Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 201 (UTT)

JITENDRA SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013-04-12

Alok Singh

body2013
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J (Oral). 1. Present appeal is filed against judgment and order dated 30.01.2010 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh in Special Sessions Trial No. 8 of 2007 whereby learned Sessions Judge found the appellant as well as co-accused Kalyan Singh guilty for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act and sentenced both of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default, to undergo additional imprisonment for two years. 2. In fact, pursuant to FIR No. 22/2007 dated 01.06.2007, police station Dharchoola, District Pithoragarh, two separate charge-sheets were submitted viz. one against the appellant and another against co-accused Kalyan Singh, on which two separate Sessions trial were proceeded. Trial of present appellant was registered as Special Sessions Trial No. 08 of 2007 while trial of another accused (Kalyan Singh) was registered as Special Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2007. Both the trials were tried together by trial court wherein prosecution has produced common evidence in the shape of PW1 Constable Keshav Lal, PW2 ASI Ravinder Singh, PW3 SI Ram Dutt Joshi, PW4 Heera Lal, PW5 Anoop Kumar, PW6 Kunwar Singh, PW7 Rakesh Chand Thapliyal, PW8 Daulat Singh and other Exhibits. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the both the parties and after appreciating the evidence available on the record, learned trial court was pleased to decide both the trials together and by one and common judgment and order dated 30.01.2010, thereby convicting both the accused for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each and in default, in making payment of fine, to undergo additional imprisonment for the period of two years. 4. Mr. Raman Kumar Shah, AGA with Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, Brief Holder for the State, submits that the appeal filed by co-accused Kalyan Singh, being criminal appeal no. 13 of 2010, has already been dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 04.05.2012. 5. This Court, having summoned the record of Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2010 filed by co-accused Kalyan Singh from the office, found the statement of Mr. Raman Kumar Shah to be correct. 6. 13 of 2010, has already been dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 04.05.2012. 5. This Court, having summoned the record of Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2010 filed by co-accused Kalyan Singh from the office, found the statement of Mr. Raman Kumar Shah to be correct. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has fairly stated that although both accused have faced separate trials, however, both the trials were tried together and were disposed by one common judgment by the trial court, therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances that appeal filed by co-accused Kalyan Singh has already been dismissed, this Court should not take contrary view to the view taken by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the identical matter, keeping in mind judicial discipline. 7. I find force in the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that he has certain points to be raised, which were not considered by the coordinate Bench of this Court but in view of the fact that since the coordinate Bench has already dismissed the appeal filed by co-accused, he is feeling handicapped and this Court is bound by the principle of stare decisis. 9. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this appeal stands dismissed for the reasons recorded by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 04.05.2012 in Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2010. Judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in criminal appeal no. 13 of 2010 shall be read, as part of this judgment. 10. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to court below along with lower court record.