Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 746 (UTT)

Jasveer Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

2016-10-20

RAJIV SHARMA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.9.2016 rendered by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani (Nainital) in Sessions Trial No.113 of 2012, State v. Jasvir Singh & others, as well as in Sessions Trial No.114 of 2012, State v. Mukhtar Singh, whereby the appellants/accused, who were charged with and tried for the offences u/s 147, 148, 307, 506 and 427 IPC, have been convicted and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month’ additional imprisonment for the offence of Section 148 IPC; they were further convicted and sentenced to undergo four years’ rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month additional simple imprisonment for the offence of Section 307 IPC; they were further directed to undergo six months’ rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence of Section 506 IPC, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo fifteen days’ additional simple imprisonment; each of the accused was further convicted and sentenced to undergo three months’ rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo fifteen days’ additional simple imprisonment for the offence of Section 427 IPC. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 4.7.2009, a first information report was registered against the accused/appellants. According to the contents of the FIR, PW2 Jagtar Singh was given beatings by the accused near Kamluaganja Steel Factory on 4.7.2009 at around 1:30 PM. Accused were armed with sticks, iron rods and swords. PW2 Jagtar Singh tried to escape but he lost his balance and thereafter, all the accused persons gave beatings to PW2. 3. PW3 Dr. M.S. Laspal medically examined PW2 Jagtar Singh. X-ray of the victim was also conducted, on the basis of which the supplementary report was prepared, wherein two fractures were found in injury nos.2 and 3 of PW2 Jagtar Singh. 4. The matter was investigated and the Challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 5. Prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses to prove its case. 6. Statements of the accused were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution and claimed trial. 7. 4. The matter was investigated and the Challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 5. Prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses to prove its case. 6. Statements of the accused were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution and claimed trial. 7. Learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani has convicted and sentenced the accused, as noticed hereinabove. 8. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Advocate, appearing for the appellant, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. 9. Mr. H.S. Rawal, learned Assistant Government Advocate has supported the judgment dated 07.09.2016. 10. I have heard learned advocates and gone through the impugned judgment very carefully. 11. It would be pertinent to mention at this stage that two trials bearing S.T. No.113 of 2012 and S.T. No.114 of 2012 were heard and tried together. S.T. No.113 of 2012 was treated as the leading case, since the witnesses were common. 12. PW2 Jagtar Singh is the injured witness. According to him, he along with his son Parvinder (PW1) had gone to Haldwani. At about 1 PM, PW2 Jagtar Singh along with one Sri Jitendra Bora, Advocate, came back. When they reached near Kamluaganja Steel Factory, PW2 was attacked by the accused. He tried to escape and raised alarm. Some ladies and children came on the spot. Accused told those ladies that PW2 Jagtar Singh had robbed the bank and thus, they were administering beatings to him. 13. Statement of PW2 Jagtar Singh is duly corroborated by PW1 Harjinder. According to him, he has seen the accused administering beatings to his father. 14. PW2 Jagtar Singh was medically examined by PW3 Dr. M.S. Laspal. He has noticed injuries on the person of PW2 Jagtar Singh. PW3 noticed fracture in injury nos.2 and 3. X-ray report was placed on record along with the supplementary report. 15. Prosecution has duly proved that PW2 Jagtar Singh has sustained the grievous injuries. 16. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused has vehemently argued that no grievous injury was noticed on the vital part of the body of PW2 Jagtar Singh. However, it is well-settled that under Section 307 IPC, only the knowledge and intention is to be seen while the nature of injuries is not of much relevance. 17. 16. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused has vehemently argued that no grievous injury was noticed on the vital part of the body of PW2 Jagtar Singh. However, it is well-settled that under Section 307 IPC, only the knowledge and intention is to be seen while the nature of injuries is not of much relevance. 17. Police also recovered the motorcycle of PW2 Jagtar Singh from the place of occurrence in presence of PW1 Parvinder Singh. 18. Learned counsel for the appellant has also vehemently argued that according to the prosecution, the accused were armed with swords but there are no corresponding injuries on the person of PW2 Jagtar Singh caused by sword. In the opinion of this Court, this is just a minor contradiction which, in no manner, affects the prosecution story. 19. Further, non-examination of Mr. Jitendra Bohra, Advocate and Mr. Harvinder Singh, has not diluted the case of prosecution. The statement of PW2 Jagtar Singh inspires implicit confidence. Prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were armed with deadly weapons and they had caused grievous injuries to PW2 Jagtar Singh. Accused/ appellants had the intention or knowledge that the injuries caused by them to PW2 Jagtar Singh could cause his death. Accused had also criminally intimidated PW2 Jagtar Singh and caused loss and damage to the motorcycle of PW2 Jagtar Singh. 20. Prosecution has proved its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and there is no occasion for this Court to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment passed by the Trial Court. 21. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. Appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are hereby cancelled. Let they be taken into custody to serve out the sentence so imposed against them by the Trial Court. 22. Let a copy of this judgment and order along with the LCR be transmitted to the Court below for compliance.