Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1360 (HP)

State of H. P. v. Harji

2016-07-13

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant appeal stands directed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the impugned judgment of 29.12.2006 rendered by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi, H.P., in Indian Forest Act No. 280-I/2004, whereby the respondents (for short ‘accused’) stood acquitted by the learned trial Court for the offences charged. 2. Facts in brief are that on 26.11.2003 Sh. Chet Singh, Forest Guard was on patrolling duty in Kliperi beat. He found that one second class kail tree was cut and the accused persons were converting the said tree into logs. The felling and converting of this tree into logs was witnessed by Tej Ram who was collecting dry fallen wood in the forest. Sh. Chet Singh, the forest guard prepared the damage report Ex.PW-1/A. The accused persons refused to sign the damage report. Tej Ram put his signatures to the damage report and iqbalnama. The timber were handed over on supardari to one Mr. Maghu Ram, Forest worker vide memo Ex. PW-1/C. The logs were then converted into sleepers and were carried out and stored in the depot concerned. Damage report was entered by the Range Officer Thachi. After completing all codal formalities and on conclusion of the investigation into the offence, allegedly committed by the accused challan was prepared and filed in the Court. 3. Notice of accusation stood put by the learned trial Court to the accused for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 32 and 33 of the Indian Forest Act read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 7 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded in which they pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. However, they chose to lead evidence in defence. 5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused. 6. The learned Deputy Advocate General has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. 6. The learned Deputy Advocate General has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal being reversed by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of conviction. 7. The learned vice counsel appearing for the respondents/accused has with considerable force and vigor contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication. 8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side has with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 9. PW-1 Chet Singh, the forest guard of the beat concerned while holding patrolling on 26.11.2003 at about 11.00 a.m. at Binglao DPF he noticed thereat of the accused after felling a kail tree theirs converting the same into logs. In respect thereof he prepared a damage report comprised in Ex. PW-1/A which stood signed by an independent witness namely Tej Ram. The seized timber was handed over on supardari under Memo comprised in Ex.PW-1/C to one Maghu Ram. The veracity of the depositions of PWs 1 and 4 witnesses to PW-1/A stood undermined by the learned trial Court on account of both holding animosity towards the accused. The inference of animosity reared by PW-1 against the accused stood aroused from an admission made by him of his instituting a case against the accused qua theirs subjecting him to beatings, case whereof he admits to be pending before the Court concerned. Even if an inference of the aforesaid animosity nursed by PW-1 towards the accused may not be sufficient to discard his testimony yet with an omission on his part to seize the iron saw and two axes, possession whereof he concedes to be held by the accused at the relevant time does give immense vigor to an inference of his making a false case against the accused. Also with both PW-2 and PW-5 wheretowhom PW-1 in his deposition ascribes a role of theirs visiting the relevant site of occurrence belying the pronouncement aforesaid testified by PW-1 amplifyingly accentuates an inference of PW-1 concocting the genesis of the prosecution case. 10. Be that as it may the testimony of PW-4 which stood discountenanced by the learned trial Court on account of his nursing an animosity towards the accused does display of his deposing a version in improvement of the version of PW-1 qua the latter seizing form the possession of the accused, a rope, used by them for fructifying their penal misdemeanors also when the relevant rope was not produced in Court does give leverage to an inference of in PW-4 testifying qua its standing seized by PW- 1 from the possession of the accused, his thereupon underlining the factum of PW-1 engineering his presence at the relevant site of occurrence. Consequently no credence is imputable to his testimony, he being an invented witness to seizure memo Ex.PW-1/A, who merely to settle his animosity with the accused, inference whereof qua his nursing an animosity towards the accused stands engendered by his conceding in his deposition of his previously deposing against the accused also of his holding no talking terms with them. Given the imminent display of animosity standing reared by PW-1 besides by PW-4 towards the accused, animosity whereof construed in coagulation with the aforesaid contradictions occurring intra-se the testimony of PW-1 and the testimonies of PW-2 and PW-5 also given the aforesaid contradictions occurring intra-se the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-4 does give a boost to an firm conclusion of the prosecution abysmally failing to sustain its case against the accused. 11. A wholesome analysis of the evidence on record portrays that the appreciation of evidence as done by the learned trial Court does not suffer from any perversity and absurdity nor it can be said that the learned trial Court in recording findings of acquittal has committed any legal misdemeanor, in as much, as, its misappreciating the evidence on record or its omitting to appreciate relevant and admissible evidence. In aftermath this Court does not deem it fit and appropriate that the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court merit interference. 12. In aftermath this Court does not deem it fit and appropriate that the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court merit interference. 12. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed and the judgment of the learned trial Court is maintained and affirmed. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back forthwith.