IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Lok Pal Singh, J.
Narendra & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2021
Decided On : 15-01-2021
U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986, Sec. 2/3 and 2(b)(c) – Ingredients of – Held that the prosecution had utterly failed to prove its case against the appellants that they were the gang leader or members of the gang or had committed any offence punishable u/s 2(b)(c), Act 1986 – Also, the trial court recorded the contradictory findings in convicting the appellants and sentencing – Impugned judgment unsustainable in the eye of the law. (Paras 10 to 15)
mñizñ xSaxLVj ,oa vlkekftd xfrfof/k;k¡ ¼jksdFkke½ vf/kfu;e] 1986] /kkjk 2@3 ,oa 2(b)(c) & ?kVd & /kkfjr & vfHk;kstu i{k iw.kZr% vlQy jgk Fkk fl) djus esa fd vihykFkhZ xSax dk ljnkj Fkk ;k fdlh xSax dk lnL; Fkk ;k fQj muds }kjk varxZr /kkjk 2(b)(c) vf/kfu;e] 1986 vijk/k dkfjr Fkk & vkSj ;g fd fopkj.k vnkyr dk vihykFkhZ dh nks"kflf) o n.M dk fu"d"kZ fojks/kkHkklh /kkj.kk ij vk/kkfjr Fkk & fojksfèkr vkns'k fof/k esa lrr~ ughaA ¼izLrj 10 ls 15½
JUDGMENT
Lok Pal Singh, J. - This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 18.02.2019, passed by the Special Judge/3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in S.S.T. No. 11 of 2009, State vs. Praveen Balmiki & Ors., whereby the said court has convicted the appellants Praveen Balmiki and Nagendra under section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred as the Act) and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and directed to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of which accused/appellant to undergo further three months' simple imprisonment.
2. Brief facts, in nutshell, are that the informant Incharge Inspector Sri B.S. Chauhan gave a report with the averments that on 24.07.2008 when he along with Constable Sandeep Kumar and constable Ravi Pant was on patrolling duty, he was informed by the villagers that there is active gang of Praveen Balmiki who is its leader, which runs with the help of its associates namely Sushil, Narendra and Pappu(present accused/appellant),. The gang has been involved in the commission of the offences like dacoity, murder, extortion etc., and due to their act, there is terror in the society and, therefore, nobody lodged any report or gives any evidence against the member of the gang. In the gang chart (Ex. Al) against accused Sushil case crime no. 125 of 2008, under sections 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC , case crime no. 107 of 2005 under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 IPC and case crime no. 54 of 2000 under section 302 and 120B IPC, against Praveen Balmiki (present appellant) case crime no. 125 of 2008 under section 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC, case crime no. 291 of 2006 under sections 392, 411, 120B IPC, case crime no. 77 of 2006 under sections 302 IPC and case crime no. 372 of 2006 under section 25 Arms Act, against Narendra (present appellant) case crime no. 125 of 2008 under section 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC, case crime no. 298 of 2007 under section 308 IPC and against accused Pappu case crime no. 125 of 2008 under section 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC and , case crime no. 107 of 2005 under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 IPC are registered at Police Station Kotwali Gangnahar, Roorkee, Laksar and Manglaur.
3. On the basis of said report FIR (Ex. A4) was got lodged and case crime no. 211 of 2008, under section 2/3 of the Act was registered. After grant of approval of the gang chart by the District Magistrate and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the present accused/appellant by the Investigating Officer. The learned Sessions Judge framed the charge under section 2/3 of the Act against the accused/appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. To prove the guilt of the accused/appellants, the prosecution got examined ten witnesses, namely, P.W.I Inspector Bahadur Singh Chauhan,( complainant) P.W.2 Sachin (informant in another case) P.W.3 Sub-Inspector Dinesh Kumar (Investigating officer of case crime no. 231 of 2006), P.W. 4 Shahazad (complainant of another case) P.W.5 Inspector Vijay Chandra Singh Gusain (Investigating officer of case crime no. 211 of 2008), P.W.6 Swyamwar Singh Rautela, P.W. 7 S.I. Bhupendra Mehta, P.W. 8 Cons. Sandeep Kumar, P.W.9 Vikas Kumar Salar, and P.W.10 Atul Kumar.
5. The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. in reply to which they alleged that they have been falsely implicated in the case. In his statement recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C, accused Praveen Balmiki has specifically stated that in case crime no. 77 of 2006 and case crime no. 231 of 2006 he has been acquitted by the trial court. However, no evidence in defence was adduced. The trial court after hearing learned counsel for the parties found that prosecution has successfully proved the guilt of the accused beyond the shadow of doubt and convicted them accordingly. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment, present appeal has bee
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.