Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 485 (HP)

State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar

2016-04-13

RAJIV SHARMA, SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. This appeal is instituted at the instance of the State against the judgment dated 17.7.2008, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, H.P. in Sessions Case No. 02/2005, whereby the respondents-accused (hereinafter referred to as accused), who were charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 341, 332, 333, 353 & 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, have been acquitted. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that complainant Ranbir Singh was serving as driver in Himachal Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ?HRTC? in short), Una. On 25.5.2003, at about 6:30 AM, the complainant started bus No. HP-20-9416 from Bus Stand Una to Bangana via Talmehra. When the bus reached near the point known as Purana Hospital Chowk, Una, the complainant overtook a bus known as Devi Darshan bearing registration No. HP-19-5555, which was moving slowly ahead of the bus being driven by the complainant. As soon as the bus being driven by the complainant reached the Old Bus Stand, Una, the driver of the Devi Darshan bus overtook the bus of the HRTC and halted the same diagonally in front of the bus being driven by the complainant. Thereafter, the accused Sanjay Kumar and Suresh Kumar, who were driver and conductor of Devi Darshan bus along with one another person got down from that bus. Accused Sanjay Kumar opened the driver's window of the HRTC bus and thereafter all the three accused persons pulled the complainant down from the seat and accused Suresh Kumar administered fist blow on the nose and other parts of his body. Thereafter, accused Sanjay Kumar and Chaman Lal also gave fist blows to the complainant. The complainant was saved from the clutches of the accused by the conductor of the bus and some other persons who gathered on the spot. Accused Sanjay Kumar also threatened the complainant by saying ?you consider yourself a faithful worker of the HRTC, you have been saved today and if ever you tried to take panga (tried to affront) with us, you will not be spared?. The conductor of the HRTC bus informed the Traffic Manager, Una over telephone, who came on the spot and the police was informed. The accused persons ran from the spot. The conductor of the HRTC bus informed the Traffic Manager, Una over telephone, who came on the spot and the police was informed. The accused persons ran from the spot. The police reached the old Bus Stand, Una and recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 154 Cr.P.C., on the basis of which FIR No. 313 of 2003 dated 25.5.2003 was recorded. The clothes of the complainant were taken into possession vide recovery memo. On completion of the investigation, challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as 14 witnesses. The accused were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. According to them, they were falsely implicated. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal. 4. Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Dy. Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved the case against the accused persons. On the other hand, Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate has supported the judgment of the trial Court dated 17.7.2008. 5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for both the sides and have also gone through the judgment and records of the case carefully. 6. PW-1 Ranbir Singh testified that on 25.5.2003, he was driving HRTC bus bearing No. HP-20-9416 from Una towards Bangana. He started the bus from Bus Stand, Una at about 6:30 AM. When he reached the point known as Purana Hospital Chowk, Una, he overtook a bus known as Devi Darshan bearing registration No. HP-19-5555, which was moving slowly ahead of the bus being driven by him. When his bus reached the Old Bus Stand, Una, the driver of the Devi Darshan bus overtook his bus and halted the same diagonally in front of the bus being driven by him. Thereafter, accused Sanjay Kumar and co-accused Suresh Kumar, who were driver and conductor of Devi Darshan bus, respectively, along with one another person alighted from that bus. Accused Sanjay Kumar opened the driver's window of his bus and thereafter all the three accused persons pulled him down from the seat and accused Suresh Kumar administered fist blow on the nose and other parts of his body. Thereafter, accused Sanjay Kumar and Chaman Lal also gave fist blows to him. Accused Sanjay Kumar opened the driver's window of his bus and thereafter all the three accused persons pulled him down from the seat and accused Suresh Kumar administered fist blow on the nose and other parts of his body. Thereafter, accused Sanjay Kumar and Chaman Lal also gave fist blows to him. He was saved from the clutches of the accused by the conductor of the HRTC bus and some other persons who had gathered on the spot. Accused Sanjay Kumar and co-accused Suresh Kumar also threatened him. The conductor of his bus informed the Traffic Manager, Una over telephone, who came on the spot and the police was informed. The accused persons ran from the spot. The police reached the old Bus Stand, Una and recorded his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. He was medically examined and MLR is Mark ?A?. The police took into possession his clothes. In his cross-examination, he admitted that there were only 2-3 passengers in his bus. He did not recollect their names and addresses. There were about 5-6 passengers in the Devi Darshan bus. The occurrence had lasted for about 15-20 minutes. The Traffic manager had reached the spot about 10 minutes after he was rung up by the conductor Satish Kumar. He stayed at the spot for about 15-20 minutes. The police also arrived in the meantime. Most of the shops remain closed in the morning. He also admitted that the shop of a confectioner was open at the time the bus driven by him arrived at old Bus Stand, Una. He also admitted that a hotel was also open at that time. The traffic jam lasted for about half an hour. The jam was got cleared by the police. 7. The statement of PW-1 Ranbir Singh has been corroborated by PW-2 Satish Kumar, the manner in which the incident has taken place. He was conductor of the HRTC bus. In his cross-examination, he also admitted that some of the shops at the old bus stop were opened when the bus reached there. The occurrence lasted for about 4-5 minutes. The Traffic Manager reached the spot about 5 minutes after the occurrence. The police also arrived at the spot about 5-10 minutes after the occurrence. He also admitted that the traffic police personnel is deployed at the old Bus Stand, Una. 8. PW-3 Manvir Singh is another employee of the HRTC. The occurrence lasted for about 4-5 minutes. The Traffic Manager reached the spot about 5 minutes after the occurrence. The police also arrived at the spot about 5-10 minutes after the occurrence. He also admitted that the traffic police personnel is deployed at the old Bus Stand, Una. 8. PW-3 Manvir Singh is another employee of the HRTC. He was coming from his house towards the Bus Stand Una to join his duties. He saw that Devi Darshan bus No. HP-19-5555 was parked diagonally in front of the bus of HRTC No. HP-20-9416. He also saw accused persons administering beatings to complainant Ranbir Singh, driver of HRTC bus with fisticuffs. He along with Satish Kumar, conductor of the HRTC bus and some other people intervened and rescued the complainant from the clutches of the accused persons. In his cross-examination, he admitted that there were shops at the old Bus Stand, Una. No shop except that of one Rana was open at the time of occurrence. He also admitted that the police arrived about 5 minutes after the arrival of the Traffic Manager. 9. PW-4 Raj Kumar Pathak deposed that he was serving as Traffic Manager at the HRTC Depot, Una since May, 2002. On 25.5.2003, he was informed by Satish Kumar, the conductor of HRTC bus No. HP-20-9416 that a Devi Darshan bus bearing No. HP-19- 5555 was stopped diagonally in front of their bus and that driver of the bus, complainant Ranbir Singh was beaten up by the accused. Thereafter, he informed the police and rushed to the spot. 10. PW-5 Dr. Manoj Kapoor gave his opinion on x-ray. According to him, there was fracture of the nasal bone. 11. PW-13 HC Subhash Chand testified that on 25.5.2003 at around 7:15 am, he was informed on telephone by the Officer In-charge, Bus Stand, Una that HRTC bus was intercepted by a private bus. He reached the spot alongwith Const. Sher Singh. The passengers of the HRTC bus were stated to have alighted therefrom and gone away. The complainant had received injuries. His statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was recorded vide Ext. PA. He also admitted that HRTC work shop was about 200 yards from the new Bus Stand, Una. He also admitted that a traffic police Constable always remains present at the old Bus Stand, Una. The complainant had received injuries. His statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was recorded vide Ext. PA. He also admitted that HRTC work shop was about 200 yards from the new Bus Stand, Una. He also admitted that a traffic police Constable always remains present at the old Bus Stand, Una. He also admitted that there are number of shops in close proximity to the old Bus Stand, Una. He further admitted that all confectionery shops near Bus Stand open at 5:00 AM. 12. PW-14 Dr. C.S.Chauhan has medically examined the complainant. He has issued MLR vide Ext. PW-14/A. The nature of injury No. 1 was opined to be grievous. The injury was caused by blunt weapon. The nature of injuries No. 2 & 3 was simple. 13. The incident has taken place at about 7:15 am on 25.5.2003. It has come in the evidence that there were many shops near the site of occurrence. PW-13 HC Subhash Chand, in his cross-examination, has categorically admitted that HRTC work shop was about 200 yards from the new Bus Stand, Una. He also admitted that a traffic police Constable always remains present at the old Bus Stand, Una. He also admitted that there are number of shops in close proximity to the old Bus Stand, Una and all confectionery shops near Bus Stand open at 5:00 AM. 14. The prosecution has not joined any independent witnesses, though available. There were passengers in both the buses. None of the passengers either from the HRTC bus or from the private pus have been cited as witnesses. The traffic police personnel was also available on the spot, however, he was not examined. The HRTC work shop was about 200 yards from the new Bus Stand, Una. The witnesses produced by the prosecution are from HRTC. The failure of the prosecution to join any of the independent witnesses, though available, creates doubt in the story of the prosecution. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the accused. The view adopted by the learned trial Court cannot be termed as perverse. There is no occasion for us to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the learned trial Court dated 17.7.2008. 15. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed.