Court acquits two after Mohali police fail to prove snatching case

After Mohali police’s failure to prove two persons guilty for snatching a woman’s gold chain in Kurali, a local court acquitted the persons who were arrested last year.

Notably, both the complainant and the eyewitness did not support police’s theory and turned hostile.

The victim Prabhjot Kaur of Rupnagar told police that on October 31, 2023, at 1 pm, she went to the house of her sister-in-law Sandeep Kaur in Kurali, following which they both went for shopping on foot to a market.

While returning home, two motorcycle-borne miscreants stopped near them around 3.50 pm and asked directions for Singhpura road. After providing them with the directions, both the women started walking ahead. The miscreants allegedly approached again and one of them snatched the gold chain of Prabhjot before fleeing on their bike.

The victim could neither see the number plate of the motorcycle, nor the faces of the accused. Police told the court that initially the complainant inquired about the snatchers at her own level and identified them as Anmolpreet Singh of Neulka village and Harmanpreet Singh of Kurali.

Kurali police registered a case on November 1, 2023, under sections 379-B, 34 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code.

Police later apprehended the accused at a check post laid near Niholka Road, Kurali, and recovered the complainant’s gold chain.

However the accused claimed that no recovery was effected from them and the alleged recovery was planted upon them just to show the case as solved by the police.

The accused’s counsel Jaswinder Singh vehemently argued that the prosecution miserably failed at proving its case as both complainant and the eye witness did not identify the accused.

Meanwhile the court of Mohali sessions judge Atul Kasana, while acquitting the accused, took notice of the statements of the victim and the eyewitness.

The victim stated that her signatures were obtained on blank papers by the police while the eye witness said her statement was not recorded.

“The onus was on the prosecution to prove its case, but the evidence on file reveals that the prosecution had miserably failed in proving that it was the accused facing trial, who had committed the offence of snatching. The complainant and the eye witness remained categoric during their statements and cross-examination by the additional public prosecutor, that they had not named the accused. It is, thus, unclear as to who disclosed the names of the snatchers to the police,” the court observed.

The court further stated that the victim did not support the claims of the police that the accused were held in her presence at the check post and no recovery was made in her presence.

“The entire version of the prosecution as qua apprehending of the accused as well as recovery of the snatched gold chain being affected from him, is rendered doubtful,” the court pronounced while acquitting the accused.