English Typing Test

7.Theperusalofthejudgmentofcourtbelowwouldindicatethatithasdescribedthedefenseoftheaccusedatlengthandthecourthasdealtwithitmeticulously.Thedefensewastakenthathewastakenawaybypolicefromhishouseon21.10.1996andafterdetaininghimatpolicestationfor2-3daysandbeatinghimbadly,hewasfalselyimplicatedinthiscase.Itwasalsostatedfromthesideofaccusedthaton23.10.1996,hisbrotherLalluYadavhadgivenanapplicationinCourtinregardtohisbeingtakenawayfromhouseon21.10.1996at3:30pmandregardinghimbeingbeatenareportwascalledforfromtheconcernedpolicestationbythecourtbuttillnextdatei.e.24.10.1996noreportwasreceivedfromtheconcernedpolicestation,ratheraccusedwasfalselychallanedunderNDPSActshowingrecoveryfromhim.ItwasalsostatedfromthesideofaccusedthatanapplicationwasmovedfromthesideofaccusedforhismedicalexaminationtobeconductedinVaranasiJail,pursuanttowhich,on25.10.1996at10:10amhismedicalexaminationwasconducted,copyofreportofwhichisExt.Kha-3.Theapplicationgivenbyhisbrotherwassupportedbyanaffidavit(Ext.Kha-2)andmedicalexaminationreport(Ext.Kha-3)whichshowsthatinall,sixinjurieswerefoundonhispersonwhichwereallofordinarynatureanditwasopinedthattheycouldhavebeencausedbyabluntobjectandwerecausedaboutfourdayspriorto25.10.1996i.e.on21.10.1996.Thecourtbelowhasexpresseditsopinioninthisregardthattheevidenceadducedbytheaccuseddoesnotprovethathewaspickedupfromhishouseon21.10.1996andwastakentopolicestation,Shivpur,wherehewasbeatenandwasdetainedillegallytill30.10.1996becauseinthisregardfromthesideofaccused,asuggestionismadetotheprosecutionthataccusedusetogivemilktotheInspectoroftheP.S.Shivpur.Forpaymentofbalancedamounthewascalledatpolicestationwherehewasfalselychallanedunderthiscaseafterbeingbeatenbadly.ThissuggestionwasdeniedbyPW-3DalpatiSingh,whoevendeniedthatheknewBarsatiYadavfrombefore.ThecourtbelowhasalsomentionedinthisregardthatDW-1whoiselderbrotheroftheaccusedhasstatednothinginexamination-in-chiefthathewastakenawaybypolicefromhishousenorhadhemadeclearastowhenhisbrotherwasbeingtakenawayfromhouse,whyhedidnotresistthembutduringcross-examination,hehadstatedthatpolicepersonnelhadtoldhisbrotherthat'InspectorSahabhadcalledhim'.Hehadinquiredfromthepoliceconstables,whereonhewastoldthataccountofmilkwastobesettled.Butduringcross-examination,thiswitnesshadalsostatedthathedidnotknowwhetherBarsatiusedtogivemilktopolicepesonnelsbecauseheneveraccompaniedhimduringsupplyofmilk.FurtherthecourthasmentionedinthejudgmentthatthebrotherofaccusedLalluYadavgavefirstapplicationinthisregardon23.10.1996withaffidavit(Ext.Kha-1),whichcontainedthathewaselderbrotherofBarsatiYadavandwasknowingthefactsofthecase.Hestatedonoaththathisbrotherwasinnocent;hisbrotherwastakenawayfromhishouseon21.10.1996atabout3:30pmandwasdetainedatconcernedpolicestationandthathehadfullhopethatpolicemightimplicatehisbrotherinsomecase.Itisfurthermentionedinthejudgmentthatfromthesaidfacts,itwasclearthat,itwasnotstatedthatpolicehadtakenawayhisbrotherfromhome,sayingthataccountofmilkwastobesettlednoranyreasonhasbeenmentionedastowhypolicehadtakenawayhisbrother.TheapplictionwhichwasmovedfromthesideofaccusedbeforethethenDistrictandSessionsJudge,Varanasion4.11.1996containedthatthecorrectfactswerethattheaccusedhadadisputerelatingtolandwithhisPattidarRamKishanYadavandothers,whohadfrequentaccesstopolicestationconcernedandbycolludingwithpolice,theygothimarrestdon21.10.1996at3:30pm,wherehewasbeatenandaftertwodayshewaschallaned.Withthesaidapplication,thewifeofaccusedTaraDevihadsubmittedheraffidavitalsoinwhichshealsostatedthattherewaslanddisputebetweentheaccusedandRamkishanYadavandthatRamKishanYadavhadgothimarrestedon21.10.1996,butduringcross-examinationofwitnessesincourt,nosuggestionwasgivenregardingtherebeinganyenmitywithPattidarRamKishanYadavrelatingtolandorthatundertheinfluenceofpattidar,policehadarrestedhimfromhouse.ThebrotherofaccusedLalluYadav(DW-1)hasalsonotstatedanythinginhisstatementinthisregard.Thus,thecourtbelowhasdeductedfromallthisthatitappearedthatwhateverthecounselfortheaccusedsuggestedhimtosayindefense,thesamewasstatedbutnothingstatedbytheaccusedindefensehadbeenproved. 8.Asregardstheversionofdefensethataccusedwasbeatenbypolice,aconjecturehasbeenexpressedbycourtthatitwaspossiblethataccusedmighthavebeenbeatenbysomeotherpersonson21.10.1996orthereafterandduetothesaidinjurybeingoldthepoliceofShivpurmightnothaveconsidereditappropriatetogethimmedicallyexamined.Thewholeversionofdefensehasbeendiscardedasbeingun-believablebecasuethesamewasnotgotsupportedbyanyindependentwitnessandthedefensemighthavebeentakenduetolegaladviceofcounsel. 9.Itisalsomentionedthattheapplicationdated23.10.1996allegedlygivenbybrotheroftheaccusedwaspossibletobegivenafterthearrestoftheaccusedbecauseofthepolicestation,Shivpurbeinglocatedonly2-3kmawayfromthecourt. 10.PerusalofthejudgementwouldfurtherrevealthatthedefensewasalsotakenbytheaccusedbeforeitthatcomplianceofprovisionsofSection50oftheNDPSActwasnotmadebutthesamewasoverruledbecauseitwasheldthattheaccusedwasnotarrestedinpursuanceofanyinformationreceivedfromanyinformant.ItwasacaseofsuddentrecoveryandarrestpursuanttothedisclosuremadebytheaccusedhimselfthathehadHeroin,therefore,provisionofSection50ofNDPSActwasnotapplicable. 11.Regardingquantityofrecoveryofheroin,itisheldbythecourtbelowthatprosecutionhasacasethatfortypudiasofHeroinwasrecoveredwhichweighedaboutfivegramseach,therefore,noadverseimpactwouldbethereonprosecution'scasewhetherweightofthiscontrabandsubstancewaslessthanfivegramsormorethanfivegrams. 12.Beforethecourtbelowthegroundofnopublicwitnessbeingtakentoprovetherecoverywasalsoraisedbutitwasdiscardedonthegroundthatitisdifficulttogeta
0:00