SMT. URMILA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
State of Uttarakhand and others
Click here to view full judgement.
U.C. Dhyani, J. -
(1.) PW1 Smt. Urmila, w/o late Sukhpal Singh wrote a complaint (Ex.Ka-1) to S.O. Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar on 15.02.2000, which was registered as case crime no.47A/2000 at Police Station Jaspur on 15.02.2000 at 3:30 PM for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC against the accused persons, namely, Chatrapal, Punit and Rampal Singh. It was alleged in the FIR that the incident took place on 10.02.2000 at 9:00 AM. The distance between the place of incident and the police station was about 9 km. The FIR was lodged after a lapse of 5 days and hence, there appears to be delay in lodging FIR, subject to furnishing proper explanation by the informant or her witnesses.
(2.) Investigation began on the basis of said first information report. After investigation of the case, the charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charges against Chatrapal, Punit and Rampal Singh were framed for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. Accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial.
(3.) PW1 Smt. Urmila, PW2 Rajesh, PW3 Virendra Singh and PW4 Suresh Singh were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which they said that they were falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was given in defence.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.