NARENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. -
(1.) INFORMANT Rajesh Kumar lodged a complaint (Ext. Ka -1) in police station Vikasnagar (Dehradun) on 18.04.2006 against Narendra Singh, alleging that on 17.04.2006, at around 07:00 P.M., informant's co -villager Narendra Singh (accused) revealed to another co -villager Roshan Singh that he killed his elder brother Rajendra Singh alias Pappu about 2 -2 1/2 months ago. Accused made extra judicial confession to Roshan Singh that he (Narendra Singh) assaulted his father and ousted him from the house. The accused also confessed that, likewise, he killed his elder brother with an axe and dumped his dead body. On the basis of said complaint, a Case Crime No. 66 of 2006 was registered against accused Narendra Singh in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 506 of IPC.
(2.) AFTER completion of investigation, a charge sheet (Ext. Ka -14) was filed by the Investigating Officer against accused Narendra Singh for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. When trial began, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC were framed against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. As many as ten prosecution witnesses namely, P.W.1 Roshan, P.W.2 Rajesh Kumar, P.W.3 Mamchand, P.W.4 Rajendra Singh, P.W.5 Jai Chand, P.W.6 Chaman Singh, P.W.7 Dr. Alok Tewatia, P.W.8 Om Prakash, P.W.9 Head Constable Harkesh Singh and P.W. 10 Sub -Inspector Rudra Singh Pal (Investigating Officer) were examined on behalf of the prosecution. No evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused/appellant in defence. Thereafter statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which he said that the case against him was false and he was falsely implicated in the crime.
(3.) TRIAL court, after hearing both the sides, found accused Narendra Singh guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. He was convicted for the said offences and was sentenced appropriately. Aggrieved against said order, present criminal appeal was preferred.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.