IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Criminal Appeal No.358 of 1993 Date of decision: February 26, 2008 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Nag Pal …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant : Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge( Oral ) Heard and gone through the record. 2. State has appealed against the judgment of the trial Court, whereby respondent Nag Pal, who was charged with and tried for an offence punishable, under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, has been acquitted. 3. Allegations on which the respondent was tried may be summed up thus. On 28.7.1991, PW-2 Chaman Lal injured was assaulted by the respondent at Naulakha, a village falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Sundernagar, when after alighting from the pillion of a motor-cycle he was going on foot, along National Highway No.21. Two persons, named Kushal Chand (PW4) and Nagnu (PW3) intervened and disengaged PW-2 Chaman Lal and the respondent. PW-2 Chaman Lal was taken to one direction by one Ramesh, while respondent Nag Pal was taken to the other direction by Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… PW-4 Kushal Chand. Respondent Nag Pal when being taken towards the opposite direction by PW-4 Kushal Chand is alleged to have threatened PW-2 Chaman Lal that he, on getting an opportunity, would do him to death. Upon that PW-2 Chaman Lal turned back. Nag Pal then got himself released from PW-4 Kushal Chand and ran towards PW-2 Chaman Lal. He took out knife Ext.P2 from the pocket of the pants, which he was wearing and dealt a blow on the chest of PW-2 Chaman Lal. He aimed three-four more blows on the chest of Chaman Lal, but the latter warded them off by raising his arms as a result of which he sustained injuries on his arms also. Thereafter respondent Nag Pal threw the knife by the side of the road and ran away. PW-2 Chaman Lal was taken to Civil Hospital, Sundernagar, where he was admitted. 4. Matter was reported to the police. One of the injuries sustained by PW-2 Chaman Lal was opined to be dangerous to life by the doctor who attended upon him and conducted his medico legal examination. On 29.7.1991, PW-2 Chaman Lal was brought to Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla on a reference by the doctors of Civil Hospital, Sundernagar, where he remained admitted upto 21.8.1991. 5. Respondent Nag Pal was also admitted to Civil Hospital, Sundernagar the same day with four injuries on his person; one on the scalp, one on the thumb of the left hand and two on other parts of the body. The injuries were opined to be simple in nature, but the respondent was kept admitted in the hospital upto 31.7.1991 for the treatment of the said injuries. Inder Pal, a younger brother of respondent Nag Pal, lodged a report with the police on the very day of the occurrence that the respondent was beaten up by PW-2 Chaman …3… Lal at Naulakha around the same time when PW-2 Chaman Lal was allegedly assaulted by the respondent. 6. Trial Court has acquitted the respondent giving the following reasons: (a) Chaman Lal denied in his testimony as PW-2 that any quarrel had taken place between him and Nag Pal, but in the later part of his testimony he admitted that blows were exchanged; (b) PW-2 Chaman Lal stated that he sustained only four injuries, but the doctor found five injuries on his person, per medico legal certificate Ext. PH; (c) PW-2 Chaman Lal and PW-3 Nagnu denied that they were related to each other, but the other witnesses stated that they were relatives; (d) There were many houses in the vicinity of the place of occurrence, but no independent witness has been examined; (e) PW-4 Kushal Chand is a friend of PW-2 Chaman Lal and so, he cannot be said to be a disinterested witness; (f) Evidence showed that PW-2 Chaman Lal and the respondent had a fight, but it was not clear, who out of the two, was the aggressor. 7. The aforesaid reasons recorded by the trial Court may not be sound enough to acquit the respondent, but we, on reappraisal of the entire evidence on record, find that the respondent took the plea of right of private defence of person which is probabilised by the prosecution’s own evidence. It is admitted by PW-8 Dr. Deepak Malhotra that on the very day of the occurrence, i.e. 28.7.1991, respondent Nag Pal had been medically examined and five injuries, including one incised wound on base of the left thumb (dorsal aspect) and a lacerated wound on the scalp, were noticed. Suggestions were …4… put to PW-2 Chaman Lal, PW-3 Nagnu and PW-4 Kushal Chand that respondent Nag Pal was assaulted by Chaman Lal with a knife and that in that process he (respondent Nag Pal) sustained the aforesaid injuries. No doubt they denied the suggestions, but did not offer explanation, as to how the respondent sustained those injuries. 8. Learned Deputy Advocate General has urged that PW-8 Dr. Deepak Malhotra in his re-examination by the State admitted that the injuries found on the person of the respondent could have been self inflicted or could have been sustained in a scuffle and that this fact negated the plea of exercise of right of private defence. Statement of PW-8 Dr. Deepak Malhotra in this behalf is just opinion evidence and the opinion is also not very specific. He has admitted the suggestion of the State counsel about the two likely causes of the injuries. One of the causes is the sustenance of the injuries in a scuffle, which fact probabilises the plea of right of private defence. 9. The doctor has admitted in the cross-examination on behalf of the respondent that PW-2 Chaman Lal could have sustained the stab injury on the chest, which has been opined to be dangerous in nature, while himself holding the knife and attempting a blow at some other person and that other person warding off the blow by raising his hand or arm. 10. It has come in the evidence that the respondent belongs to a scheduled caste while the injured and both the witnesses belong to a higher caste, i.e. Brahmin caste. It is also in evidence that respondent had had an affair with the sister of PW-2 Chaman Lal. Though the witnesses denied the suggestion about such an affair, PW- 2 Chaman Lal when shown photographs Exts. PW3/1, PW3/2 and PW3/3, did not deny that in all the three photographs his sister was …5… there with the respondent. Two of these three photographs show the respondent and the sister of PW-2 Chaman Lal in a romantic posture, which fact not only probabilises; rather proves that there was an affair between the respondent and the sister of PW-2 Chaman Lal. Respondent has pleaded that because of this affair Chaman Lal assaulted him not only on the fateful day, but also on a few earlier occasions and even the two other witnesses assisted PW-2 Chaman Lal on such earlier occasions. 11. Taking into consideration the above stated position, we feel that this is not a fit case for interfering with the judgment of acquittal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. ( Surjit Singh ), J February 26, 2008 (ss) ( Surinder Singh ), J