Disposed

Likhi Ram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2021CRLA/20/1986

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal regarding conviction for theft and attempted murder, the court noted three appellants had died while the fourth was untraceable for thirty years. The appeal was disposed of without serving the purpose of keeping it pending, altering the punishment to time already undergone.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; sentence altered to period undergone; fine of Rs. 500/- if appellant returns.

Likhi Ram Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 20 of 1986

¶3

Appellant :- Likhi Ram and others Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Keshav Sahai Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

The case is called out in revised list. None responds on behalf of appellant No. 4, Chander . The appellant Chander was convicted by the learned Trial Court, vide impugned judgement and order dated 11.12.1985, passed in Session Trial No. 231 of 1984 and was sentenced to one year's Rigorous Imprisonment under Section 379/511 I.P.C. The said impugned judgment and order dated 11.12.1985 has been challenged by means of the present criminal appeal by the present appellant No. 4, Chander including other accused appellants No. 1 to 3.

¶6

However, so far as appellants No. 1 to 3 i.e. Likhi Ram, Rohtash and Chatru are concerned, they have already expired and the present appeal on their behalf stands abated, vide order dated 20.08.2019.

¶7

The prosecution story in brief is that this incident had occurred about 36 years ago on 3/4.5.1984. On the date of this unfortunate incident, it is alleged by the prosecution, that the police of Police Station - Chandpur received an information from the police informer that an effort was being made by thieves to steal away a transformer which was set up near the crusher. The location of the said transformer was also informed that it was set up near the crusher which was situating on the road going to village Rooppur. Leaving the vehicle away, the police party had reached at the place of transformer before the accused persons came there to commit theft. Then, four accused

¶8

persons came there from the side of village Rooppur. Two out of four accused persons stood down and two accused persons climbed on the pole of the transformer. Thereafter, the accused persons started to help each others for committing the theft of the transformer. When it was believed by the police party that they had come to commit the theft of the transformer, the police party warned them and at this, the accused who was standing down the pole of the transformer, shot fire on the police party which was headed by SI Bhagwat Singh Motla. Then, in reply a fire was also made with his service revolver by SI Bhagwat Singh Motla in defence. Two accused jumped down from the pole of the transformer and the police party who were in two groups arrested the four accused persons on spot in the night at about 1:40 a.m.

¶9

The police party took the search of the person of all the four accused persons. All the four accused told police party their names one by one. From the pocket of the accused Likhi Ram (appellant No. 1) three cartridges loaded in a twelve bore pistol and a torch were recovered. From the possession of accused Rohtash who was climbing on the pole and jumped down, an Aari and a Plas was recovered from his possession. An old torch in running condition was recovered from the possession of accused Chataru. Likewise from the possession of accused Chander, an Aari , a P las and an wooden strip was recovered. All the recovered material was packed and sealed by the police and a recovery memo (Ext. - Ka 1) was also prepared. At the police station Chik (Ext. Ka-6) was also written

¶10

Thereafter, the matter was reported to the police and after registration of the FIR against the four accused persons, investigation of the offence was conducted by the Investigating Officer and charge sheet against the accused appellants was

¶11

submitted.

¶12

After submission of the charge sheet charges were framed by the Trial Court against the accused appellants to which the appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

¶13

The accused appellants including the present appellant No. 4, Chander were found guilty by the Trial Court and they were convicted and sentenced to by the impugned judgment and order. The present appeal stands already abated on behalf of the accused appellants No. 1 to 3.

¶14

So far as the surviving appellant No. 4 - Chander, is concerned, this Court has been informed that he is untraceable for the last thirty years as reported by the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor, vide his report dated 17.05.2019 available on record of this appeal.

¶15

The present appeal on behalf of the appellant No. 4, Chander, is being decided on its merit with the assistance of learned AGA present before this Court.

¶16

I have perused the impugned judgment and order of the learned Trial Court and has also gone through the record of this case. After considering the evidence led by the prosecution as well as accused persons, the Lower Court has convicted and sentenced to the accused.

¶17

As the prosecution case, the four accused persons namely Lakhi Ram, Rohtash, Chatru and Chander were arrested by the police on 3/4.5.1985 by the police on receiving information from the police informer that the accused persons would go to steal the transformer and on that information the police went to road of Rudrapur village near sugar cane crusher and the accused persons were, thus, arrested by the police. It was also

¶18

alleged by the prosecution that accused Lakhi Ram even fired on the police party and a country made pistol with alive cartridges was also recovered from his possession. The trial court recording and considering the statements and evidences brought on record by the prosecution convicted accused Lakhi Ram under Sections 307 IPC and under Section 379/511 IPC and other three accused namely Rohtash, Chatru and Chander were convicted under Sections 379/511 IPC.

¶19

The learned AGA has submitted that the prosecution in order to prove its case had produced before the Trial Court two witnesses of the raiding party i.e. P.W -1 B.S. Motla and P.W. - 2 Onkar Singh. Both the witnesses had deposed before the Trial Court that the accused persons were arrested when they were trying to steal the transformer from the spot by using necessary force. There is no contradiction in the statements of the prosecution witnesses of the fact and this Court considers that the Trial Court has rightly convicted the accused persons.

¶20

After considering the submissions made by the learned AGA and also going through the record of this case that out of four appellants, three have already died and the surviving appellant Chander is reported that he is untraceable since last thirty years as reported by the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, this appeal deserves to be dismissed as no useful purpose will be served by keeping it pending. It has been pending in this Court since 1986 and to keep it further pending for ten years or more, would be only a futile exercise as there remains no chance or any ray of hope that the accused Chander who has absconded after granting bail and is untraceable for the last thirty years, would return or would think to return to his village home.

¶21

Moreover, the incident is of the year 1985 and the accused persons has suffered agony of trial and after conviction, they

¶22

have suffered the mental incarceration for a long period and during the pendency of this appeal, three accused had already died and their case has been abated. It would not be proper to sent one accused appellant to jail at the fag end of his life as the surviving appellant No. 4, Chander, would have attained the status of senior citizen by now. Since, he is missing and his whereabout is not known, in such a situation, it can not be inferred or imagined that he is alive or not.

¶23

In this view of the matter, the present appeal is disposed of altering the quantum of punishment into the period already undergone by the appellant Chander with a fine of Rs. 500/- to be deposited by the appellant in case he returns to his home.

¶24

Office is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor for compliance.

¶25

Office is also directed to send back the record of the trial court immediately.

¶26

Order Date :- 8.1.2021 LBY

Likhi Ram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Likhi Ram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharam Dutt Vs State

Shiv Bali Singh Vs State of U.P.

Parvez Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Vs State of U.P.

Jai Narain Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Vs State of U.P. and Another