High Court rejected the State's leave to appeal and dismissed the government appeal against the trial court's acquittal of respondents in a criminal case alleging assault and attempted murder.
Leave to appeal is refused. Leave petition and government appeal are dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Leave to Appeal No. 124 of 2020 With Government Appeal No. 79 of 2020
State of Uttarakhand
… Applicant
Versus
Jakir & Others … Respondents
Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Pankaj Joshi, Brief Holder for the State/appellant.
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, Advocate, for the respondents.
Judgment reserved on: 25.7.2023 Judgment pronounced on: 1.8.2023
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
(Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
By this petition under Section 378(3) of CrPC, State/petitioner is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment/order dated 24.10.2019, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Laksar, District Haridwar, thereby acquitting the respondents from the charges framed against them under Sections 452, 323, 324, 325, 307, 504, 506 IPC.
2
administer poison to Mashruf. It was further alleged that on 3.2.2012, at about 2 o’clock in the day, family members of maternal house of Momina, including the respondents, entered the house of complainant’s brother. They were hurling abuses. Out of them, Mehboob and Sher Ali were armed with pistols, Jakir was armed with tabal , Jabir was armed with knife, while Ajad, Parvej, Juber, Sajid, Smt. Samina, Sarul, Gulam Hussain and Guddo were armed with rods, lathis and dandas. Mehboob and Sher Ali opened fire on Mashruf, however, he escaped. Thereafter accused persons assaulted Mashruf with the weapons, which they were carrying with themselves. On hearing the noise, family members of complainant, namely, Asgari, Shahnaj, Munfait, Jahida, Sabri, Munsab, Dilshad, etc., came to rescue Mashruf. Then they were also assaulted by the accused persons, who left the spot holding out a threat to kill them.
3
3.2.2012, he and his three sons (respondents herein) went to the matrimonial house of his daughter at 11 o’clock on that day. Then Munfait (PW1), Mashruf (PW2), Dilshad (PW3), Munsab (PW4) and their family members assaulted him and his three sons with intention to kill them. On raising the alarm by Momina, the villagers pelted stones from their roofs and rescued them and also informed the police and 108 Ambulance. Thereafter they (respondents) went into ambulance at 13.48 hours. Then how they would have committed the alleged incident at 2 PM. To corroborate this fact, respondents have also brought on record the information received in this regard under the Right to Information Act.
4
prosecution story and held that the FIR in this case was lodged by PW6 as a counterblast to the FIR lodged by respondent no. 3 against the complainant side.
5
admitted that after the incident, ambulance came at the spot, in which the respondents were shifted to hospital. Investigation Officer (PW13) has also admitted that respondents were shifted from the spot to Government Hospital at Laksar from ambulance. Trial court also noticed that PW1 has admitted in his cross-examination that accused persons were rescued by the villagers. Trial court also noticed that no weapon has been recovered from any of the accused persons.
6
All this raises serious doubt in the prosecution story.
7
hostile. No other independent witness has been examined in this case.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
Pr
8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the acquittal order of the trial court in the given proceedings.
Whether the High Court should set aside the acquittal of the respondents.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State of Uttarakhand
Jakir
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Pankaj Purohit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
