news details |
|
|
| DB set-aside life-imprisonment in Editor’s Murder case | | |
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, July-10: Division Bench of J&K High Court Jammu Wing comprising Justice Nirmal Singh and Justice Mohd Yaqoob Mir in an appeal filed by the convict Arjun Pradhan allowed the appeal and set-aside the conviction and sentenced passed by 2nd Additional Session Judge on January 22, 2007.
According to the police case deceased Chander Vijay Awaz Editor, Printer Publisher of Daily J K Dateline that accused were engaged by the deceased for electric fitting. Their work was not satisfactory and so they had a quarrel with the deceased. On the next day at about 7:45 AM both the accused barged in the bed-room when the deceased and his wife were taking morning tea, immediately assaulted the deceased and his wife. The injured raised an alarm when the neighbours came on spot; both the injured were shifted to hospital. The deceased succumbed to his injuries on the next day. The police registered a case and started investigation and after completion of the investigation challan was presented in the Court.
In the approved for reporting written by Justice Mohd Yaqoob Mir for the Division Bench after hearing Advocate Vidya Sagar appearing for the appellant and AAG P C Sharma appearing for the state and referred various judgments of the Supreme Court and observed that there is no denial the fact that criminals have adopted new tactics and new strategies and it becomes very difficult to punish the criminals when the standard of proof is different from probable proof. Appreciation of evidence has to keep peace with the present trend so that the object of criminal law justice system may not get defeated. In significant discrepancies and minor contradictions are definitely to be ignored but it was to be kept in mind that no person in the grip reasonable doubts get punished. For ignoring the contradictions and in consistencies, satisfaction has to be derived that there is only one position gatherable that it is only the accused and none else who has committed the crime. Contradiction in the statement of star witness Subash Kumari (wife of the deceased) are so grave which go to the route of the case. No doubt she was natural witness, her position of being related witness or her position of being the victim cannot be ignored. She is proper witness, her testimony cannot be discarded simply being a victim or a related witness but word of caution is there. Her sole statement in the facts and circumstances if would have been free from serious contradictions could be made basis for conviction but her statement as a whole, has given rise not only to simple doubt but to a reasonable and serious doubt about identity of the accused. Benefit of doubt in the fact and circumstances of the case should have been awarded to the accused. While allowing this appeal, DB set-aside the conviction and sentenced awarded by the Trial Court and acquitted the accused with the direction to release the accused forthwith provided he is not required in any other case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
