VIKRAM SINGH GUSAIN Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Vikram Singh Gusain
State of Uttaranchal And Ors.
Click here to view full judgement.
Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. -
(1.) ACCUSED -respondents Arvind Badola and Sunil Kundalia were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC, by the learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal and were acquitted vide order dated 12th June, 2006 by giving them benefit of doubt. Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 12th June, 2006, present Criminal Revision was preferred by the informant -revisionist. The informant -revisionist moved an application on 21.07.1996 enumerating the facts contained therein that his brother Mahendra Singh Gusain along with his companions Arvind Badola and Sunil Kundalia collected 70,000/ - each, for the purpose of establishing a shop in Srinagar. They hired a shop in Sri Nagar. Mahendra Singh Gusain, was not traceable since 15.07.1996. A frantic search for him was made by the informant, but to no avail. When an enquiry was made by the police from the accused -respondents Arvind Badola and Sunil Kundalia, they said that they went to take a bath on 15.07.1996, Mahendra drowned in the river. They threw the wearing apparels of the victim (deceased) in the river flowing beneath Laxman Jhoola. On 17.07.1996, when Mahendra's mother enquired from them about her son, the accused -respondent pleaded ignorance. Later on, it was revealed that the accused -respondents developed a false story of throwing of wearing apparels of the deceased in the river. In fact, they concealed the wearing apparels of the deceased in Nehru Gram, Dehradun out of fear. The clothes of the deceased were got recovered at the instance of the accused -respondents. When a report from the Forensic Science Laboratory was obtained, the same was found stained with human blood. After the investigation, the investigating officer did not find it to be a case of murder. According to the investigating officer, it was an accident, in which the victim drowned while taking bath in Alaknanda river. The dead body of the deceased could not be found. The investigating officer submitted Final Report on 19.02.1997.
(2.) THE informant Vikram Singh Gusain lodged protest petition. The Final Report dated 02.11.1998 was rejected and the accused persons were summoned through warrants for the offences punishable under Sections 302/201 IPC. Accused appeared before the Magistrate. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC were framed against the accused -respondents to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Pw1 Vikram Singh Gusain (informant), Pw 2 Kamla Devi (mother of the deceased), Pw 3 Subhash Bahuguna, Pw 4 Raj Kishor were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons, in which they said that they were falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was given in defence.
(3.) PW 1 Vikram Singh Gusain, who was elder brother of the deceased, supported the prosecution story and proved his complaint. His examination -in -chief was almost verbatim reproduction of what PW1 wrote in the complaint. He said, among other things, that the accused -respondents and the deceased wanted to establish a shop in Srinagar. Whereas the accused -respondents returned after a few days, the deceased did not. The wearing apparels of the deceased were got recovered at the instance of the accused -respondents. PW1 identified the clothes of the deceased. He admitted in the cross -examination that his brother (deceased) went to the river from his residence, but no witness was found. He also could not find any witness from Gola Bazar, Srinagar.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.