MD.HAMEED Vs. STATE
LAWS(JHAR)-2004-7-50
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on July 23,2004

Md.Hameed Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J. - (1.) AS both the criminal appeals arise out of a common judgment, passed by Shri R.P. Singh, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, West Singh -bhum at Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 132/95, arising out of Chaibasa Sadar P. S. Case No. 078/94, corresponding to G.R. No. 626/94, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) ALL the three appellants have challenged their judgment and order of conviction dated 31st August, 1998 u/s, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, as they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and directed to make payment of fine of Rs. 5000/ - each and in default to undergo further imprisonment for two years. The appellant Md. Hameed [Cr. Appeal No. 247/98(R)] has been further sentenced to under go R.I. for two years for the charges u/s. 27 Arms Act, which is to run concurrently. The Informant Md. Hussain (P.W. 8) who is the father of the deceased Md. Mobin was sitting at the shop of his second son Md. Moin Mistry (P.W. 7) on 21st December, 1994 at about 6.45 P.M. He saw the accused Md. Hameed, Jainul Haque and Md. Nazir called his son Md. Mobin (deceased) and proceeded towards the shop of Idrish Tailor. After some time, he also proceeded to find out his son and found his son Md. Mobin (deceased) standing with the accused persons on the Verandah (Chabutara) of Tailoring shop of Md. Idrish. As soon as the accused saw him (Informant), the accused Jainul Haque ordered to shot Md. Mobin as the Informant was coming. Immediately, thereafter, accused Md. Hameed took out his Pistol and shot in the back of the head of his son Md. Mobin and thereafter all the accused fled away. After sustaining head injury, Md. Mobin fell down by the side of Verandah (Chabutara). The Informant while lifting his son, raised alarm and by that time a number of local people also gathered at the P.O. and with their help his son was taken to the Hospital where he succumbed in course of treatment.
(3.) FURTHER case of the Informant (P.W. 8) is that the accused Hameed was threatening Md. Mobin that he would forcibly hold his shop at the same place at Tat Nagar Hat where the deceased was holding his shop. Due to aforesaid dispute regarding holding of shop at a particular place, the deceased was killed by the Bulaki Ram Versus Jatru Mahali accused persons at the instance of accused Md. Hameed.;


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