AASH MOHAMMAD ALIAS AASU Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-6-7
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
Decided on June 14,2013

Aash Mohammad Alias Aasu Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Informant Ved Pal wrote a complaint to Station Officer, police station Gangnahar, Haridwar on 13.03.2009, enumerating the facts contained therein that his daughter Manisha, aged 13 years, who studied in Primary School, Ibrahimpur Deha was missing since 12.03.2009. Manisha went to school on 12.03.2009, but did not return by evening. A frantic search for her was made, but to no avail. Co-villagers Neetu and Rajesh Kumar informed Ved Pal that they saw victim in the company of accused Intzar. Chik FIR (Ext. Ka-7) was registered as case crime no. 50 of 2009, on 13.03.2009, at 10:30 P.M., in respect of offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A of IPC.
(2.) After the investigation, a chargesheet was submitted against the accused Intzar and Aash Mohammad for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 and 120B of IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 and 120B of IPC were framed against both the accused persons, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) PW1 Ved Pal, PW2 Manisha, PW3 Rajesh Kumar, PW4 Dr. Kamal, PW5 Dr. Yogesh Kumar, PW6 Sanjay Rai Goswami, PW7 S.I. Govind Kumar and PW8 Poonam Agarwal 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. Accused (Intzar) said that he had acquaintance with the victim, but the prosecution story was false. No evidence was given in defence.;


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