New Delhi, Aug 27 A Delhi court has brought down the curtains on a case regarding theft of chairs, a cooler and a mattress in a government-allotted residence of a Member of Parliament in the Lutyens' Bungalow Zone in 2019, saying the prosecution failed to prove that the stolen items belonged to the government.
Judicial Magistrate Kautuk Bhardwaj was hearing a case registered at the Parliament House police station against the accused, Neeraj Kumar Singh, a resident of Khagaria, Bihar.
According to the prosecution, the accused committed a house trespass in the wee hours of July 21, 2019, at the bungalow on Dr Rajendra Prasada Road, and stole various household items, including a cooler, a computer, a monitor, curtains, kitchen utensils, mattresses, and plastic chairs.
It said that the stolen cooler, three chairs, and a mattress were later recovered from him.
The prosecution's case, however, crumbled when the court, in an order dated August 24, noted that the key eyewitness, also the complainant, did not "remember anything about the present case."
It said that the second prosecution witness deposed that Singh was working as a driver with the then MP and on the date of the incident, he was drinking alcohol in the bungalow. The key witness, the court noted, had said that he learned from another person that Singh had committed theft.
The court said that while the complainant had turned hostile, the second person's testimony had no evidentiary value.
It said, "There are no other witnesses to the incident. Hence, the fact that the accused had committed lurking house trespass or house breaking for commission of theft has not been proved by the prosecution."
Regarding the recovered items, the court said there were no eyewitnesses to confirm that these were stolen and the accused cannot be convicted merely based on his disclosure statement about stealing them.
Delivering the final blow to the prosecution's case, the court said, "The prosecution has also failed to prove the fact that the case property which was allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused (chairs, mattress and cooler) was owned by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD)."
It pointed out that no one from the department was shown photographs of the recovered cooler or chairs to confirm they were indeed government property.
"In the absence of such identification, the fundamental ingredient that the property recovered was property stolen cannot be said to be proved," the court said.
It acquitted the accused, saying the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
