ICEBREAKER: The 300km sniper turning rescue helicopters into warships
RCB sale nears reality as Adar Poonawalla confirms interest with 'strong and competitive bid'
Homebound misses Oscar 2026 nomination; here’s which films made final cut
Basant Panchami 2026: Are Delhi, Noida schools closed on January 23 for Saraswati Puja? Know here
'Board of Peace' Explained: Why inclusion of Muslim nations raises questions over global geopolitics
BNY launches tokenized deposits: Bank money quietly goes on-chain
How much money will Bangladesh lose after pulling out of T20 World Cup 2026 in India?
DELHI
The observation was made when the counsel for the accused Vicky alias Ganja argued that Investigating Officer (IO) did not join any public witness at the time of recovery of the mobile phone, which was stolen.
In a busy city like Delhi, hardly any person agrees to join police investigations considering it as a waste of time and do their best to avoid being summoned to police stations, a Delhi court said while sentencing a man to three years imprisonment for robbery.
"Innocent and law abiding persons don't want any kind of confrontation from the side of the offenders and harassment from the side of the police officials," Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Naresh Kumar Laka said.
The observation was made when the counsel for the accused Vicky alias Ganja argued that Investigating Officer (IO) did not join any public witness at the time of recovery of the mobile phone, which was stolen.
According to the complaint registered by one Saukhi Lal, the accused snatched his brother's mobile phone while they were coming from Noida and waiting at the bus stand at Kalyanpuri, in east Delhi.
When Lal tried to stop Vicky, he snatched the former's phone and cash worth Rs 400 from his pocket. Following this, the victim registered a complaint and the stolen mobile was recovered from the accused's possession.
"The offence of robbery is very serious in nature and he is involved in three other cases. But keeping in view the fact that the accused has the responsibility of one minor child, he is the only bread earning member in his family, and the fact that he is facing trial for the last three years, a modest view is taken," the judge said.