SARJEET SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Sarjeet Singh And Another
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
U.C. Barin Gosh, J. -
(1.) One Maan Singh s/o Santa Singh wrote a complaint (Ext. Ka-1) to In-Charge, Police Outpost ITI, Police Station Kashipur, on 30.07.2001 regarding the murder of his uncle Banta Singh. According to the informant, on 30.07.2001, at 08:00 p.m., his uncle Banta Singh s/o Ishwar Singh was coming from the field after operating tube well motor. Fellow villagers Lakhvinder Singh s/o Singara Singh and Sarjeet Singh s/o Santa Singh said that he (Banta Singh) was responsible for the division of land in the village and so he should be killed. Sarjeet Singh and Lakhvinder Singh fired shots upon Banta Singh, no sooner Banta Singh reached near the transformer on the pucca road. Banta Singh died on the spot. Jeet Singh s/o Har Singh and Kulvinder Singh s/o Maan Singh were accompanying Banta Singh. Informant Maan Singh was standing near the transformer. All of them saw the accused persons firing upon Banta Singh in the electric light. On the basis of said complaint, chik FIR was lodged in P.S. Kashipur on 30.07.2001 at 09:3.0 p.m. The incident was alleged to have taken place on the selfsame day at 08:00 p.m. The distance between the place of occurrence and the P.S. concerned was 06 Kms and hence, there appeared to be no delay in lodging the FIR.
(2.) Criminal Law was thus set into motion and the investigation began. After the completion of investigation, a charge sheet for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was submitted against Sarjeet Singh and Lakhvinder Singh. Two separate charge sheets were also filed against the accused persons as regards offence punishable under Section 25 Arms Act. When the prosecution opened it's case before the trial court, charge for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC was framed against them. Similarly, separate charges in respect of Section 25 Arms Act were also framed against both of them. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Five witnesses, namely, PW1 Maan Singh, PW2 Kulvinder Singh, PW3 Dr. Rakesh Singh (Medical Officer), PW4 Constable P.D. Bhatt and PW5 SI S.P. Singh were examined on behalf of the prosecution. When the statements of the accused persons were taken under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they said that they were falsely implicated on account of enmity. No evidence was adduced in defence. After considering the evidence on record, learned court below convicted Sarjeet Singh of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Accused Lakhvinder Singh was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC. Both of them were also convicted of the offence punishable under Section 25 Arms Act. They were sentenced appropriately, on both the counts. Aggrieved against the aforesaid conviction and sentence, convicts preferred present Criminal Appeal.
(3.) PW1 Maan Singh said that victim Banta Singh was his uncle. Accused Sarjeet Singh was his (PW1's) brother and accused Lakhvinder Singh was the fellow villager. On 30.07.2001, at about 08:00 p.m., when his uncle Banta Singh was coming back to his house after operating tube well motor, accused-appellants challenged the victim saying that the victim was responsible for the division of land in the village. Thereafter both the appellants fired upon Banta Singh. Banta Singh escaped unhurt by the fire of Lakhvinder, but the bullet fired by Sarjeet Singh hit the neck of victim and as a consequence thereof, victim died on the spot. Witnesses Jeet Singh (not examined), PW1 Maan Singh and PW2 Kulvinder Singh saw the incident in the light of electric bulb hanging on the transformer. PW1 proved his complaint (Ext. Ka-1). PW1 also said that many villagers reached on the spot. PW1 was also a signatory to inquest report (Ext. Ka-2) and recovery memo (Ext. Ka-3) of taking of blood stained soil/simple soil.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.