Dinesh Singh vs State Of J&K

Vinod Chatterji Koul, J

The instant Criminal Conviction Appeal is directed by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 29.12.2012 and order of conviction and sentence passed on 31.12.2012 ( for brevity ‘impugned orders) rendered by the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu in file No. 188/Challan titled State vs. Dinesh Singh and others, ( for brevity ‘Trial Court’) whereby, the Trial Court had found appellants guilty of offence punishable under Section 341, 307/34 RPC and convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years.

The said impugned order dated 31.12.2012 recorded by the Trial Court has been challenged in this appeal by the appellant, precisely on the following grounds.

i) That the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court is contrary to facts and law, hence liable to be set aside;

ii) That there are seven witnesses cited in the case and six have come in the witness box who have not supported the prosecution . They have left him alone to prove his case, as such, or sole deposition of victim is not enough to bring home the guilt of accused;

iii) That The victim Neeraj Dogra on the day of occurrence, he along with his friend P.W 2 . Chaman lal who was his pillion rider on mortar Bike JK Q 202 has not supported him and independent and impartial witnesses too have not supported the prosecution; in view of the matter conviction is liable to be set aside

iv) That Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence, the edifice on which the conviction could be based on. In absence of satisfactory corroboration from other prosecution witnesses is bad in law, hence, liable to be set aside

v) That pivot round which is the whole prosecution case revolves is the motive behind the crime, there is nothing on file to establish this forceful fact that the accused appellant has committed this crime;

vi) That the ocular evidence on record is not consistent with the medical evidence, as per prosecution case injured had been referred to GMC Jammu and from there to PGI Chandigarh, for specialized treatment , but there is no such medical record placed on the court file;

vii) That the alleged weapons of offence were never sealed at the time its seizure and it is an admitted fact that independent and impartial witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. It is a strange case where father does not come forward to support his own son, the victim, how on personal surmises, the learned court has passed the erroneous and illegal judgment;

viii) That all the injuries are simple in nature, the opinion was reserved by the medical expert and prosecution never collected the same in view of the matter the conviction is liable be set aside .

Mr. Amit Gupta, AAG learned counsel for the respondent, per-contra, has supported the impugned judgment of conviction awarded by the Trial Court. He submits trial court has not only given a well reasoned judgment, but also buttressed it with specific reasons warranting no interference.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material on record.

Perusal of the record tends to show that the Trial Court after appreciating the evidence of the prosecution and the defence has observed that evidence of the victim Neeraj Dogra who is the injured does not only suffer from any embellishment, otherwise also it is clear, cogent and natural and, as such, inspires confidence. It was observed that the details of the injuries and the mode and manner in which the same were inflicted are confirmed by the medical evidence as tendered by doctor- Anil Suri. So, there is no reason to disbelieve and discard the evidence of injured-Neeraj Dogra which has been found to be natural and is corroborated by medical evidence. The Trial Court on the basis of evidence on record came to the conclusion that prosecution has been successful in establishing that on the fateful day, accused persons along with their third accomplice Sajad Sarwar Khan (now is dead), stopped injured- Neeraj Dogra on his way at Patoli, Chowk and made a murderous assault on him with deadly weapon causing severe injuries on vital parts and left him in critically injured condition.

Thus, on the basis of evidence led by the prosecution, statement of the victim-Neraj Dogra and on the basis of the medical evidence, the Trial Court held that it is a clear case of broad day light murderous assault on victim -Neeraj Dogra by the accused persons who was stabbed with dangerous weapons on vital parts i.e., chest and stomach as a result of which he fell unconscious in to a pool of blood on spot. The evidence of the victim was supported by the other circumstantial evidence of the doctor-Anil Suri and the investigating officer, which was sufficient to prove the charge against the accused/appellant herein.

In view of the above, I do not see any illegality having been committed by the Trial court in passing the order of conviction and sentence dated 31.12.2021, therefore, the instant appeal shall stand dismissed.