LAWS(ALL)-2016-1-373

YASEEN Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On January 27, 2016
YASEEN Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 8.1.2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. court no. 5, Hardoi in S.T. No. 857 of 1999 convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 332 I.P.C. for a period of two and half years' R.I. and fine of rupees five hundred and in default of payment of fine further six months' imprisonment.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 14.8.1998, Constable 615 Krishna Bahadur Singh and Constable 121 Bindra Prasad were present at the police station. At about 10.15 a.m., munsi Samar Bahadur Singh, who was present in the office, stated that information has been received that accused appellant Yaseen son of Maikoo, resident of Bahdeen, police station Kachhauna who had been debarred from the district under Goonda Act, was sitting at the official residence near the railway station. On this information, Station Officer sent Constable 615 Krishna Bahadur Singh and Constable 121 Bindra Prasad to arrest him. Both these constables reached at railway station, mukhbir, who had accompanied, pointed out towards appellant Yaseen, who was sitting in front of the house of Shreepal. Both the Constables went near Yaseen and tried to arrest him and either side indulged in scuffle. Police personnel received injuries. However, both the Constables overpowered and arrested Yaseen at 11.00 a.m. At the time of arrest, crowd had gathered. Nobody came near due to fear of appellant Yaseen. After arrest, the name of the appellant was inquired who told his name as Yaseen son of Maikoo resident of Bahdeen, police station Kachchauna. On his personal search, 20 'puriya' of smack like powder was recovered from the right pocket of his pant. From the crowd, none came forward to stand as a witness due to fear. Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act was duly complied. The recovered contraband was sealed and legal requirements were carried out.

(3.) Two cases were instituted against the appellant; one as case crime no. 144 of 1998 under Sections 332, 353 I.P.C. and another as case crime no. 145 of 1998 under Section 21 of N.D.P.S. Act.