STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court comprising Justice Rajnesh Oswal and Justice Rajesh Sekri, released the accused namely Mohd Rashid who was awarded death sentence by the Trial Court, appellant at the time of commission of offence was a juvenile in conflict with law.
According to the prosecution case that on August 28, 2005, on the basis of source information, that an unidentified body of a young girl of about 12/13 years of age, lying near Kachhi Chawni crossing, outside Government Girls High School, Jammu had been taken by some passersby to the Government Medical College and Hospital Jammu, the Police agency swung into action and initiated inquest proceedings, under Section 174 Cr.P.C. to ascertain the cause of death.
The deceased was identified by her brother, namely, Mujaffar Ahmad (PW-2).
After autopsy, the body was handed over to the parents of the deceased and last rites of the deceased were performed in her native village at ‘Magam’ in Kashmir. During the course of investigation it came to the light that on August 28, 2005, the appellant-accused visited the house of PW-1 at Rani Park, Jammu and on the pretext of purchasing a candle from the market, he induced the deceased to accompany him and enticed the victim to the place of occurrence where she was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse and was later killed.
Accordingly, final report under section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. was filed against the accused.
The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, therefore, prosecution was directed to lead the evidence. The prosecution examined as many as 23 witnesses to bring home guilt of the accused.
DB after hearing Adv YE Tak for the appellant, observed that it is manifest that the appellant, at the time of commission of the offence was a juvenile in conflict with law and since he is about thirty years of age now and ceases to be a juvenile, he is entitled to be released forthwith.
Having regard to what has been discussed, the present appeal is allowed in part. The appeal, as against conviction, is dismissed and consequently, the impugned conviction of appellant is upheld. However, the appeal, as against the sentence is allowed and since the appellant at the time of commission of offence was a juvenile in conflict with law, and has attained majority now, he is directed to be released immediately.