Srinagar, september 26: In CRANo.41/2014 CrlM No. 393/2022 c/w Crl Ref(L) No. 05/2022 Reserved on:- 07.09.2022 titled Farooq Ahmad Vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir after hearinh a bench of HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALI MOHAMMAD MAGREY, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MD. AKRAM CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ordered as:-
1. Appellant-Farooq Ahmad was convicted for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 RPC for committing murder of one Abdul Qayoom S/O Ghulam Rasoo Sheikh R/O Sartingal, Tehsil Bhaderwah on 14.11.2002 in the wee hours, by the court of learned Sessions Judge Bhaderwah vide judgment dated 08.07.2014 and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment of two months.
2. The First Information Report (FIR) was received at the Police Station Bhaderwah at 7.00 AM on 14.11.2002, from reliable source that some unknown terrorists armed with weapons entered the house of one Abdul Qayoom at Sartingal Bhaderwah and fired indiscriminately killing him on spot.
On the basis of this report a case was registered vide FIR No.126/2002 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/460/121-A RPC and 7/27 Arms Act and the investigation was entrusted to ASI Anzer Ahmed. After investigation of the case, the charge-sheet was laid for the aforementioned offences on 20.09.2003 before the court against Farooq Ahmad, Mohd. Ashraf and Mohd. Sidiq in their absence and was consigned to records vide order dated 11.11.2003.
The proceedings were, however, revived on 08.07.2009 when one of the accused Farooq Ahmad was apprehended and produced before the court, whereas, the other two accused were reported to have been killed in an encounter with the security forces.
3. The appellant-accused Farooq Ahmad was charge-sheeted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/460 RPC and 7/27 Arms Act on 10.08.2009 by the trial court, who denied the charge and prosecution was directed to lead evidence.
The prosecution, in order to prove its case to bring home the charge against the appellant-accused, examined 11 witnesses out of 16 cited prosecution witnesses.
4. The incriminating evidence led by the prosecution against the appellant-accused was explained to him on 06.04.2012, who on his examination, stated that he had been falsely implicated by PWsParveza Begum, Shabina Akhter and Ghulam Rasool on the basis of enmity and expressed his ignorance with regard to the statements of other prosecution witnesses.
He examined in his defence, Liyaqat Ali, Om Prakash and Feroz Din, as defence witnesses.
5. The trial court, after hearing arguments and appreciating the evidence led by the both sides, held that the appellant-accused was not guilty for the commission of any other offence of which he was charged, except under Section 302 RPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment, besides fine, vide judgment/order dated 23.07.2014 passed by the court of Principal Sessions Judge Bhaderwah in case File No.16/Sessions (for short ‘impugned judgment/order’) .
6. The trial court made the Reference for confirmation of the sentence and the appellant also filed the Appeal against the impugned judgment/order dated 08.07.2014 passed by the Sessions Court Bhaderwah. The Appeal was admitted to hearing on 23.07.2014.
The Reference and Appeal had been entertained in Jammu Wing of this Court, however, on motion laid by the appellant-accused, Hon’ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 14.05.2016 passed in Cr.TA No.43/2015 ordered transfer of this matter from Jammu wing to Srinagar wing of this Court. This is how the matter is before this Bench.
31. Having regard to the afore-stated reasons, we are of the considered opinion that the trial court has rightly connected the appellantaccused with the commission of offence, of which he was charged under Section 302 RPC and acquitted him of other charges particularly the offence under Section 7/27 Arms Act in view of the fact that the weapon of offence was not recovered.
The trial court, after marshalling the evidence brought on record and apt appreciation, has passed a very reasoned judgment and the appellantaccused has failed to point out anything that could be fatal to the prosecution case. In our opinion the impugned judgment / order do not call for any interference while exercising appellate jurisdiction.
32. For the discussion made hereinabove and foregoing reasons, the appeal on hand is found without any merit and substance, and is liable to be rejected.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed along-with connected application(s), if any. Impugned judgment / order passed by the trial court is upheld.
For the reasons assigned for disposal of the appeal, the Reference made by the trial court is accepted and the punishment of life imprisonment awarded to the appellant-convict under Section 302 RPC, is confirmed.
34. Reference is, answered, accordingly.
35. Trial court record along-with a copy of this judgment be sent down, for follow up action, in execution of sentence.
|