STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Vs. OM PRAKASH AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Om Prakash And Others
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) A complaint (Ext. Ka-1) was lodged by complainant / informant Bhagwan Das on 7th October 2000, at police station Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar, enumerating the facts contained therein that on 06.10.2000, at 06:00 P.M., the informant alongwith his brother Virendra Singh and brother-in-law Har Prasad were going to their fields. When the informant alongwith others reached near the school, co-villagers Om Prakash, Bhagwan Prakash, Tassavur Hussain, Rampal fired upon them with the intention of killing them. Om Prakash was armed with a licensed gun. The remaining accused were armed with country made pistols. Virendra Singh and Har Prasad sustained injuries. The informant had litigation with Bhagwan Prakash over a piece of land. The accused persons tried to kill them on account of enmity with them. When the informant and others raised an alarm, many a people came on the place of occurrence. Accused persons exhorted that the injured and others were saved by the villagers, but they will be killed on any subsequent date. The injured were taken to Rudrapur Hospital, where they were admitted.
(2.) The FIR was lodged on 07.10.2000, at 04:25 P.M. The incident took place on 6th October 2000, at 06:00 P.M. There was delay in lodging the FIR. It is to be seen whether such delay in lodging the FIR has been properly explained by the prosecution or not After the investigation, chargesheet was submitted against the accused persons in respect of offences punishable under Sections 307, 504, 506 of IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charges in respect of selfsame offences were framed against the accused persons, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) PW1 Virendra Singh, PW2 Har Prasad, PW3 Bhagwan Das, PW4 S.I. S.P. Singh, PW5 Dr. Lalit Mohan Upreti and PW6 Dr. H.S. Rawal were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating offence 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 given in defence. After considering the evidence on record, the accused persons were exonerated of the charges framed against them. They were granted benefit of doubt vide judgment dated 14.10.2003. Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 14.10.2003, present Government Appeal was preferred on behalf of the State.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.