Delhi High Court
Ayaz Ahmed Rehmani vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 28 May, 2015
Author: S. P. Garg
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
RESERVED ON : 26th MAY, 2015
DECIDED ON : 28th MAY, 2015
+ CRL.REV.P. 175/2015
AYAZ AHMED REHMANI ..... Appellant
Through : Mr.Roopansh Purohit, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.GARG, J.
1. The petitioner - Ayaz Ahmed Rehmani was convicted under
Section 379 IPC by a judgment dated 13.05.2014 of learned Metropolitan
Magistrate in case FIR No. 393/13 PS Kotwali on the allegations that on
29.12.2013 at about 06.00 p.m. near ticket window, Red Fort area, he
picked-pocket of complainant - Badri Prasad and deprived him of his
purse containing cash and other articles. By an order dated 13.05.2014, he
was sentenced to undergo RI for two years. The petitioner unsuccessfully
challenged the judgment which was dismissed by an order dated
23.02.2015 in Crl.A.No.9/15. Being aggrieved, the instant revision
petition has been preferred.
2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner fairly opted to give up challenge to the findings recorded on
conviction under Section 379 IPC. He prayed to take lenient view to
release the petitioner on probation as he has remained in custody for
sufficient duration.
3. Since the petitioner has opted not to challenge the findings of
the Courts below, conviction under Section 379 IPC is affirmed.
Regarding sentence, I find no mitigating circumstances to take lenient
view. The petitioner was caught red-handed at the spot and stolen article
was recovered from his possession. He was found in possession of
stupefying substance apparently meant for administering to the victims.
The petitioner was also found in possession of unexplained foreign
currency. He did not disclose as to how and in what manner the foreign
currency came in his possession. Possibility of some foreigner to be
another victim at the hands of the petitioner and possession of foreign
currency to be the outcome of the said target cannot be ruled out. Status
report reveals that the petitioner is involved in five criminal cases of
similar nature at various Police Stations. Leaned counsel for the petitioner
fairly admitted that in one of such cases, the petitioner has been convicted
and released for the period already undergone by him in custody. Under
these circumstances, the petitioner, as a matter of right, cannot claim
release on 'probation'. Perpetrators of such crimes are rarely apprehended
and in number of cases they go scot free. Innocent persons / tourists are
the victims in such cases. These offences are pre-planned and intentional.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence awarded
by the Trial Court cannot be considered unreasonable.
4. The revision petition lacks merit and is dismissed. Trial
Court record be sent back forthwith with the copy of the order. A copy of
the order be sent to the Superintendent Jail.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
MAY 28, 2015 / tr
