STATE Vs. RAJIV SAHNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 26th August, 2003 propounded by learned Sessions Judge, Rajouri, by virtue of which, he has acquitted Rajiv Sahni, Rakesh Sahni and Raju of the offence under Sections 307, 332, 333, 353/34 RPC With which they faced the trial.

(2.) THE accused were charge -sheeted for the offence under Sections 307, 332, 333, 353/34 RPC by the Trial Court vide its order dated 29 -04 -1998 on the allegations that the accused Shatti accompanied by other confederates namely, Rakesh Sahni and Raju, drove his vehicle No. 9721 -JK -02D towards. Idgah when intercepted by Mohd. Fazal, Traffic Constable, posted on duty; as the accused attempted to violate the traffic restrictions. The accused left the place grumbling and threatening the complainant to come back again and teach him lesson. After some time, the accused came along with other co -accused in the vehicle and animated with a criminal intention, drove it towards Mohd. Fazal in order to run over him, by the vehicle. Fazal Mohd,, complainant, however, when attempted to save himself, was hit by the vehicle, fell on the ground and received injuries on his nose. In sustenance of the charge, the prosecution assembled the testimony of Mohd. Fazal, complainant, Mohd. Zakar, Mohd. Shabir and Dr. Vijay Gupta, as witnesses. The Trial Court, after estimation, appreciation and assessment of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, found that the evidence is neither credible nor trustworthy, for having suffered from material contradictions, glaring discrepancies on vital points and, thus, rendered untrustworthy and unbelievable. The Court further found that no evidence, documentary or oral, was produced by the prosecution to prove that complainant, Mohd. Fazal, was detailed on traffic duty on the alleged day of occurrence at Idgah. No independent witness was examined by the prosecution, though readily available on spot. The incident is stated to have taken place after the Id prayer was over and people had started coming out of the Idgah. None was examined from the locality to corroborate the evidence provided by the complainant with regard to the alleged occurrence. It was also in the evidence of complainant that the accused attacked on the CRPF personnel, who were on duty with him on spot, but made a contradictory statement in the Court that CRPF personnel, who were present there on duty, caught hold of the accused and whereas other two confederates accompanying him did not participate in the commission of the offence. Neither CRPF personnel, who are stated to have caught hold of the accused, nor the Constable, whose wireless set was stated to have broken by the accused after the commission of the offence, were examined. Whereas, according to PW Mohd. Zakar, complainant put both the hands towards the front of the vehicle and the accused with intention to kill him, drove the vehicle towards him. He was hit and dragged for a distance of 4/5 feet. If the statement of this witness is to be believed, then the complainant should have received multiple severe injuries on his body. Whereas the medical evidence indicated injuries on the nose and abrasions over dorsum of left hand, tenderness over chest. The evidence provided by the prosecution, when taken in its cumulative, manifestly appears to be much fragile and fractured to prove the guilt of the accused beyond any pale of doubt.

(3.) FOR what has been stated and discussed above, the inevitable conclusion reached is that the appeal possessing no merit, is hereby dismissed.