IRFAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C." for the short) has been filed against the judgment and order dated 17-8-2001 passed by the Sessions Judge, Haridwar, whereby the respondents-accused were held not guilty and acquitted of the charges under Sections 147/148/149/302/307 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and further that the respondents-accused Khusro, Shakil, Talib, Shamshuddin and Noor Hasan were also held not guilty and were acquitted of the charges under Section 25 of the Arms Act. A common judgment and order impugned was passed in sessions trials No. 38/2000, 166/2000, 167/2000, 168/2000, 169/2000 and 170/2000 of Police Station, Jwalapur, District Haridwar, as these were consolidated. The revision has been preferred amongst other by the injured persons.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case was that on 5-7-1999 at about 9.00 p.m. in village Sarai within the circle of P. S. Jwalapur all the respondents-accused in furtherance of common object of the unlawful assembly assaulted complainant, Shamshad, Irfan, Rustam ali, Farman, Amjad and Naushad and others by wielding fire arm, referred as, Tamanchas, Lathi-Danda and swords. The injured Shamshed succumbed to the fire arm injuries received in the occurrence. According to the prosecution, the assault was the result of some dispute pertaining to the possession of a public school in the village. The first information report (FIR) of the occurrence was lodged by informant Nasir Ahmad, the brother of the deceased Shamshad, at about 00.15 a.m. on 6-7-1999. A case was accordingly registered and on completion of the investigation charge-sheet against all the respondents-accused under Sections 147/148/149/302/307, IPC was filed on 20-8-1999. Since on the pointing of the respondents-accused named above arms were recovered separate charge-sheets were also filed against them for having committed the offence punishable under the provisions of Arms Act. All the cases were committed to the Court of Session, which came to be tried together as mentioned above.

(3.) Heard Sri Nanak Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Vinod Sharma, Advocate for the respondents-accused.