STATE OF J&K Vs. KIRTAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State is in appeal against the judgment of acquittal dtd. 30/11/2016 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu ["the trial court"] in file No.104/2006 titled State of J&K v. Kirtan Singh and others. Before adverting to the grounds of challenge urged by Mr. Aseem Sawhney, learned AAG to find fault with the judgment impugned, a brief reference to the prosecution case, as was put up before the trial court, would be worthwhile.

(2.) On 9/12/2005, one Balbir Singh while being admitted in Emergency Ward of Government Medical College Hospital, Jammu made a statement to Sub Inspector Mohd. Arif of Police Station, Miran Sahib that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 both sons of Nanak Singh resident of Ward No.2 Simbal Camp on account of an old enmity and with common intention and under criminal conspiracy along with other respondents stopped his scooter near Govt. Girls High School, Simbal Camp and made a murderous assault on him by giving repeated blows with tokas. They were armed with guns, tokkas and kattas. On raising hue and cry, his brothers arrived at the place of occurrence. On seeing his brothers and other persons, who had reached the place of occurrence, respondents fled away along with weapons. On the basis of this statement and the report of S.I. Mohd. Arif, FIR No.52/2005 under Ss. 307/341 RPC and 3/25 and 4/25 Arms Act was registered against all the respondents in Police Station, Miran Sahib. Investigation was set in motion and on culmination thereof, a charge-sheet was laid against the respondents before the trial court.

(3.) All the respondents were charge-sheeted by the trial court for commission of offences punishable under Sec. 307/326/341/34 RPC and 4/25 Arms Act. The respondents pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution was called upon to lead evidence. To bring home the charge against the respondents, the prosecution examined PW-1 Balbir Sing, PW-2- Waryam Singh and PW-5 Paramjeet Singh. Thus, only three prosecution witnesses out of the eleven cited witnesses were examined by the prosecution. On conclusion of the prosecution evidence, statements of the respondents were recorded under Sec. 342 Cr.P.C and they were provided an opportunity to submit explanation to the incriminating evidence that had come on record against them. The respondents pleaded innocence and alleged false implication in the case. They, however, chose not to lead any evidence in defence.