SUKHDEV SINGH ALIAS DEVA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Sukhdev Singh alias Deva
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Click here to view full judgement.
Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. -
(1.) CRIMINAL law was set into motion at the instance of Bakshish Singh, who wrote a complaint to Inspector In -Charge, Police Station Kotwali Khatima, on 05.01.1994, stating the facts therein that his son Sukhvir came to Khatima on 04.01.1994, with tractor and trolley, for the purpose of selling paddy and left Khatima at 01:30 P.M. on the selfsame day. He did not reach home till 05.01.1994. Tractor trolley bearing registration No. UGT 4950 was also missing. It was also stated in said report that his son was a Sardar (Sikh), aged about 19 years. His complexion was wheatish and his height was 5 1/2 feet. He was wearing yellow turban, brown coloured pant, shirt & jersey and putting on red shoes. Investigation started on the basis of said first information report. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 394 IPC was submitted against accused persons viz., Jagir Singh, Bhupinder Singh alias Pinda and Sukhdev Singh alias Deva. When the trial began, prosecution opened the case. Learned trial court framed charges in relation to offences punishable under Section 394, S. 302 read with S. 34 and S. 201 of IPC against the three accused persons on 21.11.1995, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(2.) 11 witnesses were examined on behalf of prosecution. They were P.W.1 Shripal, P.W.2 Amreek Singh, P.W.3 Bakshish Singh, P.W.4 Nirmal Singh, P.W.5 Tersame Singh, P.W.6 Ataullah Khan, P.W.7 Dr. D.C. Bhatt, P.W.8 Narendra Singh, P.W.9 Swaran Singh, P.W. 10 S.H.O. Vikram Singh Rana and P.W. 11 S.I. S.P. Singh. After the prosecution evidence was closed, incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in reply to which they said that the evidence adduced against them was false. No evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused -appellants in defence. After hearing both the sides, accused persons namely, Jagir Singh, Bhupinder Singh alias Pinda and Sukhdev Singh alias Deva were convicted of the offences punishable under Section 394, S. 302 read with S. 34 and S. 201 of I.P.C. and were sentenced appropriately.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, accused -appellants Jagir Singh, Bhupinder Singh alias Pinda and Sukhdev Singh alias Deva preferred three separate criminal appeals. Since all the three cases have arisen out of the same incident, as such, they are taken up, together, heard, and being disposed of by a common judgment.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.