Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2286 (HP)

State of H. P. v. Tej Ram

2016-10-27

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (Oral). The instant appeal stands directed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur District at Nahan rendered on 31.0.3.2008 in Cr. Case No. 62/2 of 2006, whereby, he acquitted the accused/respondents herein for theirs allegedly committing offences punishable under Sections 341, 325, 323 and 506 (1) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The facts relevant to decide the instant case are that on 16.06.2006 at about 7.00 p.m. at village Meerpur Kotla, the accused in furtherance of common intention wrongfully restrained the complainant Smt. Debo Devi from proceeding to the direction, to which she has right to move and the accused in furtherance of common intention, caused simple hurt to complainant Smt. Debo Devi and her daughter while Smt. Debo Devi also sustained grievous injuries due to the blows of danda given by the accused and the accused also criminally intimidated the complainant and her family members with dire consequences, with a view to raise alarm on their persons. Smt. Devi Devi was rescued by her husband Anup Singh from the clutches of the accused and the accused also gave beatings to him. The complainant lodged FIR Ex.PW1/A at P.S.Nahan and during the investigation, the police visited the spot and the accused produced three dandas, which were taken into possession vide recovery memos Ex.PW1/B, Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D. The police also took into possession blood stained shirt of injured vide memo Ex.PW2/A. The complainant Smt. Debo Devi was medically examined at R.H., Nahan and her MLC is Ex.PW9/A and Kumari Pinki was also medically examined and her MLC Ex.PW10/A was obtained by the IO and the IO during the investigation prepared site plan Ex.PW12/A and recorded the statements of the witnesses. He also arrested the accused and later on released them on bail. 3. On conclusion of investigations, into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed in the Court. 4. The accused were charged by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325 and 506 (1)read with Section 34 of the IPC. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses. 4. The accused were charged by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325 and 506 (1)read with Section 34 of the IPC. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded by the trial Court, in which they claimed innocence. However, they did not lead any defence evidence. 5. On an appraisal of evidence on record, the learned trial Court, returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused/respondents herein. 6. The State of H.P. is aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court. 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 misappreciation by it 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 standing replaced by findings of conviction. 7. On the other hand, the learned defence counsel has with considerable force and vigour, 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. With the user of dandas, Ex.P-1, P-2 and P-3, recovered under memos Ex.PW1/B to Ex.PW1/D, the accused/respondents are alleged to commit offences constituted in the relevant FIR comprised in Ex.PW1/A. The reflections in the apposite MLCs respectively comprised in Ex. PW9/A besides in Ex.PW10/A also the factum of the blood stained shirt of Debo Devi taken into possession under memo Ex.PW 2/A, stand contended by the learned Deputy Advocate General to make a vivid display qua hence the prosecution succeeding in proving its case against them. He contends qua the discarding by the learned trial Court of the aforesaid evidentiary material has sequeled gross perversity seeping qua its verdict arising from the factum of its not appraising their probative worth vis-a-vis the prosecution case. 10. He contends qua the discarding by the learned trial Court of the aforesaid evidentiary material has sequeled gross perversity seeping qua its verdict arising from the factum of its not appraising their probative worth vis-a-vis the prosecution case. 10. The anvil of the prosecution version is in its entirety hinged upon the deposition of PW-1, who lodged FIR Ex.PW1/A. She in her testification comprised in her examination-inchief has therein unveiled a version in corroboration to the embodiments occurring in Ex.PW1/A, yet her testification comprised in her cross-examination belittles the credibility of her testification occurring in her examination-in-chief, conspicuously, when she therewithin testifies qua a civil litigation inter se her and accused/respondent Tej Ram pending before the Civil Court concerned. Also with hers making a communication therein qua after the institution of the aforesaid suit against her by accused/respondent Tej Ram, her family members also she vowing to teach a lesson to the accused. She has also pronounced therein of the instant complaint standing reared by a vendetta nursed by her vis-a-vis the accused, vendetta whereof arising from the factum aforesaid. The aforesaid communications existing in the cross-examination of the complainant graphically display of the FIR comprised in Ex.PW 1/A being contrived for falsely implicating the accused. Even otherwise, the testification of PW-1 qua the ill-fated occurrence as held in her examination-in-chief is bereft of probative worth in the face of an injured child witness PW-2 in her testification contradicting the testification of her mother, the complainant herein, who deposed as PW-1, wherein PW-2 has ascribed an incriminatory role vis-a-vis accused Tej Ram, whereas, obviously she has excluded the participation of Mito Devi and Tarsem Singh in the occurrence wherefrom the ensuing sequel is qua the entire genesis of the prosecution version testified by PW-1, wherein she has ascribed an incriminatory role also to accused No.2 and 3 in the alleged occurrence losing its credibility. 11. 11. Be that as it may, PW-3 in his testification qua the occurrence comprised in his examination-in-chief has deposed in corroboration to the deposition of PW-1, his wife, nonetheless his deposition occurring therein is rid of sanctity in the evident face of his in his cross-examination to which he stood subjected to by the learned defence counsel unveiling the factum of his making immense improvements vis-a-vis his previous statement recorded in writing, improvements whereof stand comprised in the factum of his testifying of the accused chasing him with dandas whereupon he ingressed his house to obviate the assault assayed to be perpetrated on his person by the accused also stands constituted in his testifying qua blood oozing from the leg of his wife besides hers sustaining fracture on her arm, testifications whereof remained unembodied in his previous statement recorded in writing. Resultantly, when the aforesaid testifications rendered by PW-1 visibly stand stained with a vice of embellishments besides improvements vis-a-vis his previous statement recorded in writing, his testification in purported corroboration to the testification of his wife, PW-1, loses credibility. In aftermath, the recovery of weapons of offence Exts. P-1, P-2 and P-3 under memos Ext.PW-1/B to Ext.PW-1/D hold no efficacy nor also the reflections in the apposite MLCs comprised in Ext.PW-9/A and Ext.PW-10/A hold no probative sinew. Consequently, on anvil thereof, the accused cannot be concluded to stand connected with the offences for which they stood charged. 12. For the reasons which have been recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned trial Court below has appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner apart therefrom the analysis of material on record by the learned trial Court does not suffer from any perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record, rather it has aptly appreciated the material available on record. 13. Consequently, I find no merit in the instant appeal which is accordingly dismissed and the judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court is affirmed in favour of the accused/respondents herein. Records be sent back forthwith.