Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 881 of 2009 Appellant :- Asha Ram Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Radhey Shyam Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
1. Photo-state copy of the report dated 30.11.2017, submitted by Superintendent Jail, Shahjahanpur filed today by learned AGA is taken on record.
2. Present criminal appeal has been preferred by accused appellant Asha Ram against judgment and order dated 14.11.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge / FTC, Court No.8, Shahjahanpur in Session Trial Nos. 1177 of 2004 and 1178 of 2004 (State of U.P. Vs. Asha Ram) convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC to undergo ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/-. For the offence under Section 504 IPC, appellant was also directed to undergo one year' rigorous imprisonment. In default of payment of fine two years' additional imprisonment was also directed to undergo. For the offence under Section 25 Arms Act, appellant was directed to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine six months' additional imprisonment was also directed to undergo. All sentences were directed to run concurrently.
3. Prosecution story in nutshell, as unfolded in written report Ext. Ka-1, is as follows:
4. Informant moved written report Ext. Ka-1 at police station concerned, on 05.01.2004 mentioning therein that informant was sitting in front of his house and his sons Basudev, Sushil and his wife Smt. Sudama Devi were also present there. There was sufficient electric light. At about 05:30 P.M., accused-appellant along with his companion Ramesh and Rampal came there and started abusing to the informant. They made firing by country made pistol upon the informant to kill him which hit in left hand of the informant. After causing injury, all the accused ran away from the place of occurrence. Witnesses also reached there and identified the accused-appellant. It also appears that on the basis of written report submitted by informant, chik FIR was registered at Crime No. 4 of 2004, under Sections 307 and 504 IPC. G.D. entry was also made at the same time. Investigation commenced. Injured was medically examined and injury report was prepared. Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence and took the clothes of the injured and keeping them in sealed clothes prepared recovery memo Ext. Ka-8. Accused was arrested on 11.01.2004 and one country made pistol as well as one live cartridge were recovered and keeping them in sealed bundle recovery memo Ext. Ka-7 was prepared. On the basis of recovery memo, chik FIR at police station concerned on same day as Ext. Ka-4 was registered. G.D. entry was also made on the same day. Investigating Officer has also taken empty cartridge from the place of occurrence and prepared recovery memo Ext. Ka-9. He has also prepared memo Ext. Ka-10 regarding blood stained and sample earth taken from the place of occurrence.
5. Investigating Officer after fulfilling the entire formalities and interrogating the witnesses, submitted charge-sheet Ext. Ka-12 and Ext. Ka-15 against accused- appellant for the offence under Sections 307, 504 IPC and Section 25/27 Arms Act.
6. Concerned Magistrate took cognizance and case being exclusively triable by sessions court, was committed to Court of Sessions.
7. The appellant was charged by the Court of Sessions under Sections 307, 504 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act to which he denied and claimed to be tried.
8. Trial proceeded and in order to prove the charges on behalf of prosecution, seven witnesses, namely, PW-1 Baburam, PW-2 Vasdev, PW-3 Smt. Sudama, PW-4 Sanjay Kumar, PW-5 Ram Kumar Yadav, PW-6 Suresh Pal Sharma and PW-7 Dr. Naipal Singh were examined.
9. After closure of prosecution evidence, statement of accused appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which he has stated that prosecution started due to enmity. Charge-sheet was submitted on the basis of insufficient evidence. He also disclosed the specific enmity between informant and stated that to build-up the pressure for compromise, present prosecution was started on the basis of false facts. Accused-appellant did not adduce any documentary or oral evidence in his defence.
10. Having heard learned counsel for parties and going through record, Trial court found that prosecution has fully succeeded in bringing home the charges against accused appellant beyond reasonable doubt and convicted and sentenced accused appellant as above. Hence this appeal.
11. I have heard Shri Atul Shukla Advocate holding brief of Shri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned counsel for appellant and Shri R.K. Srivastava, learned AGA for State at length.
12. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that accused-appellant has served out entire sentence imposed upon him and has been released in this matter. Thus, appeal be decided at this stage itself. No argument was advanced on behalf of appellant assailing the findings recorded by the Trial court in the impugned judgment and order.
13. On the other hand, learned AGA argued that although accused-appellant has served out entire sentence yet findings recorded by the Trial court in the impugned judgment and order are based on correct appreciation of facts and evidence. There in no infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment and order.
14. I have considered rival submissions made by learned counsel for parties and have gone through the entire record carefully.
15. Since in this matter accused-appellant has already served out the entire sentence imposed upon him and was released from jail on 07.12.2013, I do not find any necessity to discuss the findings of Trial court on point of conviction and quantum of sentence as findings of Trial court regarding guilt of accused-appellant has not been assailed. If the facts and circumstances of the case are taken into consideration in consonance with the nature and gravity of the offence, sentence imposed upon accused-appellant by the Trial court cannot be termed to be excessive or exorbitant.
16. In light of foregoing discussions, this criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed and conviction and sentence imposed upon appellant for the offence under Sections 307, 504 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act is liable to be upheld and impugned judgment and order dated 14.11.2008 is liable to be affirmed.
17. Accordingly, criminal appeal is dismissed. Conviction and sentence imposed upon appellant Asha Ram by the Trial court under Sections 307, 504 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act is upheld and impugned judgment and order dated 14.11.2008 is affirmed.
18. Let a copy of this judgment along with lower court record be sent to Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur for compliance. A compliance report be also sent to this Court.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 sanjeet