IDRIS Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) A complaint (Ext. Ka-1) was lodged by Vishal
Tandon, son of victim Prakash Narayan Tandon with
Police Station Kashipur Kotwali, enumerating the facts
therein that victim retired from Revenue Department and
was dealing with money-lending after retirement.
Accused-appellant Idris, son of Imam, r/o Mohalla
Ghasmandi, Kashipur, used to come to victim, pledge
ornaments and borrow money from him. On 09.10.1997,
Prakash Narayan Tandon told his wife in the morning that
Idris's ornaments were to be returned. He instructed her
to take out Idris's articles, as he would be coming to take
them back. Subsequently when Idris came in the course
of day and pressed the bell, Prakash Narayan Tandon
opened the door. Idris was seated in the drawing room.
Prakash Narayan Tandon went upstairs and informed his
wife that Idris has come and the articles are to be
returned. He took ornaments pledged by Idris and went to
drawing room again. Idris and Prakash Narayan Tandon
became busy in settling the accounts. At 2:30 p.m.
informant (son of victim) along with his mother went to
see a procession. When they came back at 9:00 pm, they
found that victim was missing. When the informant went
to the drawing room, he saw that the door was bolted
from inside. Somehow the door was opened. When the
same was opened, victim was found dead on the floor
near sofa. He sustained incised wounds of knife (dagger).
Neither the ornaments nor the money which were to be
exchanged were found. Prakash Narayan Tandon was
killed by Idris.
(2.) The FIR was registered well in time, upon
which investigation started. After completing
investigation, a charge sheet against the accusedappellant Idris and two others was filed for the offences
punishable under Sections 302 and 394 IPC. Trial began
before learned Additional Sessions Judge, District
Nainital. Charges were framed against the accused-
appellant Idris for the offences punishable under Sections
302, 394 and 411 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial. Co-accused Shamim and Asif (nonappellants) were also charged in connection with offences
punishable under Sections 302 and 394 IPC. Prosecution
examined nine witnesses. Statements of accusedappellant as well as co-accused Asif were recorded under
Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied everything. The
accused Shamim died during the course of trial and
therefore, the case against him was abated. No witness
was produced in defence.
(3.) After conclusion of the trial, learned
Additional Sessions Judge/III FTC, Nainital held
accused-appellant Idris guilty of the offences punishable
under Sections 302, 394 and 411 IPC. He was awarded
imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in
default of which he was required to undergo two months'
further rigorous imprisonment as regards the offence
punishable under Section 302 IPC; ten years' rigorous
imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of
which one month's further rigorous imprisonment for the
offence punishable under Section 394 IPC and a fine of
Rs. 5,000/-, in default of which he was required to undergo
one month's rigorous imprisonment for the offence
punishable under Section 411 IPC. All the sentences were
directed to run concurrently. Aggrieved against the
aforesaid order, present appeal was preferred by the
accused-appellant Idris. Co-accused Asif was exonerated
by the trial court.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.