RAJ KUMAR @ RAJU Vs. STATE OF U.P.
LAWS(UTN)-2012-9-54
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on September 25,2012

RAJ KUMAR @ RAJU Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. (now Uttarakhand) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Prafulla C. Pant, J. - (1.) THIS appeal, preferred under section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.03.2000, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, whereby said court has convicted accused/appellant Rajkumar @ Raju under section 308 part II and 452 IPC. The accused/appellant Rajkumar @ Raju is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years under section 308 part II IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/ - under section 452 IPC. In default of payment of fine the accused/appellant is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Heard learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant, and learned counsel for the State and perused the lower court record.
(2.) PROSECUTION story in brief is that on 27.08.1994, complainant P.W. 1 Ramanand was in his shop in Satupuli Bazar, when at about 8:30 p.m., accused/appellant Rajkumar @ Raju came to his shop. The two were talking with each other, and after sometime the complainant told the accused that he should leave for his house as he has to close the shop. On this, accused Rajkumar @ Raju got annoyed, picked up weight of two kg, and started giving blow after blow on the head of the shopkeeper (P.W. 1 Ramanand). When the complainant shouted for help, the accused Rajkumar @ Raju dragged the injured out from the shop. On hearing noise P.W. 2 Meherban Singh, P.W. 3 Mamta, P.W. 4 Balvir Singh and P.W. 5 Radha Vallabh and some more people came out and saw the incident. The accused Rajkumar @ Raju was apprehended by the witnesses at the spot. Meanwhile the patrol police also reached there. First Information Report (Ex. A1) was lodged on the very day (27.08.1994) at about 11:15 p.m., with Police Station Satupuli. On the basis of the said report crime no. 76 of 1994, was registered against accused/appellant Rajkumar @ Raju relating to offences punishable under section 452, 308 IPC. The investigation was taken up by Sub Inspector S.N. Sharma. The injuries on the person of the injured Ramanand were examined by P.W. 6 Dr. S.P. Singh who recorded as many as seven injuries found on the person of the injured Ramanand on 27.08.1994, at 11:30 p.m., and prepared injury report (Ex. A2). The Radiologist found that there was fracture in the skull of the Ramanand. The report of the Radiologist is (Ex. A6) on the record. The Investigating Officer, after interrogating the witnesses, and inspected the spot submitted charge sheet (Ex. A5) against the accused Rajkumar @ Raju for his trial in respect of charge of offences punishable under section 308 and 325 IPC. The Magistrate, on receipt of the charge sheet, after giving necessary copies to the accused as required under section 207 Cr.P.C., appears to have committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial. On 26.07.1995, learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, Camp Lansdown framed charge of offences punishable under section 452 and 308 part II IPC, against the accused Rajkumar @ Raju who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P.W. 1 Ramanand (injured/informant), P.W. 2 Meherban Singh (eye witness), P.W. 3 Ms. Mamta (eye witness), P.W. 4 Balvir Singh (eye witness), P.W. 5 Radha Vallabh (eye witness) and P.W. 6 Dr. S.P. Singh (the medical officer who recorded injuries on the person of the injured Ramanand). Formal proof of the documents appears to have been dispensed with by defence counsel as such formal witnesses were not got examined. However, the court got examined C.W. 1 Constable Prakash Sharma and C.W. 2 Dr. D.K. Jain (Radiologist).
(3.) ORAL and documentary evidence was put to the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which the accused pleaded that the evidence adduced against him is false and he has been falsely implicated due to enmity. However, no evidence in defence was adduced. The trial court, after hearing the parties found that prosecution has successfully proved charge of offences punishable under section 452 and 308 part II IPC, against accused Rajkumar @ Raju, and convicted him accordingly. After hearing on sentence, accused Rajkumar @ Raju was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years under section 308 part II IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/ - under section 452 IPC. Aggrieved by said judgment and order dated 29.03.2000, passed by Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, in Sessions Trial No. 41 of 1995, this appeal was filed by the convict before Allahabad High Court from where it is received by transfer under section 35 of U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000 (Central Act 29 of 2000) for its disposal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.