Court acquits two in murder case; issues notice to witness for prejury

10/04/2018

Jammu, Apr 9: Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul acquitted Nirmal Singh @ Sikki, S/o Bharat Singh, R/o Samyal Pur, Tehsil & District Jammu. and Vickey Thappa, S/o Chaman Lal, R/o Manyal, Brahamana, Tehsil & District Jammu in murder case and issued notice to witnesses Diler Singh, Ram Ditta and Ranjit Kumar, who had deposed before this Court as well as had given the statements u/s 164-A Cr.P.C.
According to the police case that on 01.06.2014, complainant Rahul Kumar made a written complaint with Police Station Domana, Jammu that on 01.06.2014 at about 12.30 p.m. he went to the shop to purchase pulses and his father was behind him, he was proceeding towards his field for farming and when his father reached near Peepal tree at the Chowk at Smailpur Nagbani, Tehsil Jammu, accused Nirmal Singh alias Sikki came and stopped his father and told him that he talks a lot against him for which he would have to bear the adverse consequences. Prior to this, also Nirmal Singh had beaten his father and threatened to kill him as Nirmal Singh had kidnapped a girl and thereafter married her and at that time, his father had helped the parents of the girl and for this reason Nirmal Singh was bearing animosity against his father whereupon, his father told Nirmal Singh he has not talked against him. Accused, with an intention to kill his father, attacked his father and started inflicting fists blows to the head of his father. He caught him by neck and threw him on the ground, thereafter took a stone and started hitting his father on the head whereupon, his father became unconscious. On his raising hue and cry, his younger sister Pooja and other persons came on spot and accused ran away from the spot in a white coloured Maruti. Thereafter, the complainant alongwith his sister Pooja and brother-in-law took his father in an Auto to Marh Hospital where he was declared dead. On the basis of complaint, FIR No.207/2014 for offence under sections 302/341 RPC was registered in police station, Domana Jammu.
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul after hearing both the sides observed that in the absence of creditworthy direct evidence, the other formal evidence as discussed above is of no consequence for the prosecution and acquitted the accused person.
Before parting with this judgment, Court observed that the conduct of the witnesses Diler Singh, Ram Ditta and Ranjit Kumar, who had deposed before this Court as well as had given the statements u/s 164-A Cr.P.C needs to be seen. As both the statements have been made by these witnesses on oath. It can also be seen that the said witnesses have taken different stands in their evidences regarding the allegation leveled against the accused as per the prosecution story. They have denied the genuineness and correctness of their statement made u/s 164-A Cr.P.C. The statement of these witnesses reveals that they had deliberately resiled from their earlier statement made before the Ld. Judicial Magistrate u/s 164-A Cr.P.C. These witnesses have totally denied the contentions of the statements made u/s 164-A Cr.P.C in which the allegations of murder have been made against the accused. The Court at this stage is not satisfied by their statement that whatever they have deposed was on the direction of the police agency concerned, as they had suffic8ient time to bring it to the notice of the higher authorities of the police or the Magistrate in case police had made them to state as per their directions.
Court further observed that it is imperative to mention here that now-a-days there is large public anger and hue and cry is being raised that the courts are not convicting the accused persons. However no person accused of murder can be convicted if the witnesses who being the material one do not support the prosecution case or give the quality evidence before the Court. It should not be ignored that the Court has to confine itself to the ambit of law and the conditions of file as well as the testimony of the witness and the Courts are not to be swayed by emotions and sentiments. There can be no conviction merely on the basis of sentiments.
Court further observed that this is very unfortunate that the above named material witnesses have resiled from their earlier statement made before the Judicial Magistrate concerned, this practice needs to be curtailed. The purpose of Section 164-A Cr.P.C seems to be defeated when the material witnesses turn hostile. The act of these above mentioned witnesses definitely warrants the action to be taken u/s 479B Cr.P.C. Office is directed to issue notice to the above named witnesses in terms of Section 479-B Cr.P.C, directing them to show cause as to why proceedings u/s 479-B Cr.P.C be not initiated against them.JNF

Share This Story


Comment On This Story

 

Photo Gallery

  
BSE Sensex
NSE Nifty