LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-748

PRASANN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On May 22, 2009
PRASANN KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) THIS is an appeal at the behest of accused Prasann Kumar against the judgment and order dated 14.8.2003 convicting him to undergo life imprisonment under Sections 302, 364, I.P.C. and 2 years R.I. under Section 377/511, I.P.C. and 2 years R.I. under Section 201, I.P.C. in S.T. No. 896 of 2001. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. THIS is a case of circumstantial evidence. Single accused is named in the first information report which was registered on 1.9.2001 at 4.00 a.m. Police Station, Deoband, district Saharanpur situated at a distance of 6 kilometers from the place of occurrence. The first informant is Praveen Kumar, brother of the deceased Sonu aged about 10 years. Initially an information was given to the police station about missing of the deceased and the report was only for an offence under Section 364, I.P.C. but subsequently after the recovery of the dead body at the pointing out of the accused, the case was registered under Sections 364, 302, 201, I.P.C. at Case Crime No. 528 of 2001.

(3.) THE first submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that inquest commenced at 11.00 a.m. and was completed at 1.00 p.m. Perusal of the inquest report shows that crime number as well as the offences under Sections 364, 302 and 201, I.P.C, are clearly mentioned at the top, whereas P.W. 6 S.I. Gajendra Singh who was the Investigating Officer, admits in his cross-examination that the first information report was registered under Section 364, I.P.C. and investigation commenced for the said offence. No fard was prepared when the accused was arrested, neither any site plan was prepared from where the accused is alleged to have been taken into custody. THE confessional statement has also not been recorded separately. Neither he tried to get an endorsement by taking a signature of the accused on the said confessional statement. After completing all these formalities, he reached the police station at 2.00 p.m. and it was at that time while making entries in the General Diary, the offence under Sections 302 and 201, I.P.C. were also added.