Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Mar 7: High Court today set aside the lifer awarded to three persons by Trial Court in murder case and said that unfortunately, it has presumed them guilty, unless proven innocent.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Badar Durez Ahmad and Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey said the prosecution case is extremely doubtful and is not supported by any cogent evidence. “In sum, the appeal is allowed. The orders of the conviction and sentencing are set aside. The question, therefore, of confirmation does not arise, the same also stands disposed of. All the appellants are now on bail. Their bail bonds stand cancelled and sureties stand released”, the DB concluded.
The appeal was filed against the conviction and sentence awarded to appellants by Sessions Judge, Poonch way back in the year 2012 under Section 302/34 R.P.C. for having committed the murder of Harbhajan Kour.
The Trial Court, after examining the evidence on record convicted all the three accused/appellants for having committed the murder of Harbhajan Kour by burning her in furtherance of their common intention. The accused were awarded life imprisonment and it was sent to High Court for confirmation.
Initially, the FIR was registered under Section 307/34 RPC at Police Station Poonch, which was, however, later converted to one under Section 302/34 RPC when Harbhajan Kour died in the Hospital on 15.01.2007.
DB after perusal of the witnesses in the case pointed out that Court is not happy with the manner in which the Trial Court has dealt with the case. “The impression we get is that the Trial Court had made up its mind to convict the appellants and, therefore, picked only those aspects which supported a conviction and ignored the crucial points which tended to either create doubts or to establish the innocence of the appellants”, DB recorded in the judgment.
Court said, in a criminal trial, the accused are presumed to be innocent till proven guilty. But, unfortunately, the Trial Court has proceeded just the other way around by presuming them to be guilty, unless proven innocent.
That is not how the criminal jurisprudence, court said, has evolved in this country. “Trial Courts must never forget this important principle of criminal jurisprudence, particularly, because life and liberty of individuals are involved”, court said
Court further added “we find that the appellants are getting an order of acquittal today after having spent eleven years, seven years and nine years in custody. This could have been prevented if the Trial Court had analyzed the facts and evidence on record in the correct perspective”.
Court after hearing the counsel for the parties and examining the evidence on record threadbare, said appeal deserves to be allowed and obviously, the question of confirmation of the sentence would not arise. “This is so because sufficient doubt exists in our mind so as to give the benefit to the appellants”, DB said
Court said that in the present case, the only dying declaration or statement which can be said to have been established by uncontroverted evidence is the first statement made by witnesses in presence of each other, which clearly points to the fire being accidental and not intentional.
Follow our WhatsApp channel