VINOD SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
VINOD SHARMA,SHIV PRASAD S/O DATA RAM,OM DUTT, S/O VINOD
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND,SOM DUTT
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. , the petitioners have challenged the order dated 07.05.2011, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/2 nd Fast Track Court, Haridwar, in Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 2005 and Criminal Revision No. 296 of 2005, whereby said court has dismissed the appeal and allowed the revision. It is further directed by the appellate/revisional court that the sentence awarded against the petitioner No. 1 Vinod Sharma is modified and enhanced to simple imprisonment for a period of one year, apart from the fine directed to be paid by the trial court.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned counsel for the State, and perused the papers on record.
(3.) Prosecution story in brief is that on 27.11.1995, at about 6:30 am when the complainant (respondent No. 2) Som Dutt had gone to ease out himself in a field, the petitioner No. 2 Shiv Prasad and petitioner No. 3 Om Dutt armed with LATHIES along with petitioner No. 1 Vinod Sharma came there and assaulted him. It is alleged that the fire was also shot.
On the complaint of the said incident, later, the Magistrate, after recording the evidence of the complainant under Section 200 and that of witnesses under Section 202 of Cr. P. C. , summoned the petitioners to face the trial in respect of offences punishable under Section 324, 504, 506 of I. P. C. The witnesses were examined under Section 244 of Cr. P. C. Whereafter charge was framed in respect of aforesaid three offences (324, 504, 506 of I. P. C. ) against all the three petitioners, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Under Section 246 of Cr. P. C. , the witnesses namely PW-1 Amar Singh, PW-2 Som Dutt, PW-3 Virendra Kumar were further cross-examined and PW-4 Surendra Kumar was also got examined. The trial court put the oral and documentary evidence to the accused under Section 313 of Cr. P. C. regarding which the accused alleged that the same to be false. The trial court after hearing the parties, found all the three petitioners guilty of charge of offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34 of I. P. C. However, on hearing on sentence, each one of them was sentenced only to pay fine of Rs. one thousand. Aggrieved by the conviction, all the convicts (present petitioners) filed the criminal appeal No. 45 of 2005 before the Sessions Judge, Haridwar. The complainant also filed the Criminal Revision No. 296 of 2005. The appellate/revisional court consolidated the appeal and the revision and decided the both vide impugned order dated 07.05.2011, enhancing the sentence awarded to the petitioner No. 1 Vinod Sharma and directed him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year, in addition to direction of the trial court to pay fine of Rs. one thousand.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.