh and Sachin
PW11 Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/L7
Lagan Sharma made at the instance and
of accused Parvesh and Sachin Ex.PW11/L8
PW11 Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/L9
Pradeep made at the instance of and
SHIVALI
accused Parvesh and Sachin Ex.PW11/L10
BANSAL
Digitally signed by PW11 Seizure Memo of clothes worn by Ex.PW11/M
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19 accused Parvesh
16:13:31 +0530
PW11 Seizure Memo of clothes and shoes Ex.PW11/M1
recovered at the instance of accused
Sachin
PW11 Seizure Memo of number plates of Ex.PW11/M2
Apache Motorcycle Bearing regn
No. HR10P2278 recovered at the
isntance of accused Sachin son of
Satpal
PW11 Arrest Memo of accused Vicky Ex.PW11/M3
PW11 Personal search memo of accused Ex.PW11/M4
Vicky
PW11 Disclosure statement of accused Ex.PW11/M5
Vicky
PW11 Sketch of the gun of the guard of Ex.PW11/M6
the bank
PW11 Pointing out cum seizure memo of Ex.PW11/M7
gun of guard recovered at the
instance of accused Vicky
PW11 Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/M8
accused Pradeep Pradhan prepared
at the instance of accused Vicky
PW11 Pointing out memo of house of Ex.PW11/M9
accused Lagan Sharma prepared at
the instance of accused Vicky
PW11 Pointing out memo of the place Ex.PW11/
where Pulsar Motorcycle was left M10
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 51
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
by accused Pawan Pandey, prepared
at the instance of Vicky
PW11 Pointing Out Memo of spot ie Bank Ex.PW11/N
prepared at the instance of accused
Vicky
PW11 Pointing Out Memo of spot from Ex.PW11/N1
where Vicky had stolen Splendor
Motorcycle
PW11 Pointing out memo of spot where Ex.PW11/N2
Splendor Motorcycle was left
SHIVALI
abandoned
BANSAL
Digitally signed by PW11 Sketch of the pistol recovered at the Ex.PW11/N3
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19 instance of accused Vicky
16:13:33 +0530
PW11 Seizure Memo of pistol recovered Ex.PW11/N4
at the instance of accused Vicky
PW11 Pointing out of spot prepared at the Ex.PW11/N5
instance of accused Pawan Pandey
PW11 Pointing Out memo of place where Ex.PW11/N6
Pulsar Motorcycle was left,
prepared at the instane of accused
Pawan pandey
PW11 Pointing Out memo of house of Ex.PW11/N7
accused Lagan Sharma, prepared at
the instance of accused Pawan
Pandey
PW11 Pointing Out memo of house of Ex.PW11/N8
accused Pawan Pradhan, prepared
at the instance of accused Pawan
Pandey
PW11 Seizure of cloth used for muffling Ex.PW11/N9
the face during commission of
dacoity, recovered at the instance of
accused Pawan Pandey
PW11 Pointing out Memo of place of Ex.PW11/
recovery of Apache Motorcycle, N10 and
recovered at the instance of accused Ex.PW11/N11
Parvesh and Sachin son of Satpal
PW11 Seizure Memo of Bullet Motorcycle Ex.PW11/O
No. DL1SAA9086
PW12 Sketch of pistol and two live Ex.PW12/1
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 52
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
cartridges recovered at the instance
of Sachin son of Inderjit
PW12 Seizure memo of pistol and live Ex.PW12/2
cartridges recovered at the instance
of Sachin son of Inderjit
PW12 Seizure memo of cash of Ex.PW12/3
Rs.55,500/-
PW12 Seizure memo of blue jeans Ex.PW12/4
PW12 Pointing out memo of spot prepared Ex.PW12/5
SHIVALI at the instance of accused Sachin
BANSAL son of Inderjit
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
PW12 Seizure memo of cloth piece used Ex.PW12/6
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:29 +0530
by accused Sachin s/o Inderjit to
muffle his face during dacoity
PW12 Number Plates of motorcycle Ex.PW12/A-1
bearing registration No.HR10P2278 (colly.)
PW14 Arrest Memo of accused Sachin Ex.PW14/A
PW14 Personal Search Memo of accused Ex.PW14/B
Sachin
PW14 Disclosure Statement of accused Ex.PW14/C
Sachin
PW14 Seizure Memo of Rs.20,000/- Ex.PW14/D
recovered from accused Sachin
PW14 Arrest Memo of accused Pawan Ex.PW14/E
Pandey
PW14 Disclosure statement of accused Ex.PW14/F
Pawan Pandey
PW14 Arrest Memo of accused Lagan Ex.PW14/G
PW14 Disclosure Statement of accused Ex.PW14/H
Lagan Sharma
PW14 Pointing out memo of Bank Ex.PW14/I
prepared at the instance of accused
Lagan Sharma
PW14 Pointing out memo of spot where Ex.PW14/J
looted money was shared among
accused persons
PW14 Seizure memo of bike DL1SAA9086 Ex.PW14/K
PW14 Pointing out memo of house of co- Ex.PW14/L
accused Pradeep
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 53
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
CHART OF ADMITTED DOCUMENTS
Document Description of Document
Ex.PX1 FIR
Ex.PX2 Certificate U/s 65B of the Indian
Evidence Act
Ex.PX3 GD No. 28 dated 12.10.2018
Ex.PX4 Dead body handed over memo
SHIVALI
BANSAL Ex.PX5 Crime scene report
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL
Date: 2026.05.19
Ex.PX-6. TIP proceeding of accused Sachin s/o sh.
16:13:32 +0530 Inderjeet
Ex.PX-7 TIP proceeding of accused Vicky
Ex.PX-8 TIP proceeding of accused Pawan
Ex.PX-9 TIP proceeding of accused Sachin s/o sh.
Satpal
Ex.PX-10 TIP proceeding of accused Parvesh
Ex.PX-11 Report of Chance print in case DD No.
28A dated 12.10/2018
Ex.PX-12 Road Certificate No. 7/21/19
Ex.PX-13 Acknowledgment slip of Bio
Ex.PX-14 CAF and CDR of mobile no. 8851800650
(Colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-15 CAF and CDR of mobile no. 8447561824
colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-16 CAF and CDR of mobile no 8684020018
(colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-17 CAF and CDR of mobile no. 8743071452
(colly.) alongwith Certificate u/s 65 B
Ex.PX-18 FSL report of Physics division of CCTV
dated 28.06.2019
Ex.PX-19 Seizure memo of document of Kavita
hotel
Ex.PX-20 The document of kavita Hotel
Ex.PX-21 Photographs of hotel Kavita
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 54
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
Ex.PX-22 FSL report of Ballistic Division dated
09.08/2019
Ex.PX-23 FSL report of Bio division along with
Allelic data dated 30.01.2019
Ex.PX-24 FSL report of CO division dated
31.05.2019 alongwith Certificate U/s 65 B
IEA
Ex.PX-25 FSL report of Ballistic division dated
05.08.2019
SHIVALI Ex.PX-26 Sanction U/s 39 Arms Act dated
BANSAL 02.02.2019 and 28.08.2019
Digitally signed by
SHIVALI BANSAL Ex.PX-27 MLC No. 1041/18 of deceased Santosh
Date: 2026.05.19
16:13:37 +0530 Kumar Sharma
FIR No. 421/2018. Page No. 55
PS Chhawla State Vs. Sachin & Others.
