Early Times Report
JAMMU, July 14: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar upheld the life-imprisonment awarded by Trial Court in the year 2009 to Hassan Bhat who murdered Ghulam Mohd Dar over land dispute.
The case set up by the prosecution is based on the incident dated 23rd November, 2001 when, Ghulam Ahmed Dar lodged a written report with Police Station, Budgam, alleging thereinthat appellant Hassan Bhat has attacked Ghulam Mohd. Dar S/o Abdul Rehman Dar resident of Soznipora (hereinafter referred to as "deceased") who was on way to offer morning prayers at a nearby Mosque after having Sehri, being the month of fasting, wherein deceased had been inflicted axe blows twice from its sharp side, first overhead and another on face resulting in deceased dying on spot. The complainant further alleged that appellant after committing the act had escaped along with axe towards village Cheka Sheera. Pursuant to said report, case FIR No. 290 of 2001 of P/S Budgam, came to be registered against the appellant for offence under Section 302 RPC and the investigation commenced.
DB after hearing both the sides observed that in the present case, the weapon in use was an axe and its blow had such an impact that it caused a head injury measuring 20cmin length and 5 cm in depth thereby piercing the skull bone and exposing brain tissue. So much so, the accused delivered another blow over right eye of deceased after he had fallen to the ground. The eye- witness account states that the assault was of such nature that resulted into instant death of deceased. Appellant, therefore, in all probabilities intended to cause bodily injury of a nature which he knew was likely to cause the death of the deceased. The fact that the injury was aimed at the head of the deceased was sufficient enough to exhibit his intention.
For all what has been said hereinbefore, Division Bench do not see any merit in this appeal, which is, accordingly, dismissed and as a corollary thereof, the impugned judgment and the order of sentence are upheld. The criminal reference made by the trial court in consequence of upholding of the impugned judgment and order of sentence is also accepted.
DB directed Registry to return the record of the trial court along with a copy of this judgment. Since Appellant is on bail, his bail bond shall stand withdrawn and he shall surrender to custody immediately so as to undergo sentence as imposed by the trial court. In case of default, the trial court is here by directed to take necessary steps for enforcing the sentence. —JNF |
