IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.: 519/1996 Reserved on: 26.4.2010 Decided on: 14.5. 2010 _____________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh. …Appellant. Versus Sinku Ram. …Respondent. _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Per Rajiv Sharma, J. State has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 15.5.1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur in Sessions Trial No. 5-R/7 of 1995/92, whereby respondent charged with and tried for offences punishable under sections 353, 332, 333 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, has been acquitted. 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that complainant Shyama Nand (PW-1) was working as Block Officer in Tranda 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Block in the year 1991. His house was adjacent to the Block Office. At about 1.30/2.00 P.M., accused entered the office of PW- 1 and gave blow with iron pipe on the head of the complainant. The length of the pipe was about five feet. PW-1 Shyama Nand fell down and the accused sat on his chest and tried to give blow with the knife on his neck. He thwarted his attempt. Shyama Nand (PW-1) received injury on his head. He also received injuries on his neck and other parts of the body. He raised alarm and thereafter PW-2 Gian Chand and PW-3 Krishan Chand came on the spot. The injured was removed by these two witnesses and he was placed on the cot. He was kept in the room overnight and was shifted from there on 23.5.1992 to Project Hospital at Nigusari. Statement of PW-1 was recorded under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the basis of which FIR, Ex.PW-10/A was recorded. Accused was arrested and the weapon of offence was got recovered as per disclosure statement made by the accused under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Injured was medically examined by PW-11 Dr. B.S. Negi. He found as many as 14 injuries on his person. Injuries No. 8 and 12 were grievous in nature and the other were simple. Injuries No. 4 and 14 were caused with a sharp edged weapon and rest of the injuries could be caused with blunt weapon. The challan was put up in the Court against the respondent after completing all the codal formalities under section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3 3. Prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses in all to prove its case against the accused. Accused was examined under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. His defence is of simpliciter denial. Accused was acquitted by the trial court. 4. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused. 5. Mr. Ramakant Sharma has supported the judgment of the learned trial court. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 7. PW-1 Shyama Nand has testified that on 22.5.1992 when he was discharging his duties in office at about 1.30/2.00 P.M., accused entered his room and he hit him with G.I. pipe on his head and other parts of the body. He also stated that accused gave him knife stab on his throat, hand and on left foot. He fell down and become unconscious. He was removed to the hospital with the help of Gorkha labourers. His statement was recorded under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and his sweater, shirt and Pajama were taken into possession by the police. According to PW-1, accused gave him beatings since he had refused to sanction him one tree. He has admitted that the Chowkidar was at a distance of about ten meters when accused gave him beatings. PW-2 Gian Singh was working in Forest Nursery, Tranda on daily wage basis. He has deposed that he 4 heard the noise from the room of the Block Officer and he had seen the accused sitting inside the room with G.I. pipe and knife in his hand and the complainant was lying unconscious. Accused left the room and the injured was taken to hospital on the next day. He had not tried to catch hold of the accused. According to him, dispensary was at a distance of about 1½ kilometers from the place of incident. PW-3 is Krishan Chand. He has also admitted that Government dispensary was at a distance of 1½ kilometers from the place of incident. 8. PW-4 is Ganga Ram, Forest Guard. He was informed about the incident by Krishan Chand, Chowkidar and thereafter he alongwith Udam Singh, Forest Guard and Chowkidar went to the room of PW-1 and saw the injuries on his person. Blood was oozing out from the injuries. Injured (PW-1) was taken to hospital on 23.5.1992. He has admitted that doctor was residing at a distance of six kilometers and he was not called to give first aid to PW-1 Shyama Nand. He has also admitted that dispensary was at a distance of 100 yards from the place of incident. The report was not lodged with the police on 22.5.1992. The explanation given by him is that it was very late in the evening. 9. PW-5 is Smt. Jai Devi, Member Gram Panchayat. According to her, PW-1 was lying on his bed and was sleeping. PW-6 Hari Ram, PW-7 Mast Ram, PW-8 Raj Kumar and PW-9 Ramesh Chand are only formal witnesses. PW-10 is Head Constable Gian Singh. He recorded the statement of PW-1, on the basis of which FIR was recorded in Police Station, Nichar. 5 PW-11 is Dr. B.S. Negi, who examined the injured and issued Medico Legal Certificate. 10. PW-2 Gian Singh and PW-3 Krishan Chand had seen the accused inside the room. They had not tried to catch hold of accused. They were supposed to challenge the accused, who has beaten their superior officer. The incident had taken place at 1.30/2.00 P.M. on 22.5.1992. The witnesses had seen the injured in pool of blood and the blood was oozing out from the injuries. He was not given any medical aid despite dispensary being at a distance of 100 yards from the place of occurrence. The residence of the doctor was also at a distance of about six kilometers. Injured remained on the bed from 1.30/2.00 P.M. till he was taken to the hospital on 23.5.1992 at 7.00 A.M. The prosecution has not explained why the person, who was so seriously injured, was kept for 18 hours without any medical aid, which was readily available. The version of PW-2 and PW-3 that they were waiting for the arrival of Forest Guard before taking any step for giving first aid to injured, cannot be believed. It is the normal human conduct of every individual to take care of the injured person immediately. The incident had taken place at 1.30/2.00 P.M., however, the FIR was recorded at 6.45 P.M. on 23.5.1992. Delay in recording the FIR has not been explained by the prosecution. It is settled law that delay in lodging the FIR is not fatal in every case but the same has to be explained by the prosecution satisfactorily. In the instant case, senior officer has been allegedly beaten up and it was incumbent upon his 6 subordinates to immediately inform the police by sending special messenger or telephonically. PW-10 Gian Singh, Investigating Officer, has admitted that he came to know about the use of knife only when he obtained the Medico Legal Certificate. Thereafter he recorded statements of the witnesses again. The recovery of knife and iron rod is also doubtful in view of the statement of PW-4 Ganga Ram. The recovery of knife and iron rod is on two different dates. In view of above discussion, prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against the accused. 11. Accordingly, in view of above discussion, the view taken by the learned trial court is supportable by the evidence and there is no perversity in the findings recorded by the trial court. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. Bail bonds furnished by the respondent/accused stand discharged. (Deepak Gupta), J. (Rajiv Sharma), J. 14.5. 2010 *awasthi*