Police theory falls flat, court acquits Mohali resident in snatching case

A local court has acquitted a person arrested in a case of snatching after the prosecution failed to prove charges.

On August 3 last year, the police had registered the case against Rahul of Mohali district under Section 379A and 411 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at the Sector 49 police station following a complaint by one Jabir.

The complainant stated that he worked in a salon at Phase 7, Mohali. On August 3, 2023, he was returning home from the shop on his cycle when near the Sector 45 Gaushala chowk two motorcycle-borne persons came from the road separating Sectors 44 and 51. While he was on call, they slowed down their bike and asked him about Sector 45. He stopped his bicycle and as soon as he replied, the person riding pillion snatched his phone and they sped away from the spot.

During the investigation, the police arrested Rahul in the case on August 7, 2023, and allegedly recovered the stolen phone from him.

The police presented the chargesheet against the accused in the court.

Sukhwinder Singh, the advocate for the accused, denied the charges and stated that the complainant had also not supported the case of the prosecution. The public prosecutor argued that the prosecution had proved the case against the accused.

After hearing the arguments, the court acquitted the accused. The court said that the complainant did not identify the accused. There was no record which could show that mobile phone with a particular IMEI number was owned or possessed by Jabir. No effort had been made by the investigating officer to collect the ownership record of the mobile phone, the court observed.

The court stated that it was a basic principle of criminal jurisprudence that the prosecution had to prove its case, connecting each fact with another fact and thus forming a chain of facts. “There was a long distance between ‘may be true’ and ‘must be true’. All this distance has to be travelled by the prosecution by leading impeachable and reliable evidence, which lacks in this case. By extending the benefit of doubt, the accused is hereby acquitted of the charges framed against him,” the court ruled.