1 HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. A. No. 66 of 2000 Decided on: 29.02.2008 State of Himachal Pradesh ………Appellant Versus Ramesh Chand and another ………Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the appellant: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer. For the respondents: Mr.Neeraj Sharma, Advocate. V.K. Ahuja, J: This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. under Section 378 Cr. P.C. against the judgment of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, dated 23.08.1999, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them under Sections 451/325/34 IPC. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 3.2.1994, at 10.00 P.M. complainant Des Raj lodged a report with the police that on previous night at about 10.00 P.M. when he was present in his house, the accused persons entered his house and gave him fist blows and kicks, as a result of which, one of his tooth was uprooted. The occurrence was witnessed by one Kishan Chand who was working as mason. On this report, a case was registered and challan was filed before the ld. trial court who tried the respondents resulting in 1.Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 their acquittal. Heard. The submissions made by the ld. Law Officer for the appellant were that the statement of the complainant coupled with medical evidence was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. The mere fact that only eye witness Kishan Chand had not supported the prosecution version was not sufficient to hold that the guilt of the accused persons was not established. Thus, it was submitted that the findings recorded by the learned trial court are perverse and, as such, are liable to be reversed. The learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned judgment for the reasons given therein. On appraisal of record of the case, it is clear that the complainant was examined as PW-5 and he had stated that he was sleeping in his house and came out when the accused persons knocked at the door of his room and the door was opened by him. Thereafter, he was given beatings by fist blows and kicks by both the accused persons and his one of the tooth was broken. He was confronted with the police statement wherein, he has stated that he was settling the accounts with PW-1, Kishan Chand when the accused persons entered his house. In his statement on oath he has stated that at the time of this occurrence he was sleeping and came out when the accused persons knocked at the door and thereafter they gave him beatings. When he was confronted by the defence with his statement made in the witness box with his previous statement made by him before the police, he stated that both the versions stated by him are correct. In case the statement on oath was believed that he was sleeping in his room at 10.00 P.M. when the occurrence took place, there was no occasion for PW-1 Kishan Chand to settle the account 3 with him or working in his house since the complainant was sleeping at that time. Therefore, the possibility of PW-1 Kishan Chand being not present at that time cannot be ruled out. A perusal of the statement of PW-5 Desh Raj shows that he did not mention as to how many blows were given to him by the accused persons. He did not state the parts of his body where he suffered injuries or that he suffered injuries on parts of his body also at that time as a result of kick blows given by the accused persons. He only stated about the injury leading to breaking of his teeth. However, in the medical evidence 3-4 more injuries 1,3,4 & 5 were also proved from the statement of PW-5 Des Raj, Medical Officer, has not ruled out that these injuries can be caused due to accidental fall. In view of the medical evidence, the ld. trial Court has observed that in view of the medical evidence on record, possibility cannot be ruled out that the injury Nos. 1,3,4 and 5 were caused prior to this occurrence while tooth injury No. 2 was caused after this occurrence. Moreover, the learned trial Court has rightly observed that Medical Officer had admitted that uprooted both of the teeth of the complainant was deceased and it also contained cavity and possibility of its extraction by simple procedure cannot be ruled out. Thus, the only independent witness PW-1 Kishan Chand turned hostile and did not support the complainant who stated that he was present in the house of the complainant till 6. 30 P.M. for taking money and till then, no occurrence had taken place. The learned trial Court had also considered the question that the police station was only at some distance from the house of the complainant nearly 300 meters . But the occurrence was reported late in the morning at 10.30 A.M., though the occurrence took place on previous night at 10.00. P.M. It is clear from the above discussion that the complainant statement’s was not corroborated fully 4 from medical evidence or the only eye witness in the case and in view of the infirmities in the prosecution case and the testimony of the complainant, the learned trial court had come to the conclusion that the guilt of the respondents was not established beyond any reasonable doubt. The said findings recorded by the learned trial Court cannot be said to be perverse, calling for interference by this Court. There is no merit in the appeal filed by the State of H.P which is dismissed accordingly. ( V. K. Ahuja), Judge February 29th , 2008 (brb)