JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
LAWS(UTN)-2013-7-150
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 15,2013

JAGDISH PRASAD Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) P.W. 3 Suresh Chandra Juyal wrote a complaint to Naib Tehsildar, Pauri Garhwal on 04.03.1997 against accused Jagdish Prasad on the selfsame day which was registered as case crime no. 06/1997 for the offences punishable under Section 307, 325, 394 and 506 IPC at 10.30 p.m. The alleged incident took place on 04.03.1997 at 05.00 p.m. The distance between the place of incident and P.S. concerned was 20 Kilometers and hence, there appeared to be no delay in lodging F.I.R. After the investigation, a charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 325, and 506 IPC was submitted. No offence under Section 394 IPC was made out. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. When the trial commenced and prosecution opened it s case charge for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC was framed against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(2.) P.W. 1 Bachhi Ram, P.W. 2 Digambar Prasad, P.W. 3 Suresh Chandra Juyal, P.W. 4 Dr. Arun Kumar, P.W. 5 Dr. K.P. Kuniyal and P.W. 6 Ajay Kumar Singh, Tehsildar were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C, in which he said that Bachhi Ram contested the election of Gram Pradhan, he opposed, and therefore, he (accused) was falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was given in the evidence. After considering the evidence on record, learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, convicted accused under Section 307 IPC and was awarded two years rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of which, he was required to undergo six months further rigorous imprisonment, vide impugned judgment and order dated 24.08.2002. Aggrieved against the impugned judgment and order, present criminal appeal was preferred.
(3.) Prosecution led the evidence through P.W. 1. In his examination-in-chief, he said that he knew the accused, who was his co-villager. On 04.03.1997, when he was about to reach from Pauri to his village Karakot via Bawali School, accused met him on his way. He was going on foot from Bawali to Karakot. Accused caught hold of him, no sooner he reached near Debridali. It was 05.00 p.m. Accused snatched Rs. 2572/- from P.W. 1. Accused also made an attempt to snatch gold ring from his finger. When he could not snatch golden ring, he gave a blow of stone on his finger and robbed him of the said ring. Then, the accused gave a blow of stone on the head of P.W. 1. P.W. 1 sustained injuries on his head. P.W. 1 raised an alarm. P.W. 2 Digambar Prasad, who was working in the adjoining field, came to save P.W. 1. Two women, who were working nearby, came to the rescue of P.W. 1. Accused fled away after threatening the accused with dire consequences. P.W. 2 contacted his house on telephone. P.W. 1 hired a taxi and went to Bawali. P.W. 1 was taken to hospital, where he was admitted. He also said that the accused succeeded in robbing Rs. 2572/= from his pocket because he became unconscious. Accused Jagdish was inimical to P.W. 1 because P.W. 1 opposed his election as Gram Pradhan of Gram Sabha. Accused also used to destroy the trees and steal buffalos.;


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