IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.276 OF 2004 Pramod Singh S/o Hayat Singh R/o Nayak Got, P.S. Tanakpur, District Champawat ……… Appellant Versus The State ……… Respondent Dated: March 06, 2009 Sri S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the appellant Sri M.A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This appeal, preferred by the appellant u/s 374(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.8.2004 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Champawat in Special Sessions Trial No.6/2004, State Vs. Pramod Singh, whereby the learned Special Sessions Judge convicted the appellant/accused u/s 307 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.) and sentenced to undergo seven years’ R.I. and a fine of Rs.10,000/-. The appellant/accused was further convicted u/s 506(2) I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo one year’s R.I. and a fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default of payment of fine, one year’s additional simple imprisonment u/s 307 I.P.C. and three months’ additional simple imprisonment u/s 506(2) I.P.C. was awarded to the appellant/accused. It was also directed that both the sentences of the accused shall run concurrently. 2. Heard Sri S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri M.A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State and perused the entire material available on record. 2 3. In brief, the prosecution case is that Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1) lodged the F.I.R. stating therein that on 7.11.2003 in the morning she along with her husband Harish Ram (P.W.4) were threshing paddy in the courtyard of Km. Godavari (P.W.7). Meanwhile, at about 09:30 A:M the appellant/accused Pramod Singh armed with Basula came there and started abusing them. The appellant/accused also asked them how they have came there and he will not allow them to work there. The appellant/accused asked them to run away from there. On this her husband asked the appellant/accused to let them (Harish Ram and Radha Devi) do there work and requested the appellant/accused to go from there. On this, the appellant/accused said that he will kill her husband and with intention to kill her husband, the appellant/accused caused injuries on the head of her husband due to which he fell down. After hearing the noise, Km. Godavari (P.W.7), Anand Ram, Deepak Ram, Mohan Ram, Inder Lal and so many other people came at the place of occurrence due to which the appellant/accused ran away after giving threat to life. She alongwith other people has taken her husband for medical treatment to Tanakpur Hospital from where her husband was taken to Pilibhit. With the same averments, Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1) lodged the F.I.R. (scribed by Keshav Ram P.W.5) at Police Station Tanakpur on 7.11.2003 at 11:00 A:M. That F.I.R. is Ext.Ka-1. On the basis of this F.I.R., Chik F.I.R. was prepared by Head Mohirror Gopal Ram (P.W.8), that Chik F.I.R. is Ext.Ka-5. The necessary entries were also made in the G.D., carbon copy of which is Ext.Ka-6. Initially, the investigation of this case was entrusted to Sub Inspector Manoj Kumar Kothari (P.W.9). Later on, it was transferred to Kiran Lal Sah, Deputy S.P. (P.W.11). Injured Harish Ram (P.W.4) was medically examined by Dr. Anand Mohan Raturi 3 (P.W.6) who has prepared the injury report of the injured, which is Ext.Ka-4. During the course of investigation, the I.O. took the bloodstained soil and bloodstained paddy- straw (PUWAL) and also the plain soil and plain paddy- straw and the FARD was prepared, which is Ext.Ka-2. On 8.11.2003 the appellant/accused was arrested by the I.O. and the bloodstained Basula, used in the said crime, was recovered from his possession and the FARD was prepared which is Ext.Ka-3. Entry regarding the arrest of the accused and recovery of the Basula was also made in the G.D., carbon copy of that G.D. is Ext.Ka-7. After inspecting the place of occurrence, the I.O. also prepared the site-plan. C.T. Scan of the injured was also conducted at Sharda Hospital, Pilibhit and the certificate was issued by the Radiologist Dr. Rajeev Aggarwal. That certificate is Ext.Ka-9. A medico-legal certificate was also issued by the P.W.10 Medical Officer Dr. Gopal Shukla, Sharda Hospital, Pilibhit, which is Ext.Ka-10. During the course of investigation, Investigation Officer Sri Kiran Lal Sah, Deputy S.P., (P.W.11) recorded the statement of the witnesses and after completing the investigation he filed the charge sheet against the appellant/accused u/Ss 307/504/506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(X) of the S.C.S.T. Act. That charge sheet is Ext.Ka-11. 4. Learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Champawat committed the case to the court of Sessions on 20.12.2003, after giving necessary copies to the appellant/accused, as provided u/s 207 Cr.P.C. 5. On 02.01.2004, learned Sessions Judge, Champawat framed the charge against the appellant/accused under Sections 307 I.P.C. r/w section 3(1)(X) of the S.C.S.T. Act, 504 I.P.C. r/w section 3(1)(X) of the S.C.S.T. Act and 506 I.P.C. r/w section 3(1)(X) of 4 the S.C.S.T. Act. The charge was read over and explained to the appellant/accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 Smt. Radha Devi-complainant and eyewitness of the case, P.W.2 Deepak Ram-eyewitness, P.W.3 Bal Ram-eyewitness, P.W.4 Harish Ram-injured eyewitness, P.W.5 Keshav Ram-scriber of the F.I.R., P.W.6 Dr. Anand Mohan Raturi, who has done the medical examination of the injured Harish Ram, P.W.7 Km. Godavari Devi-eyewitness, P.W.8 Head Mohirror Gopal Ram, P.W.9 S.I. Manoj Kumar Kothari, Investigation Officer of this case, P.W.10 Dr. Gopal Shukla, who has medically examined and treated the injured and P.W.11 Deputy S.P. Kiran Lal Sah, Investigation Officer of this case. 7. After that the statement of the appellant/accused was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The oral and documentary evidence was put to him in question form, who has denied the allegations made against him. In reply to question no.15, he has stated that Km. Godavari (P.W.7) has enmity with him and for this reason he has been falsely implicated in the above-said case. In defence, he has not produced any documentary evidence but in oral evidence he has produced his mother Smt. Kamla Devi (D.W.1) and father Hayat Singh (D.W.2). 5 8. After appreciating the entire evidence available on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Special Sessions Judge, Champawat vide his judgment and order dated 12.8.2004 convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused as above. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 12.8.2004, the appellant/accused has preferred the present appeal. 9. To prove the injury report Ext.Ka-4, the prosecution has examined Dr. Anand Mohan Raturi (P.W.6), who has stated that on 7.11.2003 he was posted as Medical Officer at G.H.C. Hospital, Khatima. On that day he has medically examined the injured Harish Ram at 11:15 A:M and has found the injuries on his body as mentioned in the injury report Ext.Ka-4. He has proved the injury report Ext.Ka-4 which was prepared by him at the time of medical examination. He further stated that all the injuries could be caused on 7.11.2003 at 09:30 A:M by Basula. He further stated that with all these injuries death of the injured was possible. 10. Injured Harish Ram (P.W.4) was also medically examined by Dr. Gopal Shukla (P.W.10), who has stated that on 7.11.2003 he was posted as Neurosurgeon at Sharda Hospital, Pilibhit. He has done the medical examination of the injured who was taken by Bal Ram (P.W.3). It was further stated that the patient was 6 unconscious at that time and some part of the brain was coming out. C.T. Scan of the injured was also conducted by the specialist Dr. Rajeev Aggarwal, which is Ext.Ka-9. The plate was also prepared by Dr. Rajeev Aggarwal, which is Ext.3. On the basis of C.T. Scan report and plate he has done the operation of the head of the injured. The injured was also hospitalized from 7.11.2003 to 23.11.2003 and he was again called for further check up. After the C.T. Scan he has prepared the medical report i.e. Ext.Ka-10. It was further stated that both the injuries were dangerous to life and were possible to come on 7.11.2003 at 10:00 A:M by Basula. Upto the date of discharge the injured was treated by him and he was having problem in recognizing his relatives and he was not behaving normally. 11. Further to prove its case, the prosecution has examined injured eyewitness Harish Ram (P.W.4), who has stated that on 7.11.2003 at about 09:30 A:M he along with his wife Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1) were threshing paddy in the courtyard of Km. Godavari (P.W.7). The appellant/accused abused him and his wife and asked them not to thresh paddy of Km. Godavari (P.W.7). He (accused) also said that how they have came there. He will not allow them to work and asked them to run away from there. It was further stated that the appellant/accused threatened him that he will kill him and after that he caused injuries with Basula on his head due to which he fell down. On hearing the screams of his 7 wife, Km. Godavari Devi (P.W.7), Anand Ram, Deepak Ram, Bal Ram, Mohan Ram and Inderpal reached at the place of occurrence. Thereafter the accused fled from there after giving threat to his life. It was also stated that blood oozed out from his head which has fallen on the earth and paddy-straw (PUWAL). After that he became unconscious. He does not know who has taken him to the hospital. Firstly he was taken to the Tanakpur Hospital from where he was taken to Khatima Hospital and from there he was sent to Sharda Hospital, Pilibhit where he was medically examined and operation of his head was also done. It was also stated that if he would not have got the treatment on time then he might have die. Due to these injuries his hand was also got damaged and he is not able to work with his right hand. His brain has also got disturbed and his memory has become weak. This witness was cross-examined at length by the defence counsel but nothing has come out from his statement which may create any doubt in his statement. The statement of this witness is reliable, believable and inspires confidence. The statement of the injured Harish Ram (P.W.4) also gets corroboration from the statement of Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1), Deepak Ram (P.W.2), Bal Ram (P.W.3) and Km. Godavari Devi (P.W.7). Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1) has also proved the report (Ext.Ka-1) lodged by her in the police station. 12. P.W.5 is Keshav Ram, who has stated that on 7.11.2003 at about 10-10:15 A:M Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1) came to his house and asked him to wrote a 8 report on her behalf. Then he has written the report (Ext.Ka-1) on the dictation of Smt. Radha Devi. She has put her thumb impression on the said report. 13. P.W.8 is Gopal Ram, who has stated that on 7.11.2003 he was posted as Head Mohirror at Police Station Tanakpur. Smt. Radha Devi has lodged the report of the said incident on the same day at 11:00 A:M, on the basis of which he has prepared the Chik F.I.R., which is Ext.Ka-5. The necessary entry was also made in the G.D., carbon copy of which is Ext.Ka-6. The investigation of this case was entrusted to S.I. Manoj Kumar Kothari (P.W.9). 14. P.W.9 is Manoj Kumar Kothari, who has stated that on 7.11.2003 he was posted Sub Inspector at Police Station Tanakpur. The investigation of this case was entrusted to him, who during the course of investigation has recorded the statement of the witnesses and prepared the site-plan of the place of occurrence. That site-plan is Ext.Ka-8. He has also taken the bloodstained Puwal and soil and plain Puwal and soil and thereafter prepared the FARD which is Ext.Ka-2. On 8.11.2003 the appellant/accused was arrested by him and the Basula used in the said crime was also recovered from his possession. Thereafter the FARD was prepared which is Ext.Ka-3. On the basis of the statement of Deepak Ram (P.W.2) and Anand Ram, he has added the section 3(1)(X) S.C.S.T. Act against the appellant/accused. It was also stated that rest of the investigation was conducted by Deputy S.P. (P.W.11). 15. P.W.11 is Kiran Lal Sah, Deputy S.P., who has stated that initially the investigation of this case was conducted by S.I. Manoj Kumar Kothari (P.W.9) and after 9 that it was entrusted to him. During the course of investigation he has recorded the statement of the witnesses and after completing the investigation he filed the charge sheet against the appellant/accused. That charge sheet is Ext.Ka-11. 16. After that the statement of the appellant/accused was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The oral and documentary evidence was put to him in question form, who has denied the allegations made against him. In reply to question no.15, he has stated that Km. Godavari (P.W.7) has enmity with him and for this reason he has been falsely implicated in the above-said case. In defence, he has not produced any documentary evidence but in oral evidence he has produced his mother Smt. Kamla Devi (D.W.1) and father Hayat Singh (D.W.2). 17. D.W.1 is Smt. Kamla Devi, who has stated that the appellant/accused Pramod Singh is her son and he is weak in mind. She does not know whether her son has caused injuries to Harish Ram (P.W.4) or not. 18. D.W.2 is Hayat Singh, who has stated that the appellant/accused is his son and when the appellant/accused was arrested by the police then the police has not informed him. 19. From the evidence discussed above, it has come in the statement of Harish Ram (P.W.4) that on 7.11.2003 at about 09:30 A:M he along with his wife Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1) were threshing paddy in the courtyard of Km. Godavari (P.W.7). The appellant/accused abused him and his wife and asked them not to thresh paddy of Km. Godavari (P.W.7). He (accused) also said that how they have came there. He 10 will not allow them to work and asked them to run away from there. It was further stated that the appellant/accused threatened him that he will kill him and after that he caused injuries with Basula on his head due to which he fell down. On hearing the screams of his wife, Km. Godavari Devi (P.W.7), Anand Ram, Deepak Ram, Bal Ram, Mohan Ram and Inderpal reached at the place of occurrence. Thereafter the accused fled from there after giving threat to his life. It was also stated that blood oozed out from his head which has fallen on the earth and paddy-straw (PUWAL). After that he became unconscious. He does not know who has taken him to the hospital. Firstly he was taken to the Tanakpur Hospital from where he was taken to Khatima Hospital and from there he was sent to Sharda Hospital, Pilibhit where he was medically examined and operation of his head was also done. It was also stated that if he would not have got the treatment on time then he might have die. Due to these injuries his hand was also got damaged and he is not able to work with his right hand. His brain has also got disturbed and his memory has become weak. The statement of this witness is corroborated from the statement of Smt. Radha Devi (P.W.1), Deepak Ram (P.W.2), Bal Ram (P.W.3) and Km. Godavari Devi (P.W.7). The statement of Harish Ram (P.W.4) further gets corroboration from the statement of Dr. Anand Mohan Raturi (P.W.6), Dr. Gopal Shukla (P.W.10) and also from the injury report Ext.Ka-4, C.T. Scan report Ext.Ka-9 and medico-legal certificate Ext.Ka-10. Thus, from the facts and circumstances as narrated above, it is proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant/accused has committed offence punishable under Sections 307 an 506(2) I.P.C. 11 20. Sri S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the appellant/accused has submitted that the accused has been released from jail on 1.3.2009 after completing his sentence in connection with the above-said crime. Therefore, he does not want to challenge the conviction and sentence of the appellant/accused. I also concur with the view taken by the trial court in convicting and sentencing the appellant/accused and the conviction and sentence, as awarded by the trial court, is correct and justified. 21. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order dated 12.8.2004 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Champawat in Special Sessions Trial No.6/2004, State Vs. Pramod Singh, convicting the appellant/accused u/Ss 307 and 506(2) I.P.C. is hereby confirmed. The sentence of seven years’ R.I. and a fine of Rs.10,000/- u/s 307 I.P.C. and sentence of one year’s R.I. and a fine of Rs.2,000/- u/s 506(2), is also confirmed. 22. Let the lower court record be sent back. (Dharam Veer, J.) 06.03.2009 RG