YASHPAL Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts that stem out from the instant case of patricide where the accused Yashpaul is alleged to have murdered his father named Moti Ram in the evening of 15.01.2004 at about 8.15 PM are that on reaching his home situated at Uchhapind, Tehsil Billawar, the brother of the accused named Pritam Chand found his father missing from the house. On enquiry his mother Mst. Shano Devi, told him that Yashpaul that is the accused forced his father to accompany him. He, (the father) expressed his reluctance to accompany him. Pritam Chand proceeded towards the house of Yashpaul in order to locate the whereabouts of his father. After covering some distance, he heard Yashpaul, the accused stating in a loud voice that in case any person came in front of him, he will kill him. He went towards the spot where he saw the accused Yashpaul dragging his father Moti Ram. The accused inflicted injuries on the head of his father with a stone. He raised an alarm which attracted Bishan Dass S/o Jalo Ram, Parkash S/o Jalo Ram and Faqar Ali S/o Khan Mir towards the spot. They saw Yashpaul, holding a stone in his hand and stating that in case anybody tried to intervene, he will be killed. They tried to apprehend him but he fled away from the spot. He tied the neck of his father with the string of his underwear and dragged him. Pritam Chand brought his father to his home. He was unconscious. He succumbed to the injuries on 16.01.2004. It is also stated that the accused is a vagabond and does not do any work. He (the accused) demanded his share in the land held by his father. The deceased was not willing to partition the property.He had the apprehension that the accused will sell it. It is also stated that the relationship of the accused and his father was not cordial.On 16.01.2004, the complainant, Pritam Chand, who is the son of the deceased accompanied by Gian Chand went to the police post where they lodged an oral report before the police authorities in which they spelt out the details enumerated above.On this information, a case under Section 302 was registered and the investigation of the case commenced, which culminated in the presentation of a charge sheet against the accused before the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Billawar, who eventually committed the case for trial to the Court of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Kathua. The Ld. Sessions Judge charged the accused with the commission of an offence under Section 302 RPC by an order dated 07.07.2004. The accused pleaded not guilty. He claimed to be tried and, accordingly, prosecution was asked to produce evidence in support of the charge. Prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses namely Puran Chand PW-1, Om Parkash Pw-2, Bishan Dass PW3, Dr. Vinay Khajuria PW-4, Om Parkash S/o Jalo Ram PW-5, Gian Chand PW-6, Faqar Ali PW-7, Biru Ram PW-8, Shano Devi PW-9 and Pritam Chand PW-10, to bring the guilt of the accused home to him.

(2.) The prosecution evidence was closed by an order dated 24.12.2009 of the trial court and the case was posted for recording the statement of the accused as envisaged under section 342 Cr. PC. The said statement of the accused was recorded on 20.01.2010. The accused in this statement denied the occurrence and the case was posted for advancing arguments in terms of Section 273 Cr. PC. The trial Court directed that it was not a case of no evidence and asked the accused to produce his evidence in defence. The accused did not produce any evidence in his defence and accordingly, the case was posted for advance arguments. On the culmination of the trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-. In default of the payment of fine, the accused was directed to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months.

(3.) The accused has assailed the judgment of conviction and sentence in this appeal filed before this court on the grounds, inter alia, that the judgment under appeal is against the facts, the law and the canons of justice. The trial court has not applied its mind to the facts and circumstances of the case. The trial court while recording the conviction, has failed to appreciate the evidence in the proper perspective. The witnesses of the prosecution have not proved that the accused had any role to play in the commission of the crime imputed to him. The judgment has been passed on surmises and conjectures. It is a case of no evidence and the trial court has failed to appreciate the law and the facts. In the end, it has been stated that the judgment impugned in the appeal is not sustainable in the eyes of law and, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.