news details |
|
|
| DB acquits VDC member in double murder case | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Jan 11
Division Bench of J&K High Court, Jammu Wing, comprising Justice Nirmal Singh and Justice Virender Singh, has acquitted Sher Singh, a VDC member, who was awarded life-imprisonment by the Sessions Judge Rajouri for allegedly killing his wife and female child, as the prosecution is not free from doubts so as to hold the appellant guilt of the charges. The DB after accepting the appeal set aside the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant and acquitted him of the charges by giving him benefit of doubt.
According to the prosecution case on November 3, 1998 information was received in P/S Rajouri that on the intervening night of 2-3 November at about 8 PM accused Sher Singh member of Village Defence Committee who has been issued a rifle, shot dead his wife Ashoka Devi and female child at Garat. On receipt of information police went to the spot and took the possessions of dead bodies from the spot and recovered one bullet. After completion of the investigation challan was presented in the Court of law. The Sessions Judge after appreciating the evidence of the prosecution convicted and sentenced accused on October 20, 2004 to undergo life imprisonment.
The Division Bench in its approved for reporting judgment, written by Justice Nirmal Singh, after hearing both the sides and going through record of the case referred various judgments of the Apex Court on the delay of FIR and also considered the statement of prosecution witnesses Badri Nath and Baldev Singh which observed that the prosecution has given a twist to the story and has suppressed the original version given by Baldev Singh. Thus the prosecution has suppressed the true facts, utilized the delay to concoct a story, introduced false evidence to implicate the innocent person and then sent the FIR to the concerned Magistrate. This flaw by itself can be said to be sufficient to throw the prosecution case in its totality, the Bench observed.
DB further observed that the occurrence has taken place in a room which is exclusively in possession of the appellant and therefore, the burden was on the appellant to explain how the occurrence has taken place. The explanation given by him was that his wife and female child had been killed by the militants. This explanation given by the appellant not for the first time during the trial but the same had came on record on the date of occurrence itself, prosecution witnesses Badri Nath and Baldev Singh have deposed that the accused came to them in the night at about 1’0 clock and narrated that his wife and daughter were killed by the militants. Baldev Singh a chowkidar of the village has deposed that in the morning he went to inform the police regarding the incident, if the appellant would have been guilty then he would not have informed about the occurrence of both these witnesses in the night and instead he would have destroyed the evidence by the throwing the dead-bodies in the river which is close to his house. The possibility of committing this crime by the terrorist cannot be ruled out, so the appellant has discharged his burden, the trial court has overlooked all these material aspects of the case and has not appreciated the evidence of the prosecution in its right perspective, in the view of the DB the case of the prosecution is not free from doubt so as to hold the appellant guilt of the charge. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
