LIVE Online Course on Indian Constitution by Dr. Ravishankar Mor. Register Now!!
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Pilferage of consignment & returned to insult

(Querist) 14 October 2019 This query is : Resolved 

Dear experts,

Since I have no experience in trial court, I submit herewith a draft of List of Witnesses which may please be examined and valued opinion be given for which I would be much grateful.

In one format of High Court Rules, I have seen the List of Witnesses in fabular form.

(DRAFT)

1. The Complainant CW-1 (address on record)

Facts Sought to be proved by the evidence of the witness:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intentional insult [S-504 IPC] by Accused No. 1 by returning consignment after pilferage and cello-taped by
her which at the time of delivery to her weighed 300 gms evidenced by speedpost receipt and after pilferage
by Accused-1 weighed 68 grams [exhibit CW-1/A]; and whereas Accused No. 2 (Postman) for extraneous
considerations after delivery took back the pilfered consignment after 6 days and in conspiracy with Accused-
1 sent it back after another 10 days marking it as “refused”.

Documents sought to be proved by the evidence of the witness:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reliance on attested copy of Delivery Slip: [1] Ex CW-1/A & [2] pilfered consignment weighing 68 gms
marked as Ex CW-1/B submitted vide statement dated: 14/08/2019.

2. Mr. ______ Senior Supdt. of PO/CPIO
Naraina I.E. Head Post Office
New Delhi-110028

Facts Sought to be proved by the evidence of the witness:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The witness has provided attested copy of Delivery Slip, which is in response to RTI application sent to
Accused No. 3 [Post Master] who “intentionally” aided the commission of the crime by Accused No. 2 in
fabricating false evidence for extraneous
considerations. It is judicially noticeable that the signature of actual recipient was camouflaged by stapling a
piece of paper with a forged signature over it and then photocopied and attested [CW-1A].

Documents sought to be proved by the evidence of the witness:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Witness to give oral evidence & to produce original Delivery Slip fabricated (S-192 IPC) by Accused-2
Postman & Accused-3 wilful abettor of crime (S-107 IPC).

3. Mr. -------
(address)
Father of Accused-1
who took delivery of consignment

Facts Sought to be proved by the evidence of the witness:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Witness had initialed* the Delivery Slip (CW-1/A) and handed over the consignment to Accused-1
(addressee) on 13.07.2016 who resorted to intentional insult in collusion with Accused-2 pilfered the consignment
and Accused No.2 took it back after 6 days and sent it back after another 10 days as evident from CW-1/B.
[* admitted/authentic specimen of initial is available].

Documents sought to be proved by the evidence of the witness:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It proves that the consignment was delivered to Accused-1 at her residence.

4. I/O F.I.R. No. ----------
P.S: C.R. Park
New Delhi

5. Any other relevant witnesses as per the outcome.

Witnesses required to give oral evidence and also to produce documents


Filed by COMPLAINANT IN PERSON
Filed on.....................

V.N.K. MENON (Querist) 14 October 2019
Accused No. (1) is addressee who pilfered (2) is Post Man (3) is Post Master.


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :





Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query