MAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Kulwant Singh r/o Bhagatpur Tadiyal, Pirumadara, Nainital (not examined) wrote a complaint to Station Officer, Police Station, Ramnagar on 07.07.1997, enumerating the facts contained therein, that one Smt. Dhan Kaur w/o Nazir Singh, r/o Hathidangar, Pirumadara, police station, Ramnagar died on 07.07.1997, at 02:00 A.M. The reporter also mentioned that the dead body of Dhan Kaur was lying in the house of Man Singh (accused-appellant). It was alleged that on 14.06.1997, at 09:10 A.M., an explosion took place in the house of Man Singh, as a consequence of which, Dhan Kaur died. Deceased was aged 75 years, sick & frail and remained under the treatment in Ramnagar hospital for quite sometime and ultimately passed away. On the basis of such criminal complaint, criminal law was set into motion by registering chik FIR.

(2.) After investigation of the case, two chargesheets were submitted against the accused-appellant on two different dates. One was filed in respect of offences punishable under Section 5 of the Explosives Act and under Section 326 IPC and another under Section 304 IPC. Both the charge-sheets were committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, charge for the offences punishable under Section 304 IPC and under Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act was framed against accused-appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) PW1 Dr. Narendra Singh, PW2 Fauja Singh, PW3 Gurdev Singh, PW4 Patram Singh, PW5 S.I. Umiram Arya and PW6 H.C. Mahesh Pal Singh were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., in reply to which accused said that he was falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was given in defence. After considering the evidence on record, learned Addl. Sessions Judge / II F.T.C., Nainital, vide judgment and order dated 22.11.2003, acquitted the accused-appellant of the charge of offence punishable under Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act. He was also acquitted of the charge of offence punishable under Section 304 IPC, but, in its stead, he was convicted under Section 304A IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and six months alongwith a fine of Rs. 500/-. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, accused-appellant preferred present criminal appeal.