IRSHAD; DILSHAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
LAWS(UTN)-2013-7-129
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 09,2013

Irshad; Dilshad Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Pw2 A.S.I. Shyam Lal Sharma lodged an FIR against Subhash, Vikas, Irshad and Dilshad on 19.09.1999, at 02:30 A.M., in police station Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar, on the basis of which case crime no. 201 of 1999, State vs Subhash and others under Section 307 of IPC; case crime no. 202 of 1999, State vs Subhash under Section 25 of Arms Act; case crime no. 203 of 1999, State vs Vikas under Section 25/4 Arms Act; case crime no. 204 of 1999, State vs Irshad under Section 25 of Arms Act and case crime no. 205 of 1999, State vs Dilshad under Section 25 Arms Act were registered. The incident was alleged to have taken place on 18.09.1999, at 11:40 P.M. After the investigation, separate charge-sheets under Section 307 of IPC, under Section 25 of Arms Act and the one under Section 25/4 of Arms Act were filed against the accused persons. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, separate charge(s) were framed against the accused persons for the offences complained of against them. The cases were consolidated by the trial court and all the accused persons were tried together. Accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(2.) Pw1 S.I. H.P. Vats, PW2 A.S.I. Shyam Lal Sharma, PW3 S.I. Sadhana Tyagi, PW4 Inspector C.L. Sharma, PW5 Constable Kamal Singh and PW6 S.I. Nautan Das were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in reply to which they said that they were falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was adduced in defence. After considering the evidence on record, accused persons Subhash, Irshad, Dilshad and Vikas were exonerated of the charge under Section 307 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC levelled against them. Subhash, Irshad and Dilshad were convicted of the charge under Section 25 of Arms Act levelled against them. Each one of them (Irshad, Dilshad and Subhash) were directed to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each, in default of payment of which, each one of them was required to further undergo simple imprisonment for four months each. Fourth accused Vikas was convicted under Section 25/4 of Arms Act and was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five months alongwith a fine of Rs. 500/-, vide judgment and order dated 06.12.2001. Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 06.12.2001, convicts Irshad and Dilshad preferred two separate criminal appeals, which are being decided by this common judgment and order for the sake of brevity.
(3.) Since the State Government has not preferred any appeal against the acquittal of the accused persons under Section 307 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC, therefore, this Court will not deal with that part of prosecution evidence which relates to Section 307 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC. This Court will focus only on that part of prosecution evidence, which was directed against the accused-appellants in respect of offence punishable under Section 25 of Arms Act only. This Court will also not discuss the evidence, which was tendered against the non-appellants, namely, Subhash and Vikas.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.