STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. VINEET

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the above-titled government appeals have been preferred by the State challenging the judgment and order dated 12.03.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/IVth F.T.C., Haridwar in Sessions Trial No. 133 of 2006, "State Vs. Vineet and Others" and Sessions Trial No. 226 of 2006, "State vs. Sunil Rathi" whereby learned Sessions Judge had acquitted the accused Vineet @ Chinu Pandit, Rajiv Sharma @ Meenu Pandit, Sanjya Chandana and Sunil Rathi, under Sections 307, 506, 120-B IPC.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that on 03.11.2005, the informant Pradeep Kumar Sahdev had given information to the Inspector, Kotwali, Roorkee with the allegations that on that day at about 7:30 PM, while he was sitting in his shop, accused-Vineet Sharma @ Cheenu Pandit along with his brother Rajeev Sharma @ Monu Pandit, Sanjay Chandana and other accused, entered in his shop, and in order to commit murder of the applicant, they fired upon the informant with their weapons due to which the informant and his nephew Raghav sustained injuries. At that time Amit, who is the brother of the informant, was also present in the shop. On hearing the noise of firearm, the neighbours also gathered there. On the hue and cry raised in the market, the accused ran away from the spot after threatening the informant of dire consequences.

(3.) On the basis of this information (Ex. Ka-1), the Chick FIR (Ex. Ka-4) was lodged at 20:5 PM at Kotwali Roorkee. After investigation, the charge-sheets were submitted against the accused Vineet @ Chinu Pandit, Rajiv Sharma @ Meenu Pandit, Sanjya Chandana and Sunil Rathi, under Sections 307, 506, 120-B IPC.