Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. Consequently, upon the statement of witnesses and MLC, FIR No. 130/2018 under Section 307/394/397/34 IPC was registered at PS Nihal Vihar and investigation was carried out. SC No. 632/2018 FIR NO. 130/2018 State Vs Jitender Yadav & Ors.

Pages 2/29

4. Site plan was prepared. Statement of witnesses were recorded. Injured Sudesh Yadav was declared unfit for statement. Doctor handed over blood stained clothes, blood sample and sample seal of injured which police took into possession and deposited in the malkhana.

Pages 3/29

weapon and Sudesh Yadav became unconscious. He stated that he can identify both the boys on seeing them.

6. During investigation, upon receipt of information from secret infromer, accused Jitender S/o Prahlad and Ravinder S/o Prahlad were interrogated and arrested. Disclosure statement of both accused persons were recorded. Scooty and surgical blade used in the commission of offence were recovered and taken into police possession. On the disclosure statement of accused Jitender S/o Prahlad, accused Jitender Yadav was arrested and his disclosure statement was recorded. He was sent to J/c. Accused Jitender S/o Prahlad refused for his TIP. The investigation culminated into filing of challan against the accused persons alleging the commission of offence under 307/394/397/34 IPC.

7. Ld. MM took cognizance of the offences under Section 307/394/397/34 IPC. After supply of documents, in compliance of Section 207 CrPC, case was committed to the Sessions Court.

B: CHARGE FRAMED AGAINST ACCUSED :-

8. Charge under Section 307/394/34 IPC was framed vide order dated 16.10.2018 against accused Jitender @ Jitu and Ravinder @ Chhotu. Accused Jitender Yadav, Jitender @ Jitu and Ravinder @ Chhotu were also charged for offence under Section 120-B IPC. Accused Jitender @ Jitu was also charged for offence under Section 397 IPC. The case was put up for trial as all the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

58. Consequently, I do not have any hesitation in observing that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against accused persons for commission of offence under Section 307/394/397/120-B/34 IPC and they deserve the benefit of doubt.

H. CONCLUSION:-

59. As a cumulative effect of aforesaid discussion, all accused persons stand acquitted for commission of offence under Section 307/394/397/120-B/34 IPC.

60. Ordered accordingly.

61. File be consigned to Record Room.