PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Informant Prem Kumar who happened to be brother-in-law (sala) of deceased set the criminal law into motion by filing complaint (Ext. Ka-2). The complaint was scribbled by one Suresh Kumar s/o Jeevan Ram. Informant Prem Kumar s/o Ghanshyam Das complained that the incident took place on 09.03.2000 at 8:30 am. Prem Kumar and his brother-in-law (jija) Nand Kumar came to market (mandi) on the said date and time. Suresh Kumar who was accountant of Nand Kumar informed him (Nand Kumar) that he (Suresh Kumar) received a telephone call. On having heard this, Nand Kumar (victim) went to talk in nearby STD booth. Pawan Kumar (accused-appellant) stopped Nand Kumar. Pawan Kumar started abusing Nand Kumar and said that he (Nand Kumar) would not be spared today. It was with great difficulty that Nand Kumar was found alone, Pawan Kumar said. Pawan Kumar had a dagger in his hand. He inflicted a blow of dagger on Nand Kumar's head and abdomen with the intention of killing him. Nand Kumar fell on the ground in injured condition. Scribe Suresh Kumar (accountant), Prakash, Diwan Singh and Harish saved Nand Kumar and caught hold of Pawan Kumar. Nand Kumar was admitted in hospital. The incident took place at approx. 8:40 am. On the basis of complaint (Ext. Ka-2) of Prem Kumar, chik FIR (Ext. Ka-3) was lodged at PS Haldwani district Nainital on 09.03.2000 at 9:45 am. The distance between the place of occurrence and the police station was 2 kilometers and hence there appeared to be no delay in lodging the First Information Report, registered in connection with the offence punishable under sections 307/504 IPC. After the death of Nand Kumar and after having found offence been committed by accused -appellant Pawan Kumar a charge-sheet for the offence punishable under section 304 IPC was submitted against the accused after completion of the investigation.
(2.) Trial began. Charges were framed against the accused-appellant Pawan Kumar for the offence punishable under Section 304 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. As many as 10 prosecution witnesses were examined. Statement of accused appellant Pawan Kumar under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was taken. Accused appellant did not adduce any evidence in defence.
(3.) After conclusion of the trial, learned Additional Sessions Judge/ 1st FTC, Haldwani, District Nainital held accused-appellant Pawan Kumar guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304 IPC. He was awarded rigorous imprisonment for life in relation to the offence punishable under Section 304 IPC along with a fine of Rs. 20,000/-, in default of which he was directed to undergo six months' further imprisonment. Aggrieved against the aforesaid judgment and order, present appeal was preferred by the accused appellant Pawan Kumar.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.