Delhi District Court
State vs Lokesh Solanki And Others on 28 March, 2025
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
DLNE010027242020
IN THE COURT OF SH. PULASTYA PRAMACHALA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-03,
NORTH-EAST DISTRICT
KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI
INDEX
Sl. HEADINGS Page Nos.
No.
1 Description of Case & Memo of Parties 2-3
2 Case set up by the Prosecution 4-7
3 Charges 8
4 Description of Prosecution Evidence 9-28
5 Plea of accused under Section 351 BNSS 28
6 Arguments of Defence & Prosecution 28-33
APPRECIATION OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE
7 Unlawful Assembly & Riot 33-36
8 Identification of accused persons 36-40
9 Conclusion and Decision 40
Digitally signed
by PULASTYA
PULASTYA PRAMACHALA
PRAMACHALA Date:
2025.03.28
10:52:30 +0530
Page 1 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sessions Case No. : 133/2020
Under Section : 147/148/149/302/201/153A/505/188/
120B IPC
Police Station : Gokalpuri
FIR No. : 104/2020
CNR No. : DLNE01-002724-2020
In the matter of: -
STATE
VERSUS
1. Lokesh Solanki
S/o. Sh. Yogender Kumar,
R/o. H.No. C-5/47, 4th Floor,
Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-53.
2. Pankaj Sharma
S/o. Late Sh. Rajveer Sharma,
R/o. H.No. C-162, Gali No.3,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
3. Ankit Chaudhary @ Fouzi
S/o. Sh. Rajkumar,
R/o. H.No. G-14, Gali No. 2, G-Block,
Ganga Vihar, Gokalpuri, Delhi-94;
4. Prince
S/o. Sh. Mahender Singh,
R/o. H.No. C-33, Gali No.2,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
5. Jatin Sharma @ Rohit
S/o. Sh. Gourishankar Sharma,
R/o. H.No. C-101, DLF,
Dilshad Extension-II, Ghaziabad,
Sahibabad, U.P.-201005.
6. Himanshu Thakur
S/o. Sh. Harender,
R/o. H.No. F-19, 1st Floor, Flat No.1,
Ekta Society, DLF-Ankur Vihar, Loni, Ghaziabad, U.P.
Page 2 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
7. Vivek Panchal @ Nandu
S/o. Sh. Pramod Kumar Panchal,
R/o. H.No. D-106, Gali No.4, Ganga Vihar, Delhi-94.
8. Rishabh Chaudhary
S/o. Sh. Yogender Singh,
R/o. H.No. F-53, Gali No.1,
Ganga Vihar, Gokalpuri, Delhi-94.
9. Sumit @ Badshah
S/o. Late. Sh. Om Prakash,
R/o. H.No. A-367, Gokalpuri, Delhi.
10. Sahil @ Babu
S/o. Late Sh. Rakesh Sharma,
R/o. H.No. D-138, Gali No.11,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
11. Sandeep Kumar @ Mogli
S/o. Late Sh. Dalveer Singh,
R/o. H.No. E-24, Gali No.3,
Bhagirati Vihar, Delhi-94.
12. Tinku Arora
S/o. Sh. Ashok Kumar,
R/o. H.No. E-51, Gali No.2,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
...Accused persons
Complainant: SI Ashish Garg
Date of Institution : 29.06.2020
Date of reserving Judgment : 25.03.2025
Date of pronouncement : 28.03.2025
Decision : All accused are acquitted.
(Section 481 BNSS complied with by all the accused persons)
Page 3 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
JUDGMENT
CASE SET UP BY THE PROSECUTION: –
1. The above-named accused persons have been chargesheeted by
the police for offences punishable under Section
147/148/149/302/201/153A/505/188/120B IPC.
2. As per chargesheet, on 01.03.2020 a PCR call was received at
13:34:09 hours, through unknown telephone number informing
that a dead body was lying in Bhagirathi Vihar Nala. In this
regard, DD No.18-A was recorded in PS Gokalpuri. This DD No.
18-A was marked to PSI Ashish Garg. On receipt of DD No.18-
A, PSI Ashish Garg along with Ct. Rahul visited Nala C-Block,
Bhagirathi Vihar, behind Ganga Vihar Shamsan Ghat and found
one male dead body in decomposed condition, lying in the drain
(nala). Dead body was taken out from the drain and sent to RML
Hospital, where doctor declared him brought dead vide MLC No.
E/45295/188668. Dead body was preserved in the mortuary of
RML Hospital for the purpose of identification, for 72 hours on
01.03.2020. Later on, aforesaid dead body was identified as
Bhure Ali @ Salman, s/o. Sh. Hasan Ali, by his brother Md. Rafi
and father Sh. Hasan Ali. On 01.03.2020, Mobile Crime Team of
North-East District visited the place of recovery of dead body
and inspected the same. Some photographs of that place were
also taken by the photographer.
3. On the basis of these facts and tehrir prepared by SI Ashish Garg,
on 03.03.2020 DO/ASI Yashbir Singh registered this FIR
No.104/2020 u/s. 147/148/149/302/201 IPC. Insp. Bineet Pandey
was assigned further investigation of the present case.
Page 4 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
4. As per chargesheet, IO/Insp. Bineet Pandey prepared site plan,
sent a W.T. message for identification of the dead body and
recorded statement of witnesses. A request letter regarding
constitution of medical board to obtain medical opinion was sent
vide letter no. 1172 SO-DCP/NORTH-EAST DISTRICT, DELHI
DATED 02.03.2020, by the DCP, North-East District to the
Medical Superintendent, RML Hospital, Delhi.
5. The postmortem examination of the dead body of deceased
Bhure Ali @ Salman, was conducted vide PM No.159/20 by
Autopsy Board Members on 04.03.2020 in RML hospital. As per
postmortem report dated 08.04.2020, as many as 22 external
injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Cause of death
was opined as “head injury and its complication due to blunt
force impact”. Dead body of deceased was handed over to his
father.
6. As per chargesheet, on 26.02.2020 at about 10:30 AM, deceased
Bhure Ali @ Salman was killed by the rioters and thrown in Nala
near C-Block, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi, when he was coming on
foot from Brijpuri Pulia. During the course of investigation,
exhibits collected during postmortem of deceased Bhure Ali i.e.
Tooth and Blood on gauze and cloths, were seized and sent to
FSL, Rohini, Delhi, for Histopathalogy examination and for
DNA profiling.
7. On 28.03.2020, present case was transferred to SIT-III/Crime
Branch for further investigation and same was entrusted to Insp.
Kailash Chander on 03.04.2020. On 03.04.2020, IO/Insp. Kailash
Chander visited place of recovery of dead body i.e. Main Ganda
Page 5 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Nala, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. At that place one secret informer
met him and informed that one person was killed at that place by
some persons namely Lokesh Kumar, Pankaj Sharma, Ankit
Chaudhary @ Fauzi, Sumit Chaudhary @ Badshah and Prince
and they had been arrested by the crime Branch in their case. On
inquiry from SHO PS Gokalpuri, IO came to know that one case
in respect of this place of occurrence was registered at PS
Gokalpuri in FIR No.35/20, which was being investigated by
Insp. Vinay Tyagi, posted in STARS-II, Shakarpur, Crime
Branch, Delhi. IO/Insp. Kailash Chander contacted Insp. Vinay
Tyagi, who informed that afore-said persons had already been
arrested in that FIR.
8. Thereafter, IO/Insp. Kailash Chander visited STARS-II,
Shakarpur, Crime Branch, Delhi and met Insp. Vinay Tyagi, who
told IO that on 07.03.2020 he had seized mobile phones of Mohit
Sharma, Shivam Bhardwaj and Dimple Pal. During analysis, he
found these three persons to be members of one WhatsApp
Group namely “Kattar Hindut Ekta”. Said WhatsApp group was
created on 25.02.2020 by using mobile phone no.9560860823.
Accused Lokesh Solanki was also found to be member of that
WhatsApp group. Upon interrogation, accused Lokesh Solanki
was arrested in this case. Thereafter, on the basis of material
collected by the IO coupled with the disclosure statement of
accused Lokesh Solanki, other accused namely Pankaj Sharma,
Sumit Chaudhary, Ankit Chaudhary, Prince, Jatin Sharma @
Rohit, Rishabh Chaudhary @ Tapas, Vivek @ Panchal @ Nandu
and Himanshu Thakur, were also arrested in this case. IO also
Page 6 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
recorded statement of several witnesses including Nisar Ahmad,
Narrotam Singh, Nikesh @ Nikki, Rinku, in the present case.
9. After completion of investigation, on 29.06.2020 main
chargesheet was filed against accused Lokesh Solanki, Pankaj
Sharma, Ankit Chaudhary @ Fauzi, Prince, Jatin Sharma @
Rohit, Himanshu Thakur, Vivek Panchal @ Nandu, Rishabh
Chaudhary @ Tapas and Sumit Chaudhary @ Badshah, for
offences punishable under Section 147/148/149/302/201/120-B
IPC. This chargesheet was filed before ld. Duty MM (North-
East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. On 06.10.2020, ld. CMM/NE
took cognizance of afore-said offences and summoned above-
mentioned nine (9) accused persons.
10. On 15.10.2020, first supplementary chargesheet along with other
documents, was filed before ld. CMM (North-East),
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. Section 153-A/505/188 IPC were
also added in the present case, through this supplementary
charge-sheet. Thereafter, case was committed to the court of
sessions vide order dated 21.10.2020.
11. On 04.06.2021, second supplementary chargesheet along with
copy of sanction under S.196 Cr.P.C. and other additional
documents and impleading three additional accused persons
namely Sahil @ Babu, Sandeep @ Mogli and Tinku Arora, was
filed before Duty MM/NE. This supplementary chargesheet was
sent by ld. CMM/NE to the court of sessions vide order dated
30.10.2021.
12. On 06.12.2021, third supplementary chargesheet along with copy
of complaint u/s. 195 Cr.P.C. and copy of sanction u/s. 196
Page 7 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Cr.P.C., was filed directly before my ld. Predecessor.
CHARGES
13. On 11.05.2022, charges were framed against accused Lokesh
Kumar Solanki @ Rajput, Pankaj Sharma, Ankit Chaudhary @
Fauzi, Prince @ D.J. Wala, Jatin Sharma @ Rohit, Vivek Panchal
@ Nandu, Himanshu Thakur, Rishabh Chaudhary, Sumit
Chaudhary, Tinku Arora, Sandeep @ Mogli, Sahil @ Babu, for
offences punishable under Section 147/148/302/201/34 IPC read
with Section 149 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial. The charges were framed in following terms: –
“That from the early morning of 25.02.2020 till the late
night of 26.02.2020, in the area at or around main Ganda Nala
Road, near C-Block, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi, within the
jurisdiction of PS Gokalpuri, all of you being members of
unlawful assembly along with your other associates(identified &
unidentified) formed an unlawful assembly carrying deadly
weapons like lathis, sticks(danda), stones, swords and other
arms, used force or violence in prosecution of a common object,
committed rioting and you all knew being members of the
aforesaid unlawful assembly that an offence was likely to be
committed in prosecution of that common object and thereby
committed offences punishable under Section(s) 147/148 IPC
read with Section 149 IPC and within my cognizance.
Secondly, in the night of 26/02/2020 at about 10,30 a.m. at
or around main Ganda Nala Road, near C-Block, Bhagirathi
Vihar, Delhi, , you all being members of said unlawful assembly
along with your other associates (identified and unidentified)
used force or violence in prosecution of a common object and in
furtherance of common intention Committed murder of Bhure
Ali @ Salman, merely on account of the fact that he belonged to
the other community and thereafter threw his dead body in the
Bhagirathi Vihar ganda nala with a view to conceal/destroy his
identity and thereby you all along with your other associates
(identified and unidentified) committed offences punishablePage 8 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuriunder Section(s) 302/201/34 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and
within my cognizance.”
DESCRIPTION OF PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
14. Several witnesses were dropped on the basis of admission of
documents under Section 294 Cr.P.C. and prosecution examined
26 witnesses in support of its case, as per following description: –
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
PW1/Sh. On 26.02.2020 at about 8/8.30 p.m., PW1 was sitting
Narottam on the pipe line situated near the temple and at that
Singh time, he saw a mob chasing two bikers. The said bikers
were coming from the side of Bhagirathi Vihar and
were going towards Johripur pulia. When they reached
at the cross road, bikers applied the break, and pillion
rider jumped into the nala. The other biker left the bike
and started running away, who was over powered by
that mob near a sewage filter plant of MCD. That biker
was given beatings by the said mob and that biker was
in bad condition. The said mob lifted that biker and
threw him in the nala. The mob also threw that bike
alongwith lighted matchstick into nala probably
opening petrol tank of the bike, as a result of which the
bike caught fire. PW1 came back to the temple and
made a call at 100 number, informing that the mob had
thrown bike into nala and asked them to save the biker.
PW1 did not support the case of prosecution and he was
declared hostile on the point of identification of the
accused persons.
PW2/Sh. On 26.02.2020 in the morning, he was present at home
Nishar of his brother-in-law Anwar. His brother Esh
Ahmed Mohammad was stuck at the house of his sister Ameena
near Johripur pulia. PW2 was in telephonic touch with
one Avdhesh Mishra. PW2 had requested him to lock
his home and to rescue his brother from the house ofPage 9 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS GokalpuriSl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
Ameena. PW2 was also in telephonic touch with her
niece Sitara, who resided near his home. PW2 reached
Bhagirathi Nala and was making calls, but he could not
go ahead because of presence of mob. PW2 had seen
co-accused Sandeep, Prince and Himanshu, and others
namely Vikas, Golu. Akash, Sanjay, Dinesh, in that
mob.
PW3/Sh. He was resident of C-129, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. He
Shivam was using a mobile phone make Realme using
Bhardwaj no.7217779080 of Jio company, during aforesaid period
from 24.02.2020 to 26.02.2020. He was member of
certain WhatsApp group during that period. His afore-
said mobile phone was taken from him in the Crime
Branch. He identified his signature at circle X on the
seizure memo of WhatsApp Chat dated 08.03.2020
with print of chats (39 pages), which was placed in the
file of FIR No.35/20 of PS Gokalpuri. Said mobile
phone is Ex.PW3/Article-1 in that FIR.
PW3 did not support the case of prosecution and he was
also declared hostile on the point of knowing some
accused and about confession made by Lokesh for
killing Muslim persons alongwith other accused
persons.
PW4/Mohit He was working in Khaibar Pas Metro Depot as
Sharma technician. Crime branch officials had taken him
alongwith Shivam and Dimple, to their office and had
taken mobile phones of all three of them. PW4 was
added in a WhatsApp group namely Kattar Hindut and
crime branch officials had checked contents of all three
mobile phones, which were seized. His mobile phone
was exhibited as PW4/Article-1 in FIR 35/20 PS
Gokalpuri.
PW4 did not support the case of prosecution and he was
Page 10 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS GokalpuriSl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
also declared hostile on the point of knowing some
accused and about confession made by Lokesh for
killing Muslim persons alongwith other accused
persons and about knowing the chats in the Whats App
group.
PW5/Sh. He was user of mobile phone no.9873723713, which
Dimple was registered in his name and he was also using
another number from the same set i.e. 8383847939.
PW5 did not support the case of prosecution and he was
also declared hostile on the point of being member of
the Whats App group.
PW6/Sh. He was running a Photo Studio at Ex. PW-6/A
Chokha B-15, Ganga Vihar, Delhi in the name (certificate u/s
Singh and style of M/s Deepak Photo 65B of I.E. Act,
Studio. in respect of
photographs of
On 01.03.2020, on calling of police
dead body,
officer Ashish Garg, PW6 took 7-8
which were
photographs of dead body lying near
clicked by
Bhagirathi nala. PW6 took printouts
PW6);
of those photographs and handed
over to Ashish Garg at PS Gokalpuri. Ex.PW-6/P1 to
PW6 identified those photographs. Ex.PW-6/P7
PW6 identified his signature at circle (photographs of
X on the certificate u/s 65B of I.E. dead body
Act, in respect of those photographs. clicked by PW6)
PW7/Sh. He was resident of H.No. A-49, Gali No.1, Bhagirathi
Prem Pal Vihar, Delhi and on 26.02.2020, riots had taken place in
that area, but he did not see any incident of riot on
26.02.2020.
PW7 did not support the case of prosecution and he was
also declared hostile on the point of knowing accused
and about seeing a mob beating a person from Muslim
Page 11 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
community on main Nala Road, Bhagirathi Vihar at
about 10.30 A.M. on 26.02.2020 and about having seen
accused persons in that mob.
PW8/HC He was working as Reader to SHO in PS Gokalpuri on
Pradeep 24.02.2020. PW11 announced an order passed by
DCP/NE u/s 144 Cr.P.C in the jurisdictional area of PS
Gokalpuri, through loud hailer.
PW9/Sh. On 11.03.2020, he was posted as Ex.PW9/A &
Indresh Assistant Director (Biology), FSL, Ex.PW9/B
Kumar Rohini, Delhi. He had examined the (report and
Mishra exhibits taken out from six sealed allelic data of
parcels, for the purpose of PW9);
ascertaining DNA profile.
Ex.PW9/
PW9 prepared his report in respect of Article-1 to
findings arrived by him along with Ex.PW9/
allelic data. PW9 proved said report Article-6 (Parcel
and said allelic data. I/1 to Parcel II/4
with their
PW9 had prepared six separate
contents)
parcels putting back the materials or
remnants with materials of the afore-
said six parcels. He sealed them with
seal of ‘IKM FSL Delhi’. PW9
identified Parcel I/1 to Parcel II/4
with their contents.
As per report of PW9, DNA profiling
performed on source exhibit 2
(referring to contents of
Ex.PW9/Article-2) and source exhibit
3 & 4 (referring to contents of
Ex.PW9/Article-5 & 6) were
sufficient to conclude that source
exhibit 3 and source exhibit 4 were
biological father and mother
Page 12 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
respectively of source exhibit 2.
PW10/ On 21.04.2020, he was working as Ex.PW10/A
ACP Inspector Draughtsman in Crime (Site plan
Mahesh Branch. On that day, on the call of prepared by
Insp. Kailash Chander, he visited PW10)
Bhagirathi Vihar, Ganda Nala Road.
Insp. Kailash Chander also called
Insp. Bineet Pandey from PS
Gokalpuri at that place.
At the instance of Insp. Bineet
Pandey, PW10 took note of
measurements of that place i.e. road,
nala and surrounding areas.
Subsequently on 18.05.2020, PW10
prepared scaled site plan on the basis
of his rough notes, in his office.
PW11/Sh. He was working as Nodal Officer in Ex.PW11/A to
Prakash Reliance Jio Infocom Ltd. company Ex.PW11/P
Saxena and he proved certified copy of CDR, (certified copy
and respective DKYC/EKYC, as of CDR, and
pertaining to mobile numbers respective
7557223533, 7557497049, DKYC/EKYC,
7000094098, 7505868790, as pertaining to
8200894425, 8368434228, given mobile
8920973748 and 8178589464. He numbers);
proved a Cell ID Chart.
Ex.PW11/Q
PW11 also proved certificate u/s 65B (Cell ID Chart);
of IE Act, in respect of aforesaid
Ex.PW11/R
CDRs, DKYC and EKYC.
(certificate u/s
65B of IE Act)
PW12/ Sh. He was working as Deputy Secretary Ex.PW12/A &
L.K. (Home), GNCT, Delhi. PW13 Ex.PW12/B
Page 13 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
Gautam deposed that Lt. Governor of GNCT, (sanction orders
gave approval for according sanction u/s. 196 Cr.P.C
u/s. 196 Cr.P.C for offences u/s for offences u/s
153A/505 IPC against accused 153A/505 IPC
Lokesh Solanki, Pankaj Sharma, accorded by LG
Sumit Chaudhary, Prince, Rishabh against accused
Chaudhary, Jatin Sharma, Vivek persons in this
Panchal and Himanshu Thakur, in case)
this case.
PW13 being competent officer to
sign the sanction order on behalf of
LG, signed said sanction order on
11.12.2020.
Similar sanction was accorded by LG
against accused Sandeep, Sahil and
Tinku in this case, vide sanction
order dated 09.11.2021.
PW13/SI On 10.03.2021 he was posted as New Ex.PW13/A and
Samrat Delhi Range (NDR) Crime Branch, Ex.PW13/B
R.K. Puram, New Delhi. On that day, (arrest memos of
he along with Insp. Kailash and some accused Sandeep
other staff went to Mandoli Jail. and Tinku,
respectively);
PW13 was witness to arrest of
accused Sandeep and Tinku by Insp. Ex.PW13/E
Kailash in this case, at Mandoli Jail. (arrest memo of
PW13 identified his signature at accused Sahil @
circle X on their arrest memo. Babu)
Similarly, on 12.03.2021, PW13
witnessed arrest of accused Sahil @
Babu by Insp. Kailash at Mandoli
Jail, in this case. PW13 identified his
signature at circle X on the arrest
Page 14 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
memo of accused Sahil @ Babu.
On 06.04.2021, PW13 along with IO
and HC Sudhir had come to PS
Gokalpuri. In the PS, IO met ASI
Manvir, who had provided photocopy
of seizure memo of mobile phone and
memory card as seized from Nisar
Ahmed by him. ASI Manvir also
provided 2 photographs to the IO. In
these photographs, accused persons
namely Sandeep, Tinku and Sahil
were appearing.
PW13 correctly identified accused
Sandeep, Tinku and Sahil, before the
court.
PW14/Sh. He was working as Scientist, Cyber Ex.PW4/A
Arun Forensic Lab, CERT-In, Ministry of (report prepared
Kumar Electronics, Government of India, by PW14 in
Sahani N.Delhi. respect of
extracted data
On 17.04.2020, he received request
from digital
letter from Crime branch in FIR
exhibits);
no.35/20, PS Gokalpuri, alongwith 5
sealed packets and other documents. Ex.PW14/B
These exhibits were assigned to (certificate u/s
PW14 and his Incharge Lt. Colonel 65B of IE Act
Santosh Khadsare. was issued in
respect of
PW14 extracted data from the digital
retrieved data);
exhibits i.e. mobile phones, SIM
cards and memory cards as contained Ex.PW14/D
in those 5 sealed packets, vide his (true copy of
report. The extracted data were report in respect
copied/stored in a pendrive. PW14 of extracted data
Page 15 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
proved true copy of the certificate u/s from pen-drive);
65B of IE Act (original is placed in
Ex.PW14/E
FIR No. 35/20) in this respect.
(true copy of
PW14 again received another request certificate u/s.
letter dt.07.09.2020 in FIR no.35/20, 65-B of I.E. Act
alongwith sealed packets of exhibits in respect of
as sent back by this witness to the Ex.PW14/D);
police. This time, PW14 examined
Ex.PW14/
exhibits A1-MOB, A2-MOB and A3-
Article-1 (Pen-
MOB, alongwith their related SIMs
drive with
and memory cards. In FIR No.35/20,
extracted data)
PW14 had extracted data in another
pendrive vide a report and issued a
fresh certificate, in respect of the
same. He had prepared true copy of
that pendrive and all these exhibits
and pendrive were sealed and sent
back.
PW15/Sh. He was working as Alternate Circle Ex.PW15/A1,
Pawan Nodal Officer in Vodafone Idea Ex.PW15/B to
Singh company and he proved certified Ex.PW15/H
copy of CDR, and respective (certified copy
DKYCs/EKYCs, as pertaining to of CDR, and
mobile numbers 8929509153, respective
9990291257, 9582050046 and DKYCs/EKYCs,
9136034019 for periods w.e.f. pertaining to
01.12.2019 to 31.03.2020. given mobile
numbers);
He also proved certificate u/s 65B of
IE Act, in respect of aforesaid CDRs Ex.PW15/I &
and CAFs/KYCs. He also proved a Ex.PW15/J
Cell ID Charts. (certificate u/s
65B of IE Act, in
PW15 handed over afore-said
respect of
materials to police official vide letter
Page 16 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
dated 27.05.2020. aforesaid CDRs
and
CAFs/KYCs);
Ex.PW15/K
(Cell ID Chart);
Ex.PW15/A
(letter dated
27.05.2020)
PW16/ On 01.03.2020 he was working as DO from 8 AM to 2
Retd. SI PM, in North East Control Room. On that day, at about
Anil 01:30 PM, PW16 received information from some
unknown person telephonically about a dead body
lying near Bhagirathi Vihar drain. PW16
telephonically passed on this information to DO of PS
Gokalpuri.
PW17/HC On 08.05.2020, he was posted in Crime Branch,
Sonu Sector-8, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. On that day, IO/Insp.
Kailash came to PS Gokalpuri and took one transparent
box in sealed condition from MHC(M). PW17 took this
box to RML hospital and submitted the same in
pathology department along with forwarding letter
given to him by IO.
On 11.06.2020, once again on the directions of IO,
PW17 went to FSL, Rohini. PW17 was given one
authority letter by Insp. Kailash, in order to take back
certain exhibits. PW17 submitted that authority letter in
FSL, Rohini. PW17 was handed over 7 (6 were of
yellow colour and 1 was of brown colour) sealed
envelopes in FSL, Rohini. PW17 took all these
envelopes to PS Gokalpuri MHC(M). On the
instruction of MHC(M), PW17 handed over that brown
envelope to IO.
Page 17 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
None of these envelopes were opened by anyone, till
the time they remained with him.
PW18/ In February 2020, he was residing at B-55/1, gali no.1,
Sh.Amit Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. In the month of February 2020,
Kumar riots had taken place in this locality. On the day of riot,
PW18 was coming back to his home in the morning
from his work place at Sadar Bazar. While going to his
home, when he reached Brijpuri pulia at about 7 a.m.,
some persons came after him saying that ‘ pandit jaa
raha hai pakro pakro’.
PW18 rushed to his home and thereafter he did not
come out of his home on that day as well as next 3-4
days.
After about a month of the said riots, police officials
made enquiries from him regarding the riots and
obtained his signature on document
PW18 did not support the case of prosecution and he
was declared hostile on the point of identification of
accused Sandeep @ Mogli and Tinku Arora.
PW19/ He was IO of FIR no.36/20 and 38/20 of PS Gokalpuri.
Insp. He had arrested accused namely Lokesh Solanki,
Dinesh Pankaj, Ankit, Sumit, Prince, Rishabh, Jatin, Himanshu,
Kumar Vivek Panchal, Sahil, Sandeep Mogli & Tinku on
different dates. He had recorded their disclosure
statements in both aforesaid FIRs. He had also prepared
their arrest memos in both the FIRs. PW19 had
supplied copy of their disclosure statements and arrest
memos as pertaining to FIR no.36/20, to IO/Insp. K.C.
Sharma of this case, on 03.04.2020 and 19.05.2020.
However, these documents were related to 9 accused
only as accused Sandeep, Tinku and Sahil, were
arrested subsequently.
Page 18 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
PW19 had also provided copy of seizure memo of
mobile phone of accused Jatin, Rishabh and Vivek.
PW19 had also provided copy of seizure memo of
danda recovered at the instance of accused Jatin and
Vivek. PW19 had also provided copy of 12 seizure
memos relating to seizure of mobile phones of 12
members of Kattar Hindu Ekta group.
PW20/ On 03.03.2020 he was assigned investigation of this Insp. case. On same day, he took SI Ashish Garg to place of Bineet incident at nala road, C block, Bhagirathi Vihar. It was Kumar the place inside the nala from where dead body in this Pandey case was recovered.
At the instance of SI Ashish Garg, PW20 prepared site
plan (Ex.A-7) of that place. After coming back to PS,
PW20 recorded statement of SI Ashish Garg. On same
day, PW20 called officials of Crime team i.e. ASI
Akshay and Ct. Mohit, to PS and recorded their
statement.
PW20 had prepared WT message for identification of
dead body and sent it to Crime Record Office, Kamla
Market, for circulation. PW20 made local enquiry for
identification of dead body. Hasan Ali, father of
deceased and Mohd. Rafiq, brother of deceased visited
PS on same day, in search of deceased Bhura. PW20
showed them photograph of the deceased in PS and
they identified the photograph as of ‘Bhura’. They also
showed Election I-Card of Bhura to PW20. PW20 told
them to visit mortuary at RML hospital next day, when
postmortem examination was scheduled for.
On 04.03.2020, PW20 sent SI Ashish Garg to RML
hospital for getting postmortem examination done. He
reported to PW20 on same day informing about
Page 19 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
completion of postmortem and delivery of dead body.
PW20 recorded his statement. On 05.03.2020, PW20
recorded statement of Hasan Ali and Rafiq, in this case.
On 09.03.2020, SI Ashish collected exhibits from RML
hospital as related to the dead body and he handed over
the same to PW20 in PS. PW20 seized the same, vide a
seizure memo, which is Ex.A-41.
On 11.03.2020, PW20 prepared a forwarding letter and
sent the exhibits to FSL Rohini through PSI Ashish
Garg. On same day, he came back to PW20 and handed
over copy of road certificate and case acceptance
acknowledgement to PW20. PW20 recorded his
statement and statement of MHC(M).
On 22.03.2020, one ASI brought clothes of deceased
from RML hospital, which was not brought by SI
Ashish Garg on 09.03.2020. PW20 seized pullanda of
those clothes, vide a seizure memo, which is Ex.A-43.
On 17.03.2020, PW20 had sent parents of deceased
alongwith Ct. Jitender to GTB hospital, for taking their
blood sample for the purpose of DNA examination and
comparison with DNA of deceased. On 17.03.2020,
Ct. Jitender had brought and handed over 4 sealed
envelopes to PW20 alongwith 2 sample seals, which
were seized by PW20, vide a seizure memo which is
Ex.A-42.
PW21/ He was IO of FIR Nos.149/20 and PW21/A (true
Insp. Vinod 156/20 of PS Gokalpuri. He had copy of arrest
Ahlawat arrested accused Himanshu Thakur, memo of
in his case on 08.04.2020. He had Himanshu
supplied copies of arrest documents pertaining to
to IO/PW26. FIR No.
156/20)
PW22/ He was IO of FIR Nos.35/20 and 37/20, both PS
Page 20 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
Retd. Insp. Gokalpuri. He had arrested accused Lokesh Solanki,
Vinay Pankaj Sharma, Sumit Chaudhary, Ankit Chaudhary,
Tyagi Prince, Vivek Panchal, Himanshu Thakur and Rishabh
Chaudhary, in his case. He had supplied copies of
arrest documents to IO/PW26.
PW23/SI On 01.03.2020, he was posted as SI Ex.PW23/A
Ashish in PS Gokalpuri. On that day, at (endorsement of
Garg about 1.30 p.m., DO assigned him a PW23 on DD
PCR call recorded vide DD no.18A. No.18-A dated
This information was regarding a 01.03.2020);
dead body lying in Bhagirathi Vihar
Ex.PW23/B &
drain. He inspected the dead body.
Ex.PW23/C
On the directions of SHO/Insp.
(true photocopy
Pramod Joshi, PW23 had taken dead
of R/C no.
body to RML Hospital and got the
11/21/20 and
MLC of deceased prepared by the
that of
doctor present in the MLC. He got
acceptance letter
preserved the dead body.
of FSL,
On 02.03.2020, PW23 made respective.)
endorsement from point A to A1 on
DD No.18-A to register FIR. On
03.03.2020, on the direction of IO/SI
Bineet Pandey, PW23 had taken a
letter for constitution of a Board to
conduct postmortem examination of
the dead body, to RML hospital.
PW23 had prepared inquest papers
i.e. Ex.A-27. He also prepared
handing over memo and
identification memo i.e. Ex.A-30 &
Ex.A-31, respectively, in respect of
dead body.
On 09.03.2020, on the direction of
Page 21 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
IO, PW23 brought the exhibits from
RML mortuary to PS and IO seized
the same vide seizure memo
Ex.A-41.
On 08.04.2020, on the instruction of
IO/Insp. Kailash Chand, PW23
obtained postmortem report from
RML hospital and handed over the
same to IO.
On 11.03.2020 on the direction of
IO/Insp. Bineet Pandey, PW23
collected two sealed brown colour
envelops with sample seals, from
MHC(M). MHC(M) had issued road
certificate and his signature was
obtained on the same. PW23
deposited these envelops with sample
seals in FSL Rohini. PW23 had
deposited copy of R/C and
acceptance letter in the malkhana, on
same day after coming back to PS
and informed IO accordingly.
PW24/HC On 11.09.2024, on the instruction of Ex.PW24/A
Manoj Insp. Veer Singh, PW24 took a letter (Seizure memo
of request to CERT-In at ITO, to prepared by
collect the mirror copies of the data Insp. Veer Singh
as retrieved from the mobile phones in the presence
in FIR no.35/20. On that day, PW24 of PW24)
handed over that request letter to
PW14/Sh. Arun Kumar Sahani, who
handed over the pendrive for the
purpose of court and another for the
purpose of IO. PW24 handed over all
Page 22 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
these materials to Insp. Veer Singh,
who seized them, vide memo.
PW25/Insp He was posted in Crime branch and in July 2023, he
Veer Singh took up further investigation in this case. PW25
deposed on the lines of PW24/HC Manoj in respect of
Ex.PW24/A.
PW25 prepared a supplementary chargesheet and filed
these reports alongwith supplementary chargesheet
before the court on 12.09.2024.
PW26/ACP He was last IO of the present case. Ex.PW26/A
Kailash (seizure memo
PW26 deposed on the lines of
Chander of self attested
PW22/Insp. Vinay Tyagi in respect of
Sharma copy of seizure
documents pertaining to FIR
memo of a
No.35/20, PS Gokalpuri and on the
pendrive,
lines of PW19/Insp. Dinesh Kumar in
mobile phone
respect of documents pertaining to
and copy of
FIR No.36/20, PS Gokalpuri.
acceptance
After obtaining permission, PW26 acknowledgme
interrogated and formally arrested nt from FSL
accused Pankaj, Ankit, Sumit and and two
Prince in Mandoli Jail vide arrest photographs,
memos Ex.A-31, Ex.A-25, Ex.A-30 from ASI
and Ex.A-27, respectively. Similarly, Manvir,
PW26 interrogated and formally pertaining to
arrested accused Lokesh Solanki FIR No.78/20)
from Tihar Jail vide arrest memo
Ex.A-59.
PW26 also deposed on the lines of
PW10, PW20 and PW23 in respect of
Ex.PW10/A.
PW26 obtained photographs,
certificate u/s. 65-B of I.E. Act and
Page 23 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
SOC report from crime team
officials.
PW26 also deposed on the lines of
PW21/ Insp. Vinod Ahlawat in
respect getting arrest documents of
accused Himanshu.
After obtaining permission, PW26
also interrogated and formally
arrested accused Himanshu, Jatin,
Vivek and Rishabh Chaudhary from
Tihar Jail, vide arrest memos
Ex.A-54, Ex.A-52, Ex.A-53 and
Ex.A-51 respectively.
PW26 obtained report from
Histopathology department, RML
Hospital. On 09.06.2024, PW26
recorded statement of Shivam
Bhardwaj, Dimple/PW5 and Mohit
Sharma/PW4. On 11.06.2020,
PW23/Ct. Sonu handed over DNA
analysis report from FSL, Rohini.
PW26 prepared first chargesheet
against accused Ankit Chaudhary,
Lokesh Solanki, Pankaj Sharma,
Sumit Chaudhary, Prince, Rishabh,
Jatin, Vivek and Himanshu and filed
the same before the court on
29.06.2020.
On 24.07.2020, PW26 sent an
application to DCP/NE for complaint
u/s 195 Cr.P.C. in respect of offence
u/s 188 IPC. On 28.07.2020, PW26
Page 24 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
sent a request letter to DCP, Crime
branch, to obtain sanction u/s 196
Cr.P.C. for offence u/s 153(A)/505
IPC. On 12.10.2020, PW26 received
complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C. On
13.10.2020, PW26 visited office of
Stars-II, Crime branch, Shakarpur.
Insp. Vinay Tyagi handed over copy
of a report given by CERT-In.
PW26 obtained copy of report
received by Insp. Dinesh Kumar from
CERT-In, in respect of retrieval of
data from mobile phone of accused
Jatin, Vivek and Rishabh. PW26
prepared supplementary chargesheet-
I and filed it in the court on
15.10.2020. On 02.01.2021, PW21
obtained sanction u/s 196 Cr.P.C.
against these accused persons.
PW26 deposed on the lines of PW13
in respect of Ex.PW13/D to
Ex.PW13/E.
On 01.04.2021, PW26 sent a request
letter for subsequent opinion in
respect of danda recovered from
accused Vivek, Jatin (in FIR
no.36/20) and Himanshu (in FIR
no.156/20), to Superintendent, RML
hospital, through HC Sudhir.
Thereafter HC Sudhir handed over
receipt of this letter to PW26.
On 06.04.2021, PW26 alongwith SI
Samrat, SI Hashim, HC Sudhir and
Page 25 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
Ct. Vikas, went to PS Gokalpuri,
where ASI Manvir/IO of FIR
no.78/20, met him. PW26 obtained
self-attested copy of seizure memo of
a pendrive, mobile phone and copy of
acceptance acknowledgment from
FSL and two photographs, from ASI
Manvir. PW26 seized the said items,
vide a seizure memo.
On 20.04.2021, PW26 obtained
subsequent opinion from RML
Hospital, from HC Sudhir. On
04.06.2021, PW26 filed
supplementary chargesheet-II in the
court.
On 20.09.2021, PW26 sent an
application to DCP/NE for complaint
u/s 195 Cr.P.C. in respect of offence
u/s 188 IPC, against accused Tinku
Arora, Sandeep and Sahil @ Babu.
On 24.11.2021, PW26 obtained
prosecution sanction u/s 196 Cr.P.C.
against them. On 26.11.2021, he
obtained the complaint u/s 195 Cr.PC
for offence u/s 188 IPC from office
of ld. DCP/NE against them.
PW26 collected notification u/s 144
Cr.P.C. and on 02.12.2021, PW26
filed supplementary chargesheet-III
in the court.
On 10.10.2022, PW26 recorded
statement of HC Pradeep/PW8 in
respect of proclamation announced
Page 26 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
u/s 144 Cr.P.C.
Thereafter, PW26 was transferred and
he handed over file to Insp. Veer
Singh in Crime branch.
Admitted documents under Section 294 Cr.P.C.
GD No.18A as Ex.A-1; rukka as Ex.A-2; FIR as Ex.A-3 (colly 2
pages); certificate u/s 65B of IE Act as Ex.A-4; GD No.18A as
Ex.A-5; GD No.35A as Ex.A-6; site plan as Ex.A-7; Inspection report
by District mobile crime team is exhibited as Ex.A-8; certificate u/s
65B of IE Act as Ex.A-9; photographs as Ex.A-10 to Ex. A-23;
postmortem report of Bhoore Ali @ Salman as Ex.A-24 (colly 5
pages); death report as Ex.A-25; MLC dated 01.03.2020 as Ex.A-26;
request for postmortem on the body of Bhoore Ali @ Salman as
Ex.A-27; complaint of Hasan Ali as Ex.A-28; complaint of Mohd.
Rafi as Ex.A-29; identification memo of deceased by Mohd. Rafi and
Hasan Ali as Ex.A-30 & Ex.A-31; GD No.(not visible) dated
01.03.2020, Time:13:34:09 as Ex.A-32; request of DCP (N/E) to
RML Hospital, New Delhi to constitute Medical Board dated
03.03.2020 to obtain medical opinion as Ex.A-33; requests for
subsequent medical opinion dated 18.05.2020, 03.06.2020 &
09.06.2020 as Ex.A-34, Ex.A-35 & Ex.A-36, respectively; medical
opinion given by RML Hospital, New Delhi referring Ex.A-34, as
Ex.A-37; request to provide opinion with respect to Brain of deceased
dated 08.05.2020 for Histopathology as Ex.A-38; result from
Histopathology lab, RML Hospital, New Delhi, dated 20.05.2020 as
Ex.A-39; seizure memos dated 01.03.2020, 09.03.2020, 17.03.2020
and 22.03.2020 as Ex.A-40, Ex.A-41, Ex.A-42, Ex.A-43,
respectively; prescription bearing MLC Nos. B/3599/13/2020 and
MLC No. B/3600/13/2020, both dated 17.03.2020 as Ex.A-44 &
Ex.A-45, respectively; MLC Nos. B/3599/13/2020 and MLC No.
B/3600/13/2020, both dated 17.03.2020 as Ex.A-46 & Ex.A-47,
respectively; seizure memo of DVD dated 07.05.2020 as Ex.A-48;
exhibit/DVD bearing PM No-159/20 dated 16.06.2020 as Ex.A-49;
certificate u/s.65B of I.E. Act dated 07.05.2020 as Ex.A-50; arrest
Page 27 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of witness & Description of Proved
Name of documents documents/
Witness case properties
memo of Rishabh Chaudhary, Jatin Sharma @ Rohit, Vivek Panchal
@ Nandu and Himanshu Thakur, all dated 20.05.2020 as Ex.A-51,
Ex.A-52; Ex.A-53, Ex.A-54, respectively; arrest memo of Pankaj
Sharma, Prince and Sumit @ Badshah dated 04.04.2020 as Ex.A-55,
Ex.A-56 & Ex.A-57, respectively; arrest memo of Ankit Choudhary
as Ex.A-58; arrest memo of accused Lokesh Kumar as Ex.A-59;
request to provide death certificate dated 07.04.2020 as Ex.A-60;
death certificate of Bhure Ali @ Salman dated 06.03.2020 as Ex.A-61
and relevant entry made in malkhana register no.19 as Ex.A-62; two
complaints u/s. 195 Cr.P.C. as Ex. A-63 & Ex.A-64; copy of relevant
entry in register no. 19 as Ex.A-65 (colly 4 pages); R/C no.11/21/20
as Ex.A-66; FSL acknowledgment no.458 as Ex.A-67; R/C
no.49/21/21 as Ex.A-68; R/C no.33/21/20 as Ex.A-69; FSL
acknowledgement no.663 as Ex.A-70; R/C no.68/21/20 as Ex.A-71;
pointing out memo of accused Prince, Ankit Chaudhary, Pankaj
Sharma, Sumit Chaudhary @ Badshah, Lokesh, Rishabh, Himanshu
Thakur, Vivek Panchal and Jatin Sharma, as Ex.A-73 to Ex.A-81,
respectively.
PLEA OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 351 BNSS
15. Accused persons denied all the allegations and pleaded
innocence, taking plea that they were innocent and they were
falsely implicated in this case. They also took plea that witnesses
had deposed falsely against them. They further took plea that
they had nothing to do with the commission of alleged offences.
Accused persons did not opt to lead any evidence in their
defence.
ARGUMENTS OF DEFENCE & PROSECUTION
16. I heard ld. Special PP as well as ld. counsels for accused persons
and I have perused the entire material on the record.
17. Sh. Shubham Arora, Adv. authorised by Sh. Nishant Kumar
Page 28 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Tyagi, ld. counsel for Jatin Sharma, Lokesh Solanki, Sahil @
Babu, Vivek Panchal and Rishabh Chaudhary, argued that as per
allegations deceased Bhure died on 26.02.2020 at 10.30 A.M.
Prosecution relied upon only one eye witness i.e. PW2/Nisar.
But, PW2 did not see anyone committing this murder. His
statement referred to other and general conditions of riots.
Therefore, even if statement of PW2 is taken at its face value, it
does not prove the incident of this case. Ld. counsel further
argued that careful scrutiny of Whats App chats would show that
the members of the same intended to be alert against any attack.
The message imputed to accused Lokesh might have been posted
to enthuse morale of the members and to prepare themselves for
any attack. It can be treated to have been created for defence of
community and sharing of information for that purpose.
18. Sh. Rakshpal Singh and Sh. Hari Krishan, ld. counsels for
accused Pankaj Sharma, Sumit @ Badshah, Ankit Chaudhary @
Fauji, Prince, Tinku and Sandeep @ Mogli, submitted that
statement of PW2 is full of confusion and improbabilities. PW2
could not have seen Johripur Pulia from his house, as claimed by
him. When PW2 left his house, he had made call to police. But
he did not make any call to police for safety of his sister, though
he showed much concern for his sister. PW2 deliberately gave
evasive answers and showed ignorance about signing his
statement given before the court in the past.
19. Sh. Rajan Sisodia, ld. counsel for Himanshu Thakur argued to
add that there was not a single message in the relied upon Whats
App group, from Himanshu.
Page 29 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
20. Per contra, Sh. Madhukar Pandey, ld. Special PP for State relied
upon the WhatsApp chats retrieved from the mobile phone of
witnesses namely Shivam, Mohit and Dimple to submit that these
chats established involvement of accused Lokesh and his
companion accused persons in this incident.
21. Sh. Madhukar Pandey, ld. Special PP filed written argument on
behalf of prosecution. In his written argument, ld. Special PP
strongly placed reliance upon the testimony of eyewitness i.e.
PW2/Nisar Ahmad, in support of this case. Ld. Special PP further
mentioned in the written argument that PW2 confirmed the
presence of the accused persons in the rioting mob on 25.02.2020
since 7-7.30 AM, till the next day. PW2 further confirmed the
presence of accused persons in the rioting mob, who attacked the
house of Pappu, when PW2 was inside the house of Pappu. PW2
correctly identified the accused persons during his testimony
before the court by correctly taking their names except Rishabh.
Written further mentions that from the testimony of PW2, it is
well established that accused persons were an active part of the
mob indulging in riotous activities on 25.02.2020. It is further
mentioned that extraction of Data PW27/Article-1 also
corroborates the prosecution story. In this extracted data
WhatsApp Chats of group in the name of “Kattar Hindutv Ekta”
were recovered. On 26.02.2020, accused Lokesh Solanki in the
afore-said group, vide message at 11:44 PM also stated that “he
had killed 2 Muslim persons in Bhagirathi Vihar.” As per CAF
i.e. Ex.PW11/D, the number from which the extra-judicial
confession was made, was issued in the name of accused Lokesh,Page 30 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuris/o. Yogender. The testimony of PW2/Nisar Ahmad is sufficient
and reliable. Ld. Special PP placed reliance upon the case of
Mohd. Nasim v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 7073, wherein
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi observed that: –
“12. ….It was observed in Kuna @ Sanjaya Behera v. State of
Odisha, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1336 that the conviction can be
based on the testimony of single eyewitness if he or she passes
the test of reliability and that is not the number of witnesses but
the quality of evidence that is important. The Supreme Court in
Veer Singh v State of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 455 observed as under:
–
Legal system has laid emphasis on value, weight and quality of
evidence rather than on quantity, multiplicity or plurality of
witnesses. It is not the number of witnesses but quality of their
evidence which is important as there is no requirement under
the Law of Evidence that any particular number of witnesses is
to be examined to prove/disprove a fact. Evidence must be
weighed and not counted. It is quality and not quantity which
determines the adequacy of evidence as has been provided
Under Section 134 of the Evidence Act. As a general rule the
Court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness
provided he is wholly reliable.”
13. The prosecution does not require number of eyewitnesses to
prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Even if there is one
eyewitness and his testimony is up to the mark, the conviction
can be based upon the same. The Supreme Court in Namdeo v.
State of Maharashtra, (2007) 14 SCC 150 held as under: –
“In the leading case of Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade v. State of
Maharashtra, (1973) 2 SCC 793, this Court held that even where
a case hangs on the evidence of a single eye witness it may be
enough to sustain the conviction given sterling testimony of a
competent, honest man although as a rule of prudence Courts
call for corroboration. “It is a platitude to say that witnesses
have to be weighed and not counted since quality matters more
than quantity in human affairs…….””
Page 31 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
22. Ld. Special PP also placed reliance upon the case of Atmaram &
Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2012 (5) SCC 738, wherein
Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that: –
“13. It is a settled cannon of criminal jurisprudence that every
statement of the witness must be examined in its entirety and the
Court may not rely or reject the entire statement of a witness
merely by reading one sentence from the deposition in isolation
and out of context.”
23. It is further mentioned in the arguments that deposition of a
witness who had been cross examined by the Prosecutor for
resiling away from his statement given to police, was considered
in the case of Jodhraj Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 2007(15) SCC
294, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that: –
“14. It is trite that only because a witness, for one reason or the
other, has, to some extent, resiled from his earlier statement by
itself may not be sufficient to discard the prosecution case in its
entirety. The Courts even in such a situation are not powerless.
Keeping in view the materials available on record, it is
permissible for a Court of law to rely upon a part of the
testimony of the witness who has been declared hostile.”
24. Ld. Special PP further mentioned that Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Jodhraj Singh (supra) also considered and approved
the dictum laid down by it in the judgment of State of U.P. v.
Ramesh Prasad Misra and Another (1996) 10 SCC 360, wherein
it was held that: –
“7. The question is whether the first respondent was present at
the time of death or was away in the village of DW 1, his
brother-in-law. It is rather most unfortunate that these
witnesses, one of whom was an advocate, having given the
statements about the facts within their special knowledge,
under Section 161 recorded during investigation, have resiled
from correctness of the versions in the statements. They havePage 32 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpurinot given any reason as to why the investigating officer could
record statements contrary to what they had disclosed. It is
equally settled law that the evidence of a hostile witness would
not be totally rejected if spoken in favour of the prosecution or
the accused, but it can be subjected to close scrutiny and that
portion of the evidence which is consistent with the case of the
prosecution or defence may be accepted.”
25. Written argument further mentions that even though PW2/Nisar
Ahmad resiled from his statement given to the IO to some extent,
he supported the case of the Prosecution with respect to the role
attributed to accused persons. The above judgments dictate that
the evidence of a witness has to be read in entirety and merely
because the witness resiled from his statements given to the
police, the testimony of such a witness does not become
unreliable or less trustworthy.
26. Written argument further mentions that in the light of afore-said
circumstances, charges u/s. 147/148/302/201 IPC read with
S.34/149 IPC stand proved against all accused persons. Prayer
has been made for conviction of accused persons under Section
147/148/302/201 read with S.34/149 IPC, in the present case.
APPRECIATION OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE
UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY & RIOT
27. FIR in this case was registered on the basis of recovery of a dead
body from drain (Bhagirathi Vihar Nala). During investigation, it
was found to be dead body of Bhure Ali. The record shows that
prosecution relied upon PW1/Narottam Singh, PW2/Nisar
Ahmad, PW7/Prem Pal and PW18/Amit, as the eye witnesses of
the incident. However, none of these witnesses vouched to have
seen the incident of assault and murder of Bhure on 26.02.2020
Page 33 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
at 10.30 A.M. All of these witnesses were declared hostile by the
prosecution. Even otherwise, except for PW1, other witnesses did
not give specific account of any incident of murder of a person.
28. PW1 mentioned in his testimony that on 26.02.2020 at about 8-
8.30 P.M., he was sitting on a pipeline situated near a temple. At
that time, he saw a mob chasing two bikers. They were coming
from the side of Bhagirathi Vihar and going towards Johripur
Pulia/Chauraha. After reaching that crossroad (chauraha), the
pillion rider jumped into the drain (nala) and another biker also
left the bike and started running away. The mob overpowered
that biker near a sewage filter plant and gave beatings to him.
That biker was in very bad condition and the mob lifted him and
threw him in the drain. The mob also threw that bike in the drain,
while setting fire in the same. After that, PW1 made call to police
at 100 number twice.
29. PW1 did not depose about having seen any other incident on
26.02.2020. Apparently above-mentioned part of testimony of
PW1, does not relate to incident probed in this case. PW2/Nisar
claimed that on 26.02.2020 in the morning, he was in telephonic
touch with his niece Sitara, who resided near his house. She
requested PW2 to rescue her. PW2 was making calls after
reaching Bhagirathi Nala, but he did not go ahead of the same
because of presence of mob. He was hearing hue and cry only
and he did not see assault to any person on that day.
30. PW7/Prem Pal deposed that on 26.02.2020, he remained inside
of his home and did not come out of it at any time on 26.02.2020.
He further deposed that he had not seen any incident taking place
Page 34 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
on 26.02.2020. He denied the suggestions of ld. prosecutor that
on 26.02.2020 at about 10.30 A.M., he had seen a mob at Main
Nala Road, Bhagirathi Vihar; or that he had seen a person being
intercepted by that mob and beaten to death by that mob; or that
dead body of that person was thrown in the nala by that mob.
31. PW18/Amit deposed about seeing a different mob at around 7
A.M. of 26.02.2020. According to PW5, said mob was
intercepting persons from Hindu community near Brijpuri Pulia
and beating them. Thereafter, PW5 remained at his house and he
did not see any mob of persons from Hindu community.
32. Even postmortem examination report/Ex. A-24 mentions opinion
regarding time since death as about 10 days. This opinion was
given on 04.03.2020 and 10 days back from that date would be
around 24.02.2020. Thus, this opinion does not help the case of
prosecution in support of the given time and date of the incident.
During cross examination of a witness i.e. PW4/Mohit Sharma,
ld. prosecutor referred to eight other cases i.e. FIR nos. 35/20,
36/20, 37/20, 38/20, 103/20, 104/20, 149/20 and 156/20 of same
police station. All these cases have been pending in this court
itself. All these cases relate to murder during riot. All these cases
are based on the recovery of dead bodies from the same drain.
Though place of recovery of bodies had been different from each
other. But, for appreciation of evidence in this case, it is relevant
to note that several dead bodies were thrown in the same drain.
Prosecution alleged different time of incident in each case. But
prosecution evidence does not show as to which incident related
to murder of deceased Bhure. I find that there is no evidence at
Page 35 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
all to prove that Bhure was intercepted at Nala Road, Bhagirathi
Vihar on 26.02.2020 at 10.30 A.M.
33. Therefore, though on the basis of description of injuries and
cause of death mentioned in the postmortem report, I am sure
about murder of Bhure, but I am not sure about the incident of
his murder. Hence, it also becomes difficult to assume as to at
what particular place and time such incident had taken place.
Whether it was a mob consisting of 5 or more persons (which
could be termed as unlawful assembly), or otherwise. Such
questions have remained unanswered in the evidence of this case.
IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED PERSONS
34. Next question is that whether accused persons prosecuted in this
case, were members of the mob which killed Bhure. In view of
my observation made herein-above, answer to this question does
not remain matter of much speculation. When the court is not
even sure about the incident wherein Bhure was killed, and when
there is no clarity from the evidence as to which mob had killed
Bhure, then it is only a formality to say that there is no evidence
on the record to show that any of the accused was member of the
culprit mob.
35. Ld. Prosecutor heavily relied upon the Whats App chats from a
group, to raise fingers against accused Lokesh Solanki. The
relevant part of that chat is as follows: –
“2/26/20, 9:45 AM – Binni: sare taiyaar rho
2/26/20, 8:29 PM – Binni: Bhai taiyaar rho kaam start hone vala
haiPage 36 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri2/26/20, 8:29 PM – Binni: taiyaar rho sare
2/26/20, 8:30 PM – Binni: puliya se pipeline ki trf aarge hai suer
2/26/20, 8:44 PM – +91 97168 29847: Aane du in mullo ka suar
bna denge
2/26/20, 10:22 PM – +91 70539 44604: Bhaio ye danga q ho raha
h nale par abhi jo hua tha
2/26/20, 10:22 PM – +91 70539 44604: Jhoripur nale par
2/26/20, 10:24 PM – +91 96435 06209: Dikat lag rhi he 6 no me
sab ready rhena
2/26/20, 11:39 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bhai Mai Ganga Vihar se
lokesh Solanki hu agr kisi ko koi problem ho or wha log Kam
pde to bta dena Mai apni Puri Ganga Vihar ki team k sath
aayunga Sara Saman hai humare pass goli bandook sab kuch
2/26/20, 11:40 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bhai Pura support hai
abhi Hindu bhaiyo ko
2/26/20, 11:40 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bilkul bhai Ganga Vihar
gokulpuri jhoripur sb sath hai tumhare
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 97739 29196: 15 k Dane h kya
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 97739 29196: Kisi Bhai k pass
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 95992 45196: Monty Nagar.vcf (file
attached)
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 95992 45196: Bahi ad kro bhai ktr
hindu h
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 95992 45196: Yeh
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 75574 97409: Pistol hai
2/26/20, 11:42 PM – +91 75574 97409: Humare pass
2/26/20, 11:42 PM – +91 97739 29196: Faltu h kya
2/26/20, 11:42 PM – +91 97739 29196: Bhai goli h Kya 315 ki
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 75574 97409: Tumhare Bhai ne abhi 9
bje k krib b.vihar m 2 mulla mare hai
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 75574 97409: Or nale m feka hai
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 97168 29847: Bilkul Lokesh bhai
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 75574 97409: Apni team k sath
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 70539 44604: Haa bhaiPage 37 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 97168 29847: Ha
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 75032 34804: Rajput bhai bhagirath
vihar me bande bhej do
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bhai abhi thodi aarhe hai
hum sab raily lekr
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 75574 97409: B.vihar m
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 97739 29196: Koi dikkt na h Bhaiyo
2/26/20, 11:49 PM – +91 75574 97409: Vinay tumhe pta hai na
tumhara Bhai sbse aage rhta hai aise kamo m”
36. It is again worth to again refer to eight other cases, as mentioned
herein-above. Prosecution has relied upon same chats in all these
nine cases of murder and almost same set of accused persons
(one additional accused being in one case and two additional
accused being in another case) have been chargesheeted in these
nine cases. Accused in this case are accused in all these nine
cases. Aforesaid chats purportedly refer to killing of two persons
in the night of 26.02.2020. But, same has been used to support
allegations of murder of nine persons. In the present case
prosecution alleged time of murder at 10.30 A.M. This scenario
itself shows that these chats cannot be related to incident probed
in this case. Moreover, such post may be put in the group solely
with intention of becoming hero in the estimation of other
members of the group, also. It could be a boast, without truth
also. Therefore, the relied upon chats, cannot be substantive
evidence to show that accused Lokesh had actually killed two
Muslim persons. These chats at the most could be used a
corroborative piece of evidence as a support to the substantive
evidence showing complicity of Lokesh in the alleged incident.
Hence, for want of any substantive evidence, they cannot be
Page 38 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
given much attention.
37. Ld. Prosecutor also relied upon testimony of PW2/Nisar. PW2
claimed having seen and identified several persons including
some accused persons, in the mob present near Bhagirathi Nala
in the morning of 26.02.2020. But he also deposed that he had
not seen assault to any person on that day. In that situation, any
name being mentioned by PW2, becomes worthless. No
presumption can be raised that some persons identified as part of
some mob at some place, would also have been involved in the
unknown incident of murder of Bhule. There is no evidence even
to point out the place and time of such incident.
38. In his cross examination by prosecutor, PW2/Nisar deposed that
he had subsequently come to know from police that murders had
taken place at Johripur Pulia. This again goes on to show that he
had not seen any incident of murder himself. PW2/Nisar further
deposed that on 26.02.2020 at around 3-4 P.M., he had seen a
mob coming from the side of Bhagirathi Vihar. However, the
given time period once again does not match with the alleged
time of incident in this case.
39. PW2/Nisar admitted suggestion of the prosecutor that he had told
name of some persons to police, who were part of the mob seen
by him and who continued rioting for whole day of 25.02.2020
and they used to kill Muslim persons. First of all, such admission
of suggestion does not become evidence of the stated facts,
because what was told by PW2/Nisar before police, does not
become substantive evidence. What was deposed by him before
the court, is the substantive evidence. Secondly, even this
Page 39 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002724-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 133/2020, FIR No. 104/2020, PS Gokalpuri
statement does not show if PW2/Nisar had seen any particular
incident of murder. This was a generalized statement, perhaps
based on hearsay, which does not help in the trial of a particular
incident. Therefore, even without going into question of
credibility of statement of PW2/Nisar, I find that his evidence
does not help the case of prosecution in any manner, to prove the
alleged incident in this case.
CONCLUSION & DECISION
40. In view of my foregoing discussions, observations and findings, I
find that charges levelled against the accused persons in this case
are not proved at all. Hence, all accused namely 1. Lokesh
Kumar Solanki, 2. Pankaj Sharma, 3. Ankit Chaudhary, 4. Prince,
5. Jatin Sharma @ Rohit, 6. Himanshu Thakur, 7. Vivek Panchal
@ Nandu, 8. Rishabh Chaudhary @ Tapas, 9. Sumit Chaudhary
@ Badshah, 10. Tinku Arora, 11. Sandeep @ Mogli and 12. Sahil
@ Babu, are acquitted of all the charges.
Digitally signed
by PULASTYA
PULASTYA PRAMACHALA
PRAMACHALA Date:
2025.03.28
10:52:43 +0530Announced in the open court (PULASTYA PRAMACHALA)
today on 28.03.2025 ASJ-03 (North- East)
(This order contains 40 pages) Karkardooma Courts/DelhiPage 40 of 40 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
[ad_1]
Source link