Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 211 (HP)

State of H. P. v. Ramesh Chand

2017-03-20

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2017
JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant appeal stands directed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the judgment rendered on 26.05.2007 by the learned Special Judge, Una in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2006, whereby, he acquitted the accused for his allegedly committing an offence punishable under Section 3(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. The facts relevant to decide the instant case are that on 28.12.2005, an application was moved by complainant Shri Mahajan Chand along with others, namley, Meena Kumari, Rekha Kumari, Sushma Kumari, Bandna Devi, Primla Devi, Prem Lata, Phulan Devi, Subh Karam, Ranjit Singh, Rajesh Kumar, Jagat Ram, Sukh Ram, Suresh Chand, Dulo Ram and Nirmala Devi to the Superintendent of Police Hamirpur alleging therein that they belong to Scheduled Castes category. It was alleged therein that theirs girls are learning the occupation of tailoring and embroidery in the Centre Started through the Panchayat. The marriage of Kanchan daughter of Amra, who was also undergoing training in the aforesaid centre was fixed for 18.11.2005. All the girls undergoing training in the Centre were invited to the said marriage along with the teacher. The girls belonging to Scheduled castes were made to get up by the accused from the row in which the guests attending the marriage were sitting to take their meals by saying that he would not allow the girls belonging to doom and chamar scheduled castes to sit along with him in the same row. It was also alleged that earlier an application/complaint was also submitted to the Addl. S.P., Hamirpur on 21.11.2005 but no action had been taken in the matter till date. On Receipt of application Ex.PW1/A of 28.12.2005, the same was marked by the Superintendent of Police to Deputy Superintendent of Police (Headquarters) on the same day for immediate necessary action under law, who further marked the same to SHO, P.S., Sadar for registration of a case under Section 3 of the Act. Consequently, an FIR was registered in the concerned police station. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer concerned completed the codel formalities. 3. On conclusion of the investigation, into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed before the learned trial Court. 4. Consequently, an FIR was registered in the concerned police station. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer concerned completed the codel formalities. 3. On conclusion of the investigation, into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed before the learned trial Court. 4. The accused stood charged by the learned trial Court for his committing offences punishable under Sections 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by the learned trial Court in which the accused claimed innocence and pleaded false implication in the case. 5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court, returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused/respondent herein. 6. The State of H.P. stands aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal recorded in favour of the accused/respondent by the learned trial Court. The learned Deputy Advocate General for the State has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of the evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of the material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal warranting reversal 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 counsel appearing for the accused/respondent herein has with considerable force and vigour, contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation by him of the evidence on record and theirs not necessitating any 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. The alleged incident occurred on 18.11.2005. However, an FIR qua it comprised in Ex.PW1/A stood lodged with the Police Station concerned, on 2.1.2006. 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. The alleged incident occurred on 18.11.2005. However, an FIR qua it comprised in Ex.PW1/A stood lodged with the Police Station concerned, on 2.1.2006. Consequently, with the alleged incident standing reported with an immense delay of more than a month elapsing since its occurrence hence Ex.PW1/is rendered to stand afflicted with inherent taints of premeditation and concoction, whereupon, its veracity gets shaken. Even though, the mere factum of the complainant belatedly qua the relevant occurrence making a report before the police station concerned would not per se thereupon render the version held in belatedly instituted complaint comprised in Ex.PW1/A to stand stained with any vice of premeditations nor also with any stain of concoction nor would the version encapsulated therein be construable to be incredible, unless the prosecution had rendered a truthful tangible explication qua the spurring of the relevant delay. In case, the reason for the occurrence of a delay in the prompt lodging of the apposite FIR holds entrenched elements of prevarication, thereupon the inevitable sequel would be qua this Court concluding with formidability qua the belated lodging by the aggrieved of the complaint/ FIR with the police station concerned, rendering the version held there within to be in its entirety acquiring a taint of concoction whereupon no reliance would be imputable. 10. The explication which stands purveyed by the complainant qua his omission to promptly report the matter to the police station concerned stands anchored upon qua his earlier on 21.11.2005 proceeding to make an application before the authority concerned, yet the aforesaid explication for the delay which has occurred in the lodging of a report with the police station concerned since the incident occurring vis-a-vis its standing reported with the police station concerned, stands stained or infected with a pervasive vice of falsity, arising from the factum of PW-1 in his statement acquiescing qua his inability to produce the copy of the earlier complaint lodged on 21.11.2005 by him in the police station. Consequently, with the aforesaid explication qua the immensity of delay which had occurred since the occurrence of the incident vis-a-vis it standing reported to the police station concerned, constrains this Court to conclude qua the entire version held in the apposite FIR being a pure concoction also it standing stained with vice of premeditation and afterthought also thereupon its standing rendered incredible. 11. Be that as it may, the relevant records makes a disclosure qua under Ex. D-2, the complainant recording a compromise with the respondent/accused. Even though, the charge qua which the accused/respondent stood subjected to, is non compoundable whereupon the effect, if any, of Ex. D-2 would stand effaced. Nonetheless, an incisive perusal of Ex. D-2 unveils qua it holding communications qua the entire version encapsulated in the FIR embodied in Ex.PW1/A arising from a sheer misunderstanding qua the respondent/accused compelling the aggrieved children to on account of theirs belonging to the Scheduled Castes community to hence arise from their squatting position in the Dham, rather contrarily, it conveys qua the respondent/accused for easing the congestion at the relevant place, his thereupon requesting the aggrieved children to arise from their squatting position. Since no evincings spur in Ex. D-2 qua in its making, it standing prodded by any ulterior motive or its making spurring from any inducement whereupon, its effectuation may efficaciously erase the effect of the belated lodging of the FIR, contrarily absence of evidence aforesaid renders it to hold predominant play, for hence tending vigour to a conclusion qua the FIR lodged qua the incident arising from a sheer misunderstanding. 12. Aggravated momentum to the aforesaid factum stands also acquired from the prime factum qua the prosecution witnesses PW-2, PW-3 and PW-8 deposing with unanimity qua Kiran Kumari, Meena Kumar, Sarswati, Champa and Savita, Ishwari Devi, Hari Dass, Labhu, Kirpu, Uttam Chand and Bachittar all belonging to the schedule caste community, besides theirs deposing qua all the aforesaid taking meals in the same row along with members of the non scheduled caste community besides with PW-2 testifying qua the relevant place becoming congested and uncomfortable, for easing whereof, the respondent making a request upon the squatters, to arise therefrom, whereupon, it is befitting to conclude qua the revelations occurring in Ex. D-2 also attaining corroborative force therefrom. D-2 also attaining corroborative force therefrom. Thereupon, the defence succeeds in its espousal qua the purported penal misdemeanor ascribed to the accused not holding the relevant mens rea, contrarily, it arising from his holistic perception for easing congestion from the relevant place. The aforesaid evidence succors the espousal of the defence qua the purported misdemeanor ascribed by the prosecution qua the accused/respondent arising from his contemplation for easing the congestion occurring at the relevant site also when thereupon it does not hold any element of his within the domain of the charge standing proven to commit the offence charged, necessarily, hence, the acquittal of the accused was apt. 13. For the reasons which have been recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned trial Court has appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner apart therefrom the analysis of the material on record by the learned trial Court does not suffer from perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record. 14. Consequently, there is no merit in the instant appeal which is accordingly dismissed. The judgment impugned before this Court is maintained and affirmed. Records be sent back forthwith.