news details |
|
|
| Trial court empowered to arraign person as accused: HC | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
SRINAGAR, Apr 26: Justice Sanjeev Kumar of J&K High Court while dismissing the petition filed by Mehraj-ud-Din Khan seeking quashment of order of Trial Court whereby Trial Court arraign him as accused, observed that the trial court is empowered to summon a person to attend the Court and arraign him as an accused if the evidence led before it in an inquiry or trial is sufficient to connect him with the crime.
The facts leading to the filing of this petition are that on 20th of April, 2014, Police Station, Sopore, received an information from reliable sources that some unknown terrorists had barged into the house of one Khazir Mohammad Naikoo and indulged in indiscriminate firing killing one Nazir Ahmad on spot and injuring Shabir Ahmad. On this information, an FIR bearing No.95/2014 under Section 302/307 RPC and 7/25 Arms Act was registered by the police and investigation in the matter set in motion. While the investigation was going on, the injured Shabir Ahmad also succumbed to his injuries and died. The Investigating Officer recorded the statement of witnesses and on that basis took into custody some suspected persons for interrogation.
The Investigating Officer after completing the requisite formalities presented the challan before the trial court for disposal under law. The trial court, on the basis of material collected during investigation, framed charges against accused Imtiyaz Ahmad Mir, Aijaz Ahmad and Sajjad Ahmad Malla, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
While the prosecution witnesses in the case were being examined, Khazir Mohammad Naikoo, the father of deceased Nazir Ahmad Naikoo, filed a protest petition before the trial court seeking a direction to SSP, Baramulla, to constitute a SIT to investigate FIR No.95/2014 so that the actual perpetrators of double murder are brought to book.
The protest petition came to be considered by the trial court and the trial court in the light of Statements of PW Khazir Mohammad Naikoo, the protest petitioner, and PW Mohammad Maqbool Naikoo, came to the conclusion that the complicity of the petitioner herein in the commission of crime registered vide FIR No.95/2014 was established and, therefore, there was hardly any point to direct further investigation in the case. The trial court invoked the powers conferred upon it under Section 351 of CrPC and directed that the petitioner herein be arraigned as an accused in the case after putting him on show cause notice. This was done by the trial court vide its order dated 13th of November, 2015.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed that trial court has carefully considered the evidence led before it during trial and concluded that the involvement of the petitioner in the crime was, prima facie, established. It did not pass an order of arraignment of the petitioner as an accused straightway but before doing so, the trial court put the petitioner on show cause notice and gave him adequate opportunity to defend his position. The petitioner filed detailed objections to the protest petition to make out a case for recalling of show cause notice. The trial court, after threadbare discussion and taking into account all relevant considerations, came to the conclusion that the complicity of the petitioner with the crime was, prima facie, established and, therefore, it was in the interests of justice to arraign him as an accused in the case. With these observations Court dismissed the petition. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
