CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR No. 2763 of 2009 Date of decision: 5.5.2011 Ramjan and others ........ Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JORA SINGH Present: Mr. Navneet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Raja Sharma, AAG, Haryana. None for respondent No.2. JORA SINGH, J. Ramjan, Fajru, Hanif, Juhra, Akbar, Akhtar and Sami Mohammad, preferred this revision petition to challenge the order dated 7.9.2004 (Annexure P-1), passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Nuh. By this order petitioners were ordered to be charge- sheeted under Sections 304/34 IPC. Sadik, filed complaint under Sections 304/34 IPC, copy of which is Annexure P-2, on the allegation that on 31.7.2002, at about 10.00 a.m. his sister Reshmi, had gone to the fields to bring fodder. While returning to the village then Ramjan, Fazru, Hanif, Jahura, Akbar, Akhtar and Sami Mohmmad, had stopped Reshmi near the fields and enquired from Rashmi as to why she had cut fodder from their fields. CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -2- After that all the accused gave fist/kick and danda blows. Reshmi became un-conscious and when she failed to return then complainant had gone to jungle to locate her. Reshmi was found lying un-conscious. She was brought to house. When she regained consciousness then told him that while returning from the fields with fodder she was near the fields of Ramjan then Ramjan and others gave fist/kick blows and also caused injuries with danda. Effort was made to save her but he could not save her. Matter was reported to the police on 1.8.2002. DDR No. 21 was recorded. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that according to the complaint no eye-witness. After the occurrence, Reshmi told the complainant-respondent that accused had given fist/kick blows. She was also given danda blows that means petitioners-accused had caused injuries to Reshmi. After the death, post-mortem examination was conducted but as per post-mortem report copy of which is Annexure P-4, no injury was noticed Viscera was sent to the laboratory but report of the laboratory is to the effect that no external injury detected and no evidence of cause of death. Argued that in Court complainant appeared as PW-1 and examined PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan but in Court PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan, stated that they had witnessed the occurrence but their statements are without any evidentiary value because according to DDR No. 21 and the complaint occurrence was not witnessed by anybody. Due to party faction in village petitioners were named. Learned State counsel argued that DDR No. 21 was recorded. Proceedings of inquest under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -3- completed. As per post-mortem report, doctors were not clear as to what was the cause of death. Viscera was sent to the laboratory but as per report of the laboratory cause death was not due to any injury. In fact, Reshmi died naturally. After going through the file, I am of the opinion that submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners seems to be correct one. Complaint copy of which is Annexure P-2, was filed by Sadik on the allegation that on 31.7.2002, at about 11.00 a.m. Reshmi had gone to fields to collect fodder and when she was near the fields of Ramjan then Ramjan, Fazru, Hanif, Jahura, Akbar, Akhtar and Sami Mohmmad, had stopped Reshmi and enquired from her as to why she had cut fodder from their fields. After that all the accused gave fist/kick and danda blows. Reshmi became un-conscious and when she failed to return then complainant had gone to jungle to locate her. Reshmi was found lying un-conscious. She was brought to house. When she regained consciousness then told him that while returning from the fields with fodder she was near the fields of Ramjan then Ramjan and others gave fist/kick blows and caused injuries with danda. Effort was made to save her but he could not save her. Matter was reported to the police on 1.8.2002. DDR No. 21 was recorded. According to the complaint Annexure P-2, occurrence was not witnessed either by the complainant or anybody else. Complaint rather shows that Reshmi had gone to fields to collect fodder and when she was returning then petitioners-accused had caused injuries to her. Death was on the intervening night of 31.7.2002/1.8.2002. DDR No. 21 dated 1.8.2002, was got recorded, copy of which is Anneuxre P-9. CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -4- According to the DDR, also no eye-witness. As per DDR and the complaint Reshmi was found lying un-conscious in the fields and when she regained consciousness then she reported to the complainant- respondent that injuries were caused to her by Ramjan, Fazru, Hanif, Jahura, Akbar, Akhtar and Sami Mohmmad. After death, post-mortem examination was conducted. Annexure P-4 is the copy of the post-mortem report but as per post- mortem report no external injury was noticed on the person of deceased. Doctors were not sure as to what was the cause of death. Viscera was sent to laboratory and report of the laboratory is Annexure R-1. As per report of the laboratory no external injury was noticed. Cause of death could not be traced. As discussed earlier, after death proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were initiated. Challan was not presented in Court. As per reply filed by the State death was natural. Before summoning, complainant appeared as PW-1 and examined PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan. Complainant did not state a word that he had witnessed the occurrence. Complainant simply stated that when Reshmi regained consciousness then disclosed to him that injuries were caused by the petitioners. PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan, in Court stated that they had witnessed the occurrence when petitioners accused had caused injuries to Reshmi but as per DDR No. 21 dated 1.8.2002 or private complaint (Annexure P-2) no eye-witness then statements of PW-2 to PW-4 are without any evidentiary value. In case occurrence was witnessed by PW-2 to PW-4 then in the complaint CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -5- Sadik-complainant could easily mention that occurrence was witnessed by PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan. On 1.8.2002, report was lodged with the police but in the report not a word that occurrence was witnessed by PW-2 to PW-4. If we presume that occurrence was witnessed by PW-2 to PW-4 and in their presence petitioners had caused injuries with Danda then injuries should have been noticed by the doctor at the time of post- mortem examination. There was no external injury on the person of deceased. Viscera was sent to the laboratory to report as to whether death was due to poisonous substance but report of the laboratory is to the effect the poisonous substance was not detected. Cause of death was not detected. Reply filed by the State is to the effect that death was natural. Charge is to be framed if the Court is of the opinion that prima facie case is made out. At the time of charge, Court is not to see that evidence on file is sufficient to convict the accused but when no evidence on the file regarding cause of death, no external injury was noticed and no eye-witness then ultimately, no question of conviction under Section 304 IPC. Charge was framed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh, on the allegation that learned PP for the State assisted by Hashim Khan, Advocate, for the complainant, argued that eye- witnesses appeared in Court and stated that petitioners had caused injuries to Reshmi. Ultimately, Court opined that from the perusal of statement of complainant Sadik as well as eye witnesses namely Aamin and Haroon, a prima facie case to frame charge against all the accused CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -6- under Section 304 read with Section 34 IPC, but as discussed earlier complainant is not the eye-witness. PW -2 to PW-4 had not seen the petitioners while causing injuries. According to the complainant deceased when re-gained consciousness then told that petitioners had caused injuries. They had given fist/kick blows and danda blows but according to post-mortem report, no external injury was noticed. Viscera was sent to the laboratory but as per report of the laboratory no poisonous substance was detected. Doctors are not clear as to what was the cause of death. When no body had witnessed the occurrence then statements of PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan, are to be ignored without any evidentiary value. Statement of the complainant is also to be ignored because he had not witnessed the occurrence. According to the complainant, death was due to injuries caused by the petitioners but as per medical evidence no injury was noticed. All discussed above shows that it is a case of no evidence. No purpose would be solved if the petitioners were directed to face trial because ultimately, they are to be acquitted in the absence of medical as well as oral evidence. Occurrence was on 31.7.2002 at about 10.00 a.m. Death was during the night time. When Reshmi, after regaining consciousness had disclosed about the incidence to the complainant then she should have been shifted to the nearest hospital for medical aid. Report was also not lodged with the police. Report was lodged on 1.8.2002 but at that time, complainant failed to report to the police that occurrence was witnessed by PW-2 Aamin, PW-3 Haroon and PW-4 Hafijan. PW-2 to PW-4 are related to the CRR No. 2763 of 2009 -7- complainant, so, possibility of false implication due to party faction in village cannot be ruled out. In view of all discussed above, no prima facie case is made out to frame charges, so, the impugned order dated 7.9.2009 (Annexure P-1) is set aside. Petitioners are discharged. For the reasons recorded above, the instant revision petition is allowed. May 5, 2011 ( JORA SINGH ) rishu JUDGE