Jammu & Kashmir High Court
State Of J&K Through Sho P/S Kishtwar vs Adil Aslam And Another ... on 17 November, 2020
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Rajesh Bindal, Sanjay Dhar
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
(THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE)
SLA 36/2018.
CON(CR) 28/2018
Reserved on 10.11.2020
Pronounced on 17 .11.2020
State of J&K through SHO P/S Kishtwar Applicant/appellant(s)
Through :- Mr.Aseem Sawhney, AAG
V/s
Adil Aslam and another Non-applicant/Respondent(s)
Through : Mr. Y.E.Tak, Advocate
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
SANJAY DHAR, J.
1. Through the medium of instant application, the applicant/appellant is seeking leave to file appeal against the judgment dated 21.12.2017 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Kishtwar (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court') whereby the non-applicants/respondents have been acquitted of the charges for commission of offences under Sections 302/307/147/148/148 & 149 RPC.
2 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
3 The charge-sheet arising out of FIR No. 145/2013 registered with Police Station, Kishtwar for offences under Sections 302/307/147/148/148 & 149 RPC was laid before the learned Trial Court on 10.04.2015.As per the contents of 2 SLA 36/2018 charge-sheet, on 09.08.2013 at about 10.30 pm, there was a clash between the mobs of two communities near Kuleed Chowk, Kishtwar. During the said clash, the accused/respondents fired upon the mob of rival community, as a result of which, PWs Rinku Kumar, Sunil Kumar, Sandeep Kumar and Anju Singh sustained injuries, whereas one Arvind Singh died on spot. After investigation of the case, offences under Sections 302/307/147/148/148 & 149 RPC were found established against the respondents/accused and the learned Trial Court charged the accused/respondents for commission of the aforesaid offences.
4. After completion of trial of the case, the learned Trial Court, on the basis of the evidence on record, passed the impugned judgment, whereby it has observed that there is no evidence on record to connect the accused/respondent with the crime. Accordingly, they were acquitted of the charges.
5. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant that even though the witnesses to the occurrence have not supported the prosecution version, inasmuch as they have not identified the culprits, yet, there is evidence on record to prove the occurrence as also to prove recovery of weapons of offence.
6. Prima facie there appears to be merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Therefore, a case for grant of leave to file appeal is made out. Accordingly, the leave to file the appeal is granted.
The application stands disposed of.
CON(CR) 28/2018 The applicant/appellant has filed the instant application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 3 SLA 36/2018 21.12.2017 passed by the learned trial Court. There is a delay of 28 days in filing the instant appeal.
It is averred in the application that certified copy of the impugned judgment was obtained on 28.12.2017 and sanction for filing the appeal was accorded by the Government vide order dated 26.02.2018. The appeal has been filed on 27.04.2018. The respondents have not filed any reply to the application as such, the averments made in the application have remained unrebutted. The delay, that has occurred in filing the appeal, has been properly explained by the applicant/appellant, as such, the same deserves to be condoned. The application is, accordingly, allowed and the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
The application stands disposed of.
Registry to register and number the appeal, if not already done. CrlA (AD) No. 4/2020.
The appeal is taken up for admission.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that important questions of fact and law arise in the instant appeal. The same is, accordingly, admitted to hearing. The trial Court record be summoned.
The Registry shall prepare the paper book and process the appeal for hearing in due course.
(Sanjay Dhar) (Rajesh Bindal)
Judge Judge
Jammu
17.11.2020
Sanjeev
Whether order is speaking: Yes
Whether order is reportable:Yes/No
SANJEEV KUMAR UPPAL
2020.11.21 14:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document