CHANDAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18-07-2000, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 76 of 2000, and Sessions Trial No. 33 of 2000, whereby accused/appellant Chandan Singh has been convicted under Sections 302 and 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.), and under Section 4/25 of Arms Act, 1959. The convict has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 302 I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 323 I.P.C. The accused/appellant Chandan Singh has been sen­tenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, under Section 4/25 Arms Act, 1959.

(2.) HEARD learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the Lower Court Record.

(3.) ON receiving the two Charge Sheets against the accused/appellant Chandan Singh, the Magistrate committed both the cases to the court of Sessions of trial, after giving necessary copies to the accused, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge, Nainital, on 09-05-2000, after hearing the parties, framed charge of offences punishable under Sec­tions 302 and 323 I.P.C. He framed a separate charge in respect of offence pun­ishable under Section 4/25 of Arms Act, 1959. The accused Chandan Singh pleaded not guilty in both the cases and claimed to be tried. Evidence of both the cases was recorded in Sessions Trial No. 76 of 2000. The prosecution got exam­ined P.W.1-Mahesh Kumar Ahuja, com­plainant and alleged eye-witness; P.W.2-Surendra Pal Singh, another eye witness; P.W.3- Rajendra Kumar, in whose pres­ence the knife and blood stained clothes of the accused are said to have been re­covered; P.W.4- Sub Inspector Kiran Pal Singh, who investigated the crime related to offence punishable under Section 4/25 Arms Act; P.W.5- Dr. P.C. Kapri, who conducted post mortem examination; P.W.6- Sub Inspector Mohd. Hanif, in whose presence Inquest Report was pre­pared and P.W.1- In-charge Inspector Raja Ram Nagar, who investigated the crime relating to murder. The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in re­ply to which he alleged the same to be false. However, no evidence in defence was adduced. After hearing the parties, trial court found the accused Chandan Singh guilty of charge of offence punish­able under Section 302 I.P.C. and one punishable under Section 4/25 Arms Act. The accused Chandan Singh was further found guilty of charge of offence punish­able under Section 323 I.P.C. for caus­ing voluntarily hurt of Simran, daughter of complainant, who is said to have been assaulted by accused. Accordingly, the ac­cused was convicted on charges of of­fences punishable under Sections 302, 323 I.P.C. and 4/25 Arms Act, 1959. After hearing on sentence, the accused-Chandan Singh was sentenced to impris­onment for life and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-under Section 302, I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 323 I.P.C., and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, under Section 4/25 Arms Act. Aggrieved by said judgment and order dated 18-07-2000, the accused/appellant has pre­ferred this appeal through Senior Super­intendent, Central Jail, Bareilly, where he appears to have been undergoing the sen­tence awarded against him.