ASHISH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) PW 1 Anuj Kumar (complainant/injured) lodged a first information report against the accused-appellant Ashish on 28.07.2000 at reporting outpost Rani Pokhari, District Dehradun for the offence under Sections 307, 504 and 506 IPC. The incident allegedly took place on 28.07.2000, at 8:30 am, and the first information report was lodged promptly on the selfsame day at 9:00 am. The distance between the place of incident and the PS concerned was 200 meters only. The informant thus lost no time in promptly lodging the FIR. After the investigation, a charge-sheet under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC and Section 25/4 Arms Act was submitted against the accused (appellant herein).
(2.) When the trial began and prosecution opened it s case, charges for the offences punishable under Section 307 IPC and Section 25/4 Arms Act were framed against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. PW 1 Anuj Kumar (injured), PW 2 Jai Prakash, PW 3 Yashpal Singh, PW 4 Ramesh Kothari, PW 5 Jugul Kishor, PW 6 Head Constable Shri Krishna Gupta, PW 7 Doctor M.S.Rawat, PW 8 SI Vivekanand Tiwari, PW 9 Rajesh Kumar, PW 10 SI Mahendra Singh and PW 11 SI N.D. Thakur were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused person under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which he said that he was falsely implicated in the case. After considering the evidence on record, learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ist FTC/ Special Judge, CBI, Dehradun, held the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and directed him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years along with fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of which, he was directed to undergo three months further rigorous imprisonment. He was also convicted Section 4/25 (1) (B)(b) Arms Act and was directed to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of which, he was further directed to undergo one month s rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved against the judgment and order dated 19.02.2003, present criminal appeal was preferred on behalf of the convict-appellant.
(3.) Prosecution led the evidence through PW 1 and PW 3. Both were the eyewitnesses, in addition to the fact that PW 1 was also the informant. PW 1, in his examination-in-chief, stated that on 28.07.2000 at around 8:30 am, accused-appellant met him near Mukesh Lakhera s shop. Since the accused-appellant belonged to neighboring village, therefore, PW 1 knew him personally before the alleged incident. Accused-appellant stopped the motorcycle of PW 1 and said that PW 1 was becoming the leader and inflicted the blow of knife on the right side of chest of PW 1. Injured tried to stop the blow, as a consequence of which, he sustained injuries on his palm. After inflicting blows of knife, accused appellant threatened PW 1 with dire consequences and fled away. Ramesh Kothari and Yashpal came on the place of incident. PW 1 rang his brother Jay Prakash, who wrote the complaint on the dictation of PW 1. PW 1 also proved his complaint (Ext. Ka-1). Wearing apparels, namely, shirt (material ext. -1) and undershirt (material ext. -2) of the injured were also produced before the trial court. On the previous day of the incident, an altercation took place between the accused-appellant and co-villagers of PW 1, in which accused-appellant threatened that whosoever will come to Rani Pokhari, he will be assaulted and will be dealt with appropriately.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.