Reserved On –03.12.2025 Delivered On – 17.12.2025 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Appeal No. 342 of 2017 Ajam @ Ajeem @ Ikrar and another ........Appellants Versus State of Uttarakhand .….Respondent Present:-

Ms. Manisha Bhandari and Mr. Shaswat Sidhant, Advocates for the appellants.

Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, AGA for the State. Criminal Appeal No. 343 of 2017 Hafij Mustkeem ........Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand .….Respondent Present:-

Ms. Manisha Bhandari and Mr. Shaswat Sidhant, Advocates for the appellant.

Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, AGA for the State.

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 32 of 2017 Imam Raza Naqvi ........Appellant Versus State of Uttarakhand .….Respondent Present:-

Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the appellant through video conferencing.

Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, AGA for the State.

Coram: Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Per: Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Since, all these appeals arise from one and the same first information report, they are heard together and being decided by this common judgment and order. However, in this judgment, wherever reference to prosecution witness (“PW”) is made, it shall refer to the witness or the witnesses examined in Sessions Trial No. 97 of 2010, State v. Hafij Mustkeem and others, in the court of 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar, unless otherwise expressly specified.

2. The case is based on FIR No. 348 of 2009, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar, lodged by PW 1 Irfan Ahmad, who was Village Pradhan on 08.08.2009 of village Piran Kaliyar, Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar. On that date, in the graveyard of Piran Kaliyar, dead bodies of a woman and a child, aged about 10 years, were found. After lodging of the FIR, the police reached at the spot, prepared inquests, investigation proceeded and charge sheets submitted.

3. The prosecution came up with the story that the appellant Imam Raza Naqvi was a tenant of the deceased Noor Jehan. He along with other co-appellants killed the deceased Noor Jehan and her son Abdul Rahmat, so as to grab her property. Initially, Charge Sheet No. 10 of 2010 was submitted against all the four appellants. The appellants Imam Raza Naqvi, Mohd. Rafi. @ Rafia @ Guddu and Ajam @ Ajeem @ Ikrar were shown as absconders in the charge sheet. Based on this charge sheet, cognizance was taken on 16.01.2010 and the case was committed for sessions trial against the appellant Hafij Mustakeem and proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 97 of 2010 were registered on 12.03.2010 in the sessions court.

4. Subsequently, Charge Sheet No. 10A was submitted against the appellant Imam Raza Naqvi. The court took cognizance on

22.05.2010 and the matter was committed to the court of sessions for trial on 31.05.2010 and the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 225 of 2010 were registered on 07.06.2010 against the appellant Imam Raza Naqvi.

5. Supplementary Charge Sheet No. 10 B of 2013 was submitted against the appellant Ajam @ Ajeem @ Ikrar, on which the Magistrate took cognizance on 01.05.2013 and it was committed for trial by the court of sessions on 14.05.2013 and on 15.05.2013 the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 165 of 2013 were initiated against the appellant Ajam @ Ajeem @ Ikrar.

6. Similarly, supplementary Charge Sheet No. 101 of 2014 was submitted against the appellant Rafi @ Rafia @ Guddu on 31.07.2014, on which the Magistrate took cognizance and committed the case for sessions trial on 11.08.2014 and on 14.08.2014, the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 246 of 2014 were initiated against the appellant Rafi @ Rafia @ Guddu.

7. The charges were framed against the appellants on the following dates:-

(i) Hafij @ Mustkeem - 22.03.2010 in ST No. 97 of 2010 (ii) Imam Raja Naqvi - 17.08.2010 in ST No. 225 of 2010 (iii) Ajam @ Ajeem @ Ikrar - 02.07.2013 in ST No. 165 of 2013 (iv) Rafi @ Rafia @ Guddu – 22.11.2014 in ST No. 246 of 2014

8. The above four sessions trials proceeded separately.

9. In Sessio