A man facing trial for allegedly trying to kill a godown's security guard by firing at him in 2013 has been acquitted by a Delhi court after the victim turned hostile and failed to identify him.
Additional Sessions Judge Rajneesh Kumar Gupta absolved Siya Ram, a resident of Rohtak in Haryana, of the charge of attempt to murder under the IPC and various provisions of the Arms Act. He was accused of firing at Ashok Kumar, a security guard of a godown in Mundka's factory area, with a pistol.
The court said another guard, the only eye-witness to the incident apart from Kumar, also could not identify Ram.
"Prosecution witness 1(Kumar) and 2(Suraj Mal) are the only witnesses of the prosecution to prove that it is Ram who had committed the alleged offences, but they have turned hostile and have not identified the accused," the judge said, while acquitting him and added that the prosecution could not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The court said there was nothing to prove that the pistol, which was recovered from Ram, was used in the offence.
According to the prosecution, on the intervening night of January 19-20 last year, Siya Ram had tried to enter into a godown in factory area in Mundka with the intention to commit theft. When Kumar tried to stop him, he beat him up and warned him at gun point not to raise an alarm.
Seeing this, Suraj Mal rushed to call other guards for help. By the time he returned, Kumar was lying in a pool of blood as he had received a bullet injury and Ram had fled from the spot.
The police was informed and Kumar was rushed to a nearby hospital.
Two weeks later, Ram was arrested with a country-made pistol and two live cartridges.
However, Kumar changed his stand in the court saying that he had not lodged any complaint and could not identify Ram as it was dark at the time of the incident.
Suraj Mal also deposed on the same lines as Kumar and said he could not identify who had shot the victim.
According to the police, Ram had admitted his involvement in the crime, but in the court he denied the allegations and claimed to have been falsely implicated in the case.
