State Of J&K vs Gara Ram And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 467 j&K

                                                               S. No.214
            HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                          ATJAMMU

                                            SLA No. 112/2016
                                            c/w
                                            CONCR No. 104/2016
                                            (Through Video Conferencing)


State of J&K                                                  ...Petitioner(s)

               Through :- Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG
              v/s<




Gara Ram and others
't
                                                 .....Respondent(s)

                 Through :-


Coram:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE


                                    ORDER

CONCR No. 104/2016

1. No reply to this application has been filed by the respondents. For

the reasons stated in the application, which have remained un-rebutted, the same

is allowed and delay of 63 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The application

stands disposed of.

SLA No. 112/2016

2. As per the prosecution case, on 29.02.2012 at about 12O'clock when

the complainant, namely, Vishwajeet Singh along with his friends Abhishek

Jamwal and Amit Choudhary was standing near Gurudwara at Mini Bus Stand,

Main Stop, Jammu, accused-respondents launched a murderous assault upon the

complainant, as a result of which, he was grievously injured. FIR No. 52 of 2012

for offences under Sections 307/326/341 read with Section 34 RPC and 4/25

Arms Act was registered at Police Station, Gandhi Nagar and investigation was

set into motion. After investigation of the case, the aforesaid offences were found

established against the accused-respondents and challan was produced before the

Court of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu.

3. The charges for the aforesaid offences came to be framed against the

accused-respondents and their pleas were recorded. The accused denied the

charges and, as such, the prosecution was directed to lead evidence in support of

the charges. The prosecution examined as many as six witnesses in support of its

case. The learned trial Court considered the said evidence and passed the

impugned judgment whereby the accused stand acquitted of the charges.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

impugned judgment as well as the grounds urged in the application.

5. The prosecution has rested its case on the statements of injured

PW1, Vishwajeet Singh Jamwal and eye witnesses Abhishek Jamwal and Amit

Choudhary. None of these witnesses have stated that accused-respondents were

the persons who were responsible for the murderous attack on the injured.

According to them, the attack was launched by a group of boys without

identifying them. PW-6 Vijay Kumar, who, as per the prosecution case, is an eye

witness, has stated that he came to know about the occurrence from the injured

Vishwajeet Singh Jamwal. Thus, his knowledge about the occurrence is on the

basis of what has been narrated to him by the injured, who himself has not

identified the assailants.

6. Form the above analysis of the statements of material witnesses of

the prosecution, it becomes clear that there is absolutely no evidence on record to

connect the respondents with the assault alleged to have taken place upon the

complainant. In these circumstances, the learned trial Court has rightly come to

the conclusion that charges against the respondents are not established.

7. For the foregoing reasons I do not find any ground to interfere with

the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial court and, as such, no case for

grant of leave to file appeal against the impugned judgment is made out.

8. The application stands dismissed, accordingly.

(SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 12.04.2021 Paramjeet Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No