The two were arrested by the Crime Branch of Chandigarh Police in April 2014 after the UT Police reported a series of burgalries in the city committed in a unique style. The thieves reportedly used to leave behind couplets of Urdu Shyari and became famous as Dhoom style burglars. They were so dubbed after the Bollywood flick released at the time in which the protagonist would commit a crime and leave a message about his next target scrawled on the wall.
During the period in which the incidents were committed, the UT policemen, investigating the cases, confirmed that they had recovered notes from the crime scenes with Urdu Shyari written in Devnagari script about the next strike.
Along with Ramesh and Tilakraj, their accomplice Vikas was also arrested at the same time in 2014 for a burglary committed in March 2014 and for two in 2013. The three were acquitted in the three cases in 2015. Vikas, facing trial in three other unrelated cases of theft, jumped bail and is now a proclaimed offender. Ramesh was booked in a further 12 cases of burglary and Tilakraj in 11 cases. Both were given bail after six months in prison in 2014, but they did not jump bail like Vikas.
Recovery of stolen items was planted: Defence counsel
The Crime Branch team of the UT Police began naming Ramesh and Tilakraj in other cases after arresting them in the first case in March 2014 and obtaining their police remand from April 26 to May 3, 2014. Their names were included in the FIRs of the other 2012 and 2013 cases on successive dates during this period, one after the other. The police made recoveries on the same days as the cases were registered. Curiously, over this seven-day period, police made daily recoveries from just two places, an almirah at Ramesh’s Sector 20 home and the double bed box at Tilakraj’s home in Sector 22.
Advocate Rohit Khullar, defense counsel of Ramesh, argued in court that the recoveries were planted by crime branch sleuths while arresting him. Moreover, the complainants disowned the recoveries, saying the items were not theirs.
The court has observed in its judgments that, “The prosecution has failed to examine any witness of police in whose presence recovery of stolen articles was effected from the possession of the accused and the discussion is sufficient to give benefit of doubt to the accused.”
Duo also acquitted of burglary at judge’s house
Among the 15 cases was a burglary at the Sector 19 residence of a former judge of the district court, Chandigarh.
A theft of gold chain, gold ring and lady’s wristwatch was reported from the house of the judge posted in district court in 2013. The theft was reported on June 30, 2013.
The complainant, Jaspal Singh, the father of the judge, stated in court that he could not identify the accused and added that he had not named any suspects to the police. So, Ramesh and Tilakraj got acquitted.
Jatin Rehan, a complainant and witness in a case registered on October 23, 2013, stated in court that the articles recovered by the police did not belong to him. He said he had not got back any of the stolen articles. The duo was aqcuitted on January 22, 2015.
Deepankar Masih, a complainant and witness in a case registered on February 22, 2014, told court that he could not identify the accused.
Source- Indian Express
The cases were registered against the duo under sections 380 (theft in the dwelling house, etc), 454 (lurking house trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment) and 411 (dishonestly receiving stolen property).