Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 24: Division Bench of High Court comprising Justice Hasnain Massodi and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat today upheld the life-imprisonment awarded by the then Sessions Judge Ramban to accused Mohd Baksh, son of Salah Mohd of Gool, who was facing trial in murder of his real brother’s wife over a dispute of land.
While upholding the life-imprisonment, Division Bench directed Director General of Police for appropriate action against the Investigation Officer, Abdul Majid, the then Assistant Sub Inspector.
“On appreciation of direct evidence of prosecution witness it is difficult to attach any importance to the version of Investigation Officer to the effect that the room where the body of deceased was lying was locked when he visited the spot on the following day of occurrence”, the DB said, adding “it is unfortunate that the Investigation Officer has made departure from the prosecution version on many aspects of the case which speaks volumes about his professional efficiency”.
“The Investigation Officer has claimed in cross-examination that prosecution witness Farid Ahmed had filed a written complaint with him which he had sent to the Police Station along with his docket for registration of case”, the DB said, adding “the statement appears to have been made oblivious of the fact that the case had been registered on the basis of statement of Farid Ahmed recorded by the Investigating Officer Abdul Majid at Bhimberbas on 21.9.2005 and not on the basis of a written report filed before him by Farid Ahmed”.
“No lapse in investigation has been pointed out. A closer look at the testimony of Investigating Officer shows that he has cared least to scrupulously depose about the facts coming to his knowledge and made fool of himself by making ridiculous statements in cross- examination on several aspects of investigation. At one stage, he deposed that informant Farid Ahmed had made a statement before him and he had written the docket for registration of case on the basis of such statement but he had not recorded the statement”, the DB further observed, adding “this is followed by another version that Farid Ahmed had filed a written report in regard to occurrence and he had dispatched the same to Police Station along with his docket but the same did not form part of record”.
“The conduct of Investigating Officer in witness-box speaks volumes about his sense of responsibility. Be that as it may, it is well settled that any irregularity or illegality in investigation cannot be permitted to reflect upon the case and no benefit can be derived by accused from such irregularity or illegality”, the DB said, adding “it is shocking that the Investigating Officer has not stood on a firm ground while deposing in the case and despite there being no flaw in investigation; he has blown hot and cold for reasons unknown. The officers dealing with the investigation of sensitive cases like murder cannot be permitted to behave in such a manner and conduct themselves in an irresponsible fashion as has been done by the Investigating Officer in the instant case”.
“Investigating Officer Abdul Majid needs to deal with for his delinquent conduct”, the DB said.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel