IN THE COURT OF MS.

MAHIMA CHAUDHARY

SENIOR CHIEF METROPOLITON MAGISTRATE, COURT NO. 12,

JAIPUR SESSIONS COURT

IN THE MATTER OF:

State of Rajasthan .....Prosecution

Versus

Ramesh Das ....Accused

FIR No. 322/18

P.S. Sanganer
Date: 30.08.2018

WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION TO THE ABOVE MATTER

AT HAND

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

That the above mentioned matter has been filed by the Prosecution on behalf of state under section

380 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The brief events in the present case are as under:

1. That the present written submission is preferred against the Charge sheet No. 748 u/s 380 IPC,

PS- Sanganer. The true copy of present Charge sheet vide Charge sheet No. 748 Ex.PW1/1 is

annexed herewith as Annexure “A”. The FIR No. 322/18 vide Ex. PW3/1 was registered u/s 380

IPC by Mr. Sachdev Kumar. As per the complaint filed, there was a theft that took place at

Kumar’s residence in 33, Chaudhary Charan singh Park, Tonk Road Jaipur-302011.
2. That on 23 July 2018, Priya Kumar D/o Sachdev Kumar saw someone, covering himself with a

brown shawl, escaping from the boundary of their house at around 3.30 P.M. Mr. And Mrs.

Sachdev Kumar were at the office. After arriving, Mr Sachdev and Mrs. Prity Kumar noticed that

two gold rings and one gold chain were missing from their locker.

3. That although the gold jewellery of 22 gram (all 24 carat) was missing, but everything else

including the locker and its keys were perfectly at their place. In fact, the locker was safely kept

locked. It was discovered that glass window in the bathroom, attached to bedroom was unlocked

and opened with some mud impressions of shoes on the floor and the wall of the bathroom.

4. That the key of the locker was kept in the cupboard, which was locked with its key, kept in Mrs.

Prity’s handbag, which she was carrying with her in office at that time. According to the

complainant, only the family members were aware of the location of locker’s key.

5. That I.O. Rajesh Verma and the F.S.L. team were present at the crime scene. Site Map was

prepared by I.O. Rajesh Verma vide Ex.PW4/1. The photographs of shoeprints, Invoice of stolen

property and the key of the locker were seized vide Property Search and Seizure Memo

Ex.PW5/1.

6. The FSL Team collected Fingerprints taken on locker from where property was stolen,

photographs of shoeprints at crime spot, soil sample and, finger prints present on the locker were

sent to FSL vide Forwarding Note Ex.PW6/1.

7. That the complainant suspected Mr. Ramesh Das, his full day servant, as no one else other than

the family members was aware of the locker and the place where it’s key was kept and Ramesh

being their full day servant would have somehow got to know about it. Also because the locker

was not broken, rather was safely kept locked after theft which shows that the thief possessed its

duplicate key. The glass window of bathroom was always kept locked from inside and no family

member unlocked the window.

 8. That the fingerprints of Mr. Ramesh Das were taken and a pair of his shoes were seized on 25

July 2018 and sent to FSL vide Forwarding Note Ex.PW6/2. As per the FSL reports (FORM NO.

FEL/JAIPUR/FAM,15.17) vide Ex.PW7/1 received on 28 July 2018, fingerprints on the locker,

the shoeprints and molecular composition of soil matched to that of Ramesh Das and his pair of

shoes respectively.

9. That Mr. Ramesh Das was arrested on 28 July 2018 at 4:03 P.M. vide Ex.PW8/1 and produced

before the magistrate on 29 July 2018. Ramesh Das was ordered to be kept in judicial custody for

14 days.

10. That on 31 July 2018, search was conducted at Ramesh’s house and a duplicate key to the locker

was seized vide Property Search and Seizure Memo Ex.PW5/2 and was sent to FSL vide

Forwarding Note Ex.PW6/2. As per the FSL reports (FORM NO. FEL/JAIPUR/FAM,15.17)

vide Ex.PW7/1 received on 28 July 2018, the duplicate key matched to the structure of the lock

from which the jewellery was stolen. PW 5 who is an FSL expert was examined and cross

examined. It was confirmed by the locksmith Lokesh Talwar that it was the same key he made

for Mr. Ramesh Das. Also, that key was able to unlock the locker.

11. That the statements of four witnesses under section 161 CrPC were taken and the accused was

charged under section 380 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on 23 July 2018.

GROUNDS

12. That the above mentioned evidences are substantiating all the essentials of Theft as provided

under section 378, I.P.C. PW1, who is the victim Mr. Sachdev Kumar and the PW 5, who is the

locksmith Lokesh Talwar were examined and cross- examined which proves that the possession

of immovable property was taken up by the accused without the consent of PW1 who owned that

property.

13. That the accused never admitted to have taken the possession of missing jewellery. However, the

FSL report certified and exhibited vide Ex.PW7/1 shows that the all the fingerprints, shoe prints
 and soil sample match with the identity and the objects belonging to accused. This satisfies

another essential of theft i.e. the property was dishonestly taken by the accused

14. The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed the offence

with the requisite mens rea.

15. That all the evidences in the entire charge-sheet are compelling enough to absolutely affirm the

factum of the accused actually stealing the jewellery from Kumar’s residence. In addition to this,

the prosecution’s case places reliance on the presence of strong circumstantial evidences and the

same should be allowed to result in the conviction of the accused person.

PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited the public

prosecutor most humbly and respectfully pray before this Hon’ble Court to be graciously pleased

to:

i. Set the accused guilty under section 380 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the said case.

ii. Reasonable compensation to Mr. Sachdev Kumar for the loss of life and personal liberty

suffered by them during the entire trial.

AND/OR

Further the Court may pass any other orders in the light of justice, equity and good

conscience.

And for this act of kindness, your Lordships, the prosecutor shall as duty bound ever

humbly pray.
 Verification

I, Sachdev Kumar, above named, do solemnly affirm and declare that the content of the foregoing

affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part is false and nothing material have been concealed.

Verified this on the date 30.08.2018

Solemnly declared at Jaipur

Dated this 30th day of August 2018

Sd/-
Sachdev Kumar
Deponant
 State of Rajasthan v. Ramesh Das
F.I.R. No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.PC.

Statement of accused Ramesh Das S/o Mahesh Das, Age about 46 years, R/o 13, Chaudhary Charan
Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302011 U/s 313 CrPC

WITHOUT OATH.

Q1. It is in evidence against you that you have committed the offence of theft by stealing 22 grams
of gold jewellery of 24 carat from the kumar’s residence at 33, Chaudhary Charan Singh Park,
Tonk Road, Jaipur-302011. What do you have to say about it?

Ans- No, I have not stolen. Also, it was contended during the framing of charges that stolen property
has been found from my house and kept in Malkhana. However, there is no evidence for the sasme in
charge sheet. Neither there is any seizure memo prepared nor any F.S.L reports says that the
jewellery has been found from my possession.

Q2. It is in evidence against you that you got a duplicate key made for the locker and the FSL reports
also proved that the duplicate key was that of the locker. What do you have to say about it?

Ans- No such duplicate key has been seized from me. It is because the seizure memo clearly states
‘N.A.’ wherein it is asked ‘Person from who seized/ recovered’. Also, the FSL reports are silent on
the fingerprints present on the duplicate key. Therefore, it is nowhere evident that the duplicate key
has been found from my possession.

Q3. It is evident from the FSL reports that you were present at the time when the offence took place.
Also, as per the statement of Locksmith Lokesh Talwar u/s 161 CrPC, the duplicate key of the
locker is the same that he made for you. What do you have to say about it
Sd/-
Ramesh Das
Accused

SD/-
(Ms. Mahima Chaudhary)
SCMM Court No. 12,
Jaipur Sessions Court
Ans- As per the statement under section 161 of Mr. Sachdev Kumar, the key of the locker on the day
of offence was as usual keot in the cupboard and the key of the cupboard was with Mrs. Prity who
was in office at that time. He also stated that on that day also the cupboard was kept locked. Even if I
had possessed the key of locker, how could I reach the locker without having the keys of locked
cupboard?

Q4. It is in evidence against you that you were present at the crime spot when the offence took place
as all the fingerprints match with that of yours. What do you have to say about it?

Ans- It is Reasonable to expect my presence over there because I am a full time servant at Kumar’s
residence and I did clean that room and everything kept there on the day of commission of offence
also so it is possible to obtain my fingerprints from there.

Q5. It is in evidence against you that you broke into the house from the window as the soil samples,
shoe prints match with that of yours. What do you have to say about it?

Ans. The shoe prints and soil sample matched to that of mine because on that day I was wearing the
same shoes while working and it is possible that, that particular area was left out from being cleaned
and therefore my shoe prints. What do you have to say about it?

Q6. It is in evidence against you that your shoe prints were also found on the wall of the bathroom
that had the window.

Ans. I don’t know.

RO&AC

Sd/-
Ramesh Das
Accused
24.08.2018
SD/-
(Ms. Mahima Chaudhary)
SCMM Court No. 12,
Jaipur Sessions Court
24.08.2018
 State of Rajasthan v. Ramesh Das

FIR No. 322/18

P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.P.C.
22.08.2018
PW-1: Statement of Sachdev Kumar S/o Sri Gopal Kumar, aged 48 years, R/o 33, Chaudhary Charan
Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur is called for examination in chief.

On SA:

Q. Introduce yourself to the Court

Ans. I am Sachdev Kumar, Civil Engineer as partner of my partnership firm Harbinger Heights situated at A-
42 New Sanganer Road, Jaipur.

Q. How do you know about the incidence?

Ans. The incidence took place at my residence at 33, Chaudhary Charan Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-
302011 on 23.07.2018. My daughter Priya called me and told that she has seen someone escaping from our
house boundary. I and my wife rushed home and found everything perfectly on its place. We checked our
locker and found that two gold rings and one gold chain was missing.

Q. How do you think the thief must have reached the jewellery in locker?

Ans. It is because we found that the glass window of our bathroom, attached to the bedroom where locker is
kept, was partially open. It was always kept locked from inside. There were some shoe prints of mud on the
bathroom floor and the wall of the window. The locker was not broken, rather safely locked and kept perfectly
on its place, which meant that the thief possessed a duplicate key, because the original key was with my wife
in her office at that time.

Q. What were your reasons of suspecting Ramesh Das for committing theft?

Ans. He can only be the one who might have overheard about the key at some occasion because he spends full
day at our house. Also, he had asked for money as his daughter met with an accident and he does not have
sufficient money for her operation. With all probability he might be the one who has opened the glass window
lock from inside so that nobody suspects him of theft, rather believes that someone from outside has broken
into the house.

RO & AC

Sd/-
Signature of witness
22.08.2018
Sd/-
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Court No.12 Jaipur Sessions Court.
22.08.2018
Statement is written by me as per the dictations. Recorded as per his version, explained again in hindi and
vernacular language and admitted to be correctly recorded in the presence of the accused. (sd/- stenographer
Manika Gupta).
 State of Rajasthan v. Ramesh Das
FIR No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
22.08.2018
PW-2: Statement of Lokesh Talwar S/o Chabi Talwar, aged 48 years, R/o 21, A Block,
Manifarm, Jaipur is called for examination in chief.

On SA:

Q. Introduce yourself to the Court

Ans. I am Lokesh Talwar. I work as locksmith and I have my shop at A Block, Manifarm, Jaipur.

Q. How do you know about the incidence?

Ans. On 27 July 2018, Head Constable Rajesh Verma came and asked me to recognize a photo of
Ramesh Das. The police came to me as I was the only locksmith in the closest vicinity of Kumar’s
residence. The police officer told me about the theft that took place at Kumar’s residence.

Q. Do you know who Ramesh Das is?

Ans. Yes, I know Ramesh Das very well. He is my acquaintance; we often meet each other while
having tea at a nearby Thadi. Although we never had a formal meet up, but he came to my shop for
the first time as a customer around two weeks before H.C. Rajesh Verma came to my shop asking
about him.

Q. Why did Ramesh Das visit your shop?

I remember Ramesh Das visiting my shop around two weeks ago for getting a duplicate key made. I
do not remember the type of duplicate key he wanted me to make but I do remember that the key he
brought was a very small one and when I asked him if it was of some Locker, he did not answer my
question. He came to me at 3.30PM. I do not work from 3.15 to 4.00 P.M. as it is my lunch break.
But he insisted on me to make a duplicate key for him as it was very urgent.
RO & AC
Sd/-
Signature of witness
22.08.2018
Sd/-
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Court No.12 Jaipur Sessions Court

Statement is written by me as per the dictations. Recorded as per his version, explained again in
hindi and vernacular language and admitted to be correctly recorded in the presence of the accused.
(sd/- stenographer Manika Gupta).
 State of Rajasthan v. Ramesh Das
FIR No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.P.C.

22.08.2018

PW-1: Statement of Sachdev Kumar S/o Sri Gopal Kumar, aged 48 years, R/o 33, Chaudhary
Charan Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur is called for cross- examination in chief.

XXX by Counsel Mr. Piyush Goyal for the accused.

On SA:

Q1. If you could please state your name in front of this court.

Ans. I am Sachdev Kumar.

Q2. How many people are there at your home?

Ans. We are 5 family members. However, Ramesh Das is working as our full day servant since last
10 years.

Q3. Where was Ramesh Das at around 3.30 P.M., the time at which the theft took place according to
you?

Ans. Ramesh Das goes for a two hour lunch break everyday between 3.00 P.M. to 5.00 P.M.

Q4. Then how can you say that he is the one who has stolen the jewellery?

Ans. Because he is the only one who knew precisely that locker was kept inside which cupboard and
where the key of the cupboard and key of the locker was kept.

Q5. But you said during your examination that no one other then the family members is aware of the
location of key of the locker.

Ans. Yes, and that is the reason we suspected Ramesh Das because he remains at our house for the
whole day so he might have somehow overheard someone talking about the key of locker.

Q6. If Ramesh Das is a full day servant then why would he enter and exit the house like a thief?
Having duplicate key, he would have anytime secretly taken out the jewellery.

Ans. May be he did not want himself to be suspected so he came from the window of our bathroom
so that we would think that someone from outside has come.

Q7. What prove do you have that you possessed the jewellery that has been stolen?

Ans. Invoice for the stolen jewellery has been seized from me by I.O. Rajesh Verma.

Q8. How can you say that you do not have jewellery in your possession because it was stolen by
someone?
Ans. Because my wife wore that jewellery in a marriage 10 days before the theft took place, and kept
it in the locker which we are now not able to find.

Q9. Is it only the jewellery or anything else also that you find missing in your house?

Ans. A household has so many different articles, it is difficult to identify what all is missing.

Q10. If there are so many things in your house then it is possible that you would have kept the
jewellery somewhere and forgotten and just because your daughter had an illusion of somebody
fleeing, you feel that something is definitely stolen.

Ans. We all are very sure that jewellery was kept there and is now missing.

Q11. You told that the key of the locker was inside a cupboard which was locked and its keys were
with your wife in office. Is it right?

Ans. Absolutely.

Q12. As per the evidences, only a duplicate key of the ‘Locker’ has been found in possession of Mr.
Ramesh Das and locksmith lockesh talwar also admits of making a duplicate key for the locker and
not of the cupboard. Right?

Ans. Right.

Q13. Then how did he reach the key of the locker which was always kept inside the always locked
cupboard?

Ans. I don’t know, the cupboard might have been left open someday and he would have taken out the
key of the locker at that day.

Sd/-
Signature of witness
22.08.2018
Sd/-
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Court No.12 Jaipur Sessions Court.
22.08.2018

Statement is written by me as per the dictations. Recorded as per his version, explained again in
hindi and vernacular language and admitted to be correctly recorded in the presence of the accused.
(sd/- stenographer Manika Gupta).
 State of Rajasthan. v. Ramesh Das
FIR No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.P.C.

22.08.2018

PW-2: Statement of Lokesh Talwar S/o Chabi Talwar, aged 48 years, R/o 21, A Block, Manifarm,
Jaipur is called for cross- examination in chief.

XXX by Counsel Mr. Piyush Goyal for the accused.

On SA:

Q1. How do you know Mr. Ramesh Das?

Ans. I do not know him personally but I know certain things about him because we often have tea at the
nearby Thadi together. I know that he works at Kumar’s residence as full day worker.

Q2. When did he come to your shop?

Ans. I don’t remember the exact date but yes he came here sometime around two weeks before Head
Constable Rajesh Verma came to my shop asking about him.

Q3. Do you remember how many customers came to your shop that day?

Ans. No, there were many customers and I had a lot of work to do that so I don’t remember much.

Q6. Why did Ramesh Das come to your shop?

Ans. He came to get a duplicate key made. As far as I remember, it was small key of a locker and when I
asked him if this was key of a locker, he did not replied, but asked me to make it as soon as possible.

Q7. But you said that there were too many customers and you did not remember anything except that Ramesh
came to your shop.

Ans. Yes there were many customers but I remember precisely about Ramesh Das because my shop is closed
from 3.15 PM to 4.00 PM and Ramesh came here at 3.30 PM. I refused to help him and asked him to come
back after 4.00 PM, but he insisted allot and said that it is very urgent. So I made a duplicate key for him
during my break. That is why remember precisely about him.

RO&AC
Sd/-
Signature of witness
22.08.2018
Sd/-
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Court No.12 Jaipur Sessions Court.
22.08.2018
Statement is written by me as per the dictations. Recorded as per his version, explained again in hindi and
vernacular language and admitted to be correctly recorded in the presence of the accused. (sd/-stenographer
Manika Gupta)
 IN THE COURT OF MS. MAHIMA CHAUDHARY

SENIOR CHIEF METROPOLITON MAGISTRATE, COURT NO. 12,

JAIPUR SESSIONS COURT

State of Rajasthan. v. Ramesh Das

FIR No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.PC.

SUMMONS TO WITNESS

To Mr. Sachdev Kumar, Civil Engineer r/o 33, Chaudhary Charan Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-
302011.

WHEREAS complaint has been made before me that Ramesh Das of 13, Chaudhary Charan Singh
Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302011 has committed the offence of theft u/s 380 IPC at around 03.30
P.M. on 23.07.2018 at Kumar’s residence, 33, Chaudhary Charan Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-
302011 and it appears to me that you are likely to give material evidence or to produce any document
or other thing for the prosecution;

You are hereby summoned to appear before this Court on the 22nd day of August, 2018 at ten o’clock
in the forenoon, to produce such document or thing or to testify what you know concerning the
matter of the said complaint, and not to depart thence without leave of the Court; and you are hereby
warned that, if you shall without just excuse neglect or refuse to appear on the said date, a warrant
will be issued to compel your attendance.

Dated, this 17th day of August, 2018

(Seal of the Court)

Sd/-
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Court No.12 Jaipur Sessions Court
 IN THE COURT OF MS. MAHIMA CHAUDHARY
SENIOR CHIEF METROPOLITON MAGISTRATE, COURT NO. 12,

JAIPUR SESSIONS COURT

State of Rajasthan. v. Ramesh Das

FIR No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.PC.

SUMMONS TO WITNESS

To Mr. Lokesh Talwar, Locksmith r/o 21, A Block, Manifarm, Jaipur-302011.

WHEREAS complaint has been made before me that Ramesh Das of 13, Chaudhary Charan Singh
Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302011 has committed the offence of theft u/s 380 IPC at around 03.30
P.M. on 23.07.2018 at Kumar’s residence, 33, Chaudhary Charan Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur-
302011 and it appears to me that you are likely to give material evidence or to produce any document
or other thing for the prosecution;

You are hereby summoned to appear before this Court on the 22nd day of August, 2018 at ten o’clock
in the forenoon, to produce such document or thing or to testify what you know concerning the
matter of the said complaint, and not to depart thence without leave of the Court; and you are hereby
warned that, if you shall without just excuse neglect or refuse to appear on the said date, a warrant
will be issued to compel your attendance.

Dated, this 17th day of August, 2018

(Seal of the Court)

Sd/-
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Court No.12 Jaipur Sessions Court.
 IN THE COURT OF MS. MAHIMA CHAUDHARY

SENIOR CHIEF METROPOLITON MAGISTRATE, COURT NO. 12,

JAIPUR SESSIONS COURT

State of Rajasthan. v. Ramesh Das

FIR No. 322/18
P.S. Sanganer
U/s 380 I.PC.
CHARGE

I, Mahima Chaudhary, SCMM Court No. 12, Jaipur Sessions Court, do hereby charge you Ramesh
Das s/o Mahesh Das as under:

That within the jurisdiction of PS Sanganer, Jaipur you committed theft at Kumar’s
residence at 33, Chaudhary Charan Singh Park, Tonk Road, Jaipur by stealing a 4 gram gold ring, 8
gram gold ring and 10 gram gold chain, and thus you thereby committed an offence punishable u/s
380 IPC within the cognizance of this court.

I hereby direct that you be tried by this court for the above said offence

SD/-
(Ms. Mahima Chaudhary)
SCMM Court No. 12,
Jaipur Sessions Court

The charge has been read over and explained to the accused who is questioned as under:

Q. Do you, Ramesh Das plead guilty or claim trail?

Ans. I plead not guilty and claim trial.

RO&AC.

Sd/-
Ramesh Das
Accused
SD/-
(Ms. Mahima Chaudhary)
SCMM Court No. 12,
Jaipur Sessions Court
Date: 13.08.2018
 ORDER REQUIRING PRODUCTION IN THE COURT OF PERSON IN
PRISON FOR ANSWERING TO CHARGE OF OFFENCE
(Under Section 267 CrPC)

To the officer in charge of the Jail at Jaipur Central Jail, Jaipur

WHEREAS the attendance of Mr. Ramesh Das at present confined in the above mentioned
prison, is required in this court to answer to a charge of Theft under section 380 IPC or for the
purpose of a proceeding under section 380 IPC.

You are hereby required to produce the said accused under safe and sure conduct before this
Court of Ms. Mahima Chaudhary, Senior Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaipur
Sessions court on the 13th day of August, 2018 by 10.00 A.M. there to answer to the said charge, or
for the purpose of the said proceeding, and after this court has dispensed with his further attendance,
cause him to be conveyed under safe and sure conduct back to the said prison.

And you are further required to inform the said accused of the contents of this order and deliver
to him the attached copy thereof.

Dated, this 8th day of August, 2018

[Seal of Court]

SD/-
(Ms. Mahima Chaudhary)
SCMM Court No. 12,
Jaipur Sessions Court