SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(UK) 557

2010 (1) N.C.C. 444
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.C. Kandpal and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Veer
Criminal Appeal No. 647 of 2001
YAKUB AHMED & ORS. – Applicants
Versus
THE state – Respondent
Decided on : 17.11.2009

Advocates:
For the Applicants : Mr. Rajendra Kotiyal, Learned counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. Nandan Arya, learned AGA

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sec. 154 and Indian Penal Code, 1860, Secs. 302, 324, 323 r/w Sec. 34 — Three eye witnesses — Evidence of — Witnesses cross examined at length, but nothing came in their statements that create any doubt on their reliability — From their statements it was clear that the scribe of the FIR had wrongly written the time of incident as 6:30 A.M., instead of 5:30 A.M., by mistake — Also, as per the FIR and the evidence eye witness, accused was having the weapon Ballam — Learned trial court rightly held that gun was wrongly written in place of Ballam, due to mistake of the Peshkar — Here the prosecution had produced the three eye-witnesses to prove its case — Held — By not producing the person, who had brought the deceased in the hospital, who was not an eye-witness of the occurrence do not create any doubt in the prosecution story — The conviction and sentence of the appellant confirmed.

        (Paras 10, 18 to 20, 27, 29)

        n.M izfd;k lafgrk] 1973] /kkjk 154 vkSj Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 302] 324] 323 lifBr /kkjk 34 & rhu izR;{knf'kZ;ksa ds c;ku ntZ fd;s x;s & bu lkf{k;ksa dh ckn esa vf/kijh{kk Hkh dh xbZ ijUrq mu ds c;kuksa ls ,slk dqN ugha vk;k ftl ls mudh fo'oluh;rk ij lansg mRié gksrk gks & mu ds c;kuksa ls ;g Li"V gksrk Fkk fd izFke lwpuk fjikVZ esa ?kVuk dk le; 6-30 iwokZg~u gksuk pkfg, Fkk vkSj izFke lw;uk fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij vkSj izR;{kn'khZ xokgksa ds lk{; ds vuqlkj vfHk;qDr cYye fy;s gq, Fkk & ekU; fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ;g lgh fu.kZ; fn;k x;k fd cYye ds LFkku ij canwd xyrh ls is'kdkj }kjk fy[kh xbZ Fkh & vfHk;kstu }kjk rhu izR;{kn'khZ lk{kh dsl lkfcr djus gsrq izLrqr fd;s x;s Fks & fu.kZ; esa dgk x;k fd ml O;fDr dks izLrqr u fd;s tkus ls ftlds }kjk e`rd dks vLirky esa HkrhZ djk;k x;k Fkk tks fd ?kVuk dk izR;{kn'khZ lk{kh ugha Fkk dksbZ lansg mRié ugha gksrk gS & vihykFkhZ dk n.M vkSj ltk iq"V dh xbZA ¼izLrj 10] 18 ls 20] 27] 29½

JUDGMENT

[Per : Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J.]

This appeal, preferred by the appellants’ under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.03.1997 passed by the Special Judge/Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital in Sessions Trial No. 54 of 1993, State Vs. Yakub Ahmed & others, whereby the learned Special Judge/Addl. Sessions Judge has convicted the appellants-accused Yakub Ahmed, Margub, Sharif and Ayub for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 324/34 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.). Each of the appellants-accused was sentenced to life imprisonment u/s 302/34 IPC. For the offences punishable u/Ss 324/34 IPC and 323/34 IPC, for each of the offences, each of them was sentenced to six months’ R.I. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record.

3. In brief, the prosecution case is that P.W.1 Khalil Ahmed lodged an FIR stating therein that the appellant-accused Margub Ahmed had taken the motorcycle of his son on 14.7.1991 and in the evening of that day, he returned the motorcycle in a damaged condition. The complainant’s son Iqbal directed the appellant-accused Margub to get that motorcycle repaired on which some altercation took place between them and the appellant-accused went from there by threatening to see complainant’s son in the morning. On 15.7.1991 at about 6:30 A.M., both of sons of complainant namely Iqbal and Mohammed Ahmed were going in the teashop of Suresh Thakur and then the appellants-accused Yakub, Ayub, Margub and Sharif stopped complainant’s sons from their back. Appellants-accused Yakub and Ayub were having spades in their hands, appellant-accused Magrub was having a Lathi while the appellant-accused Sharif was having lance (Ballam) in his hand. Appellant-accused Magrub exhorted other appellants-accused to kill complainant’s sons. On this, complainant’s sons raised a noise on hearing which complainant also reached on the spot. Then all the appellants-accused started beating complainant’s sons with their respective weapons viz. spade, lathi and lance. Appellant-accused Ayub inflicted injury of spade on the neck of Mohd. Ahmed with intention to kill him; appellant-accused Sharif caused injury of lance in his abdomen and complainant’s son Iqbal was also been injured by the appellants-accused with spade, lance and lathi. When the complainant tried to intervene, then the appellant-accused Magrub also gave a blow of lathi on his foot. On the noise raised by the complainant and his sons in order to save themselves, Akhtar Ali (PW3), Vishaluddin (PW2) and Jarrar Khan came on the place of occurrence and witnessed the incident and also saved them. It was further stated that on the neck and abdomen of Mohd. Ahmed and on the head and hands and foots of Iqbal, serious injuries had come. With the same averments, the FIR Ex.Ka-1 was lodged by the P.W.1 Khalil Ahmed on 15.7.1991 at 9:15 A.M. at P.S. Kichha. On the basis of FIR (Ex.Ka-1), Head Moharrir Kavindra Mohan prepared Chik FIR of the case, i.e. Ex.Ka-7. In the same process, entry was also made in the G.D., the carbon copy of which is Ex.Ka-8. Investigation of this case was entrusted to P.W.4 Inspector D.P. Singh. Injured Mohd. Ahmed was medically been examined on 15.7.1991 at 6 A.M. by PW5 Dr. P.C. Pant and injury report Ex.Ka-12 was prepared. Likewise injured Iqbal Ahmed was also medically been examined by same medical officer on 15.7.1991 at 6:45 A.M. and medical report Ex.Ka-13 was also prepared. Injured Khalil Ahmed was also medically been examined by P.W.7 Dr. R. Singh on 15.7.1991 at 10:00 A.M. and after the medical examination, injury report Ex.Ka-17 was prepared. Thereafter supplementary report of injured Iqbal was also prepared by the same medical officer, i.e. Ex.Ka-14. The I.O. during course of Investigation recovered a















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top