Non-inclusion of an accused's name in the FIR undermines the prosecution case, creating substantial doubt about the reliability of witness testimonies.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant assisted by Sri K.K. Pandey as well as Sri Dileep Kumar, Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Amit Singh, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. representing the State of Uttar Pradesh On account of certain gray areas in the instant appeal we have sought an assistance from the learned counsel for the appellant to further argue the case and clarify those areas in the appeal. Which was done by the counsel in the month of May, 2024 and now we are in position to decide the matter finally on merits. After hearing the rival submission we are proposing to decide this matter finally on merits.

2. From the record it reveals that there are two connected Appeals 5905 of 2018 in Re-Saurabh Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Criminal Appeal No. 7075 of 2018 in Re-Bhanu Urf Bhanu Pratap. Both the appellants have preferred the afore-mentioned appeals. Accused-appeallants namely, Bhanu Pratap and Saurabh Kumar filed these separate appeals assailing the legality and validity of judgment dated 03.10.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ FTC-2 Bijnor whereby both the aforesaid mentioned namely Bhanu Urf Bhanu Pratap and the appellant Saurabh Kumar were convicted by the concerned trial court. Now for the sake of convenience, we have clubbed the records/ memo of both the appeals and they are being jointly decided.

From the order sheet of Criminal Appeal No. 7075 of 2018, it reveals that Sri Satendra Tiwari learned A.G.A. informed the Court, that pending appeal the appellant Bhanu Urf Bhanu Pratap died about two years back and as such his appeal Criminal Appeal No. 7075 of 2018 stood abated and consigned to record vide order dated 21.09.2023 by the Bench of this Court.

Thus, the current situation is that the only appeal No. 5905 of 2018 in Re: Saurabh Kumar is pending for final adjudication.

3. Saurabh kumar, the appellant before us, has preferred the instant Criminal Appeal, under section 374(2) Cr.P.C., challenging the validity and legality of the judgment and order dated 03.10.2018, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.2, Bijnor, in Session Trial No.105 of 2016, emanating from case crime no. 381 of 2015, Police station-Mandawar, Disrtict Bijnor wherein, he has been convicted under section 302 read with section 34 I.P.C., and sentenced to life imprisonment, with a fine of Rs.50,000/-and in default of payment of fine, the appellant has been directed to undergo three years additional imprisonment, along with co-accused Bhanu alias Bhanu Pratap.

4. Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant at the outsetinformedtheCourtthatthepresentappellantSaurabhKumarisneither named in the FIR nor charge sheeted accused and has been summoned by learned trial judge vide order dated 06.09.2016 in the exercise of power under- Section 319 Cr.P.C.

He further states that the name of the appellant Saurabh Kumar for the first time floated by the informant after one month and five days of the lodging of the FIR. It is submitted that, no plausible or convincing reason was forwarded by the prosecution for this unexplained delay and this sea change/addition in the tone, tenure and texture of the prosecution story which is extremely relevant for the present case and having a potential for, far reaching repercussion upon the authenticity and veracity of the prosecution story.

5. In