Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In this case of Awadhesh Kumar Versus State of U.P. & Anr, in this an appeal was filed by the appellant in the supreme court challenging the decision of the Allahabad High Court. In this case the complainant Awadesh Kumar’s mother Smt. Lajjawati was making complaint to Ravinder Verma (original accused No. 1 respondent No. 2 herein) regarding bad behaviour of his nephew Vishun Kumar. At that time, Sudhir @Ramaudh, Rakesh, Vishun Kumar were also present there. When the mother of the complainant was making complaint, meanwhile all the above named four persons started quarrelling with his mother. In the meanwhile, the brother of the complainant Anoop Kumar and his father Ram Lakhan also reached there. Then all the four accused persons were asked by these persons to go away from there. Feeling annoyed by this conduct of the complainant side, Vishnu Kumar, Rakesh Kumar and Sudhir @ Ramaudh exhorted Ravinder to fire at the deceased, Ravinder, with his country made pistol fired on the complainant’s mother. The complainant along with other persons took his injured mother to police station and lodged the FIR. That, initially the case was registered under Section 307, 504, 506/34 IPC, however, subsequently on the death of Smt. Lajjawati on 11.07.2006, the case was converted into one under Section 302 IPC. After investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the chargesheet against all the four named accused persons, including respondent No. 2 herein. All of them were tried by the learned Court of Sessions for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
The learned Trial Court convicted respondent No. 2 herein (Ravinder) as the specific role of fire on the deceased was attributed to him. The learned Trial Court acquitted the other three accused persons. The Respondent No.2 herein (original accused no.1) feeling dissatisfied with the order of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court convicting him, preferred Criminal Appeal before the High Court. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has modified the conviction from that of punishable under Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part 1 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with a fine of 20,000/. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court modifying the conviction from Section 302 IPC to 304 Part 1 IPC, thereby the appellant filed an appeal in the supreme court, the supreme court after hearing the case held “the present appeal succeeds. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court modifying the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC to that of Section 304 Part I IPC is hereby quashed and set aside. The judgment passed by the learned Trial Court convicting the respondent No. 2 – original accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC is hereby restored. Now, respondent No. 2 – original accused No. 1 to surrender before the concerned Court to undergo the sentence as imposed by the learned Trial Court, within a period of three months from today.”
86540
103860
630
114
59824