IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 163 of 2002 Date of decision: 15.12.2008 State of H.P. …. Appellant. Vs. Subhash Chander and another ... Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant-State: Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Dy.Advocate General. For the respondent: Sh. Jagdish Vats, Advocate. Per Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) This appeal by the State is directed against the judgement of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo, in Criminal Case No. 50-2 of 1996 dated 25.9.2000, whereby the accused has been acquitted of having committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 353, 332 and 506 IPC. The prosecution version in brief is that one Shri Kamal Kumar, constable, was posted at I.T.B.P police post at Nesang. On 17.11.1995, the incharge of the police post directed Kamal Kumar to take the office-dak to the post office. When this person was going towards the village, he was accosted by two persons, whom he did not know. These two persons got into an argument with him and later slapped him. However, Kamal Kumar managed to save himself from the clutches of the two persons and ran away. Both the assailants chased him. In the mean-time, he met two other constables of his section and narrated the whole incident to them. When these two assailants saw the constables, they ran away from the spot. However, before running away they had threatened to take the life of Kamal Kumar by throwing him down a Dhank. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment yes. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 17.11.1995. According to Kamal Kumar he thereafter narrated the matter to his companion PW-2 constable Ranbir Singh. Thereafter, he reported the matter to his higher authorities who asked him to go to Morrang and he went there on 18.11.1995. Then he narrated the incident to his Officer “Second in- Command” who then directed him to go to the headquarters at Sarahan. Thereafter, he went to Sarahan on 19.11.1995 and narrated the incident to the Deputy Commandant. The injured was then got examined by the Medical Officer of the I.T.B.P. Thereafter, directions were given to lodge the complaint with the police. In the complaint, it was also mentioned that in the meantime the complainant had come to know the identity of his assailants and they were the accused. The main ground on which the accused have been acquitted is that they have not been identified. The statement of four witnesses is relevant in this regard. Injured Kamal Kumar, appearing as PW-1, states that he was told by the villagers of village Nesang about the identity of accused persons. He has not cared to identify the villagers nor the said villagers have been examined in Court. According to PW-2 constable Ranbir Singh, Kamal Kumar injured had informed him about the identity of the accused immediately after the incident. This version is totally contrary to the version of the injured Kamal Kumar who states that the identity was got known from the villagers. PW-9, Pusha Ram, who is also from the ITBP, has given another version. According to him, when the Post Commander Shri Hira Singh visited the village Nesang to inquire about the incident he was informed by some sources about the names of the accused persons. However, PW-10 Hira Singh, Post Commander, has not even whispered one word about having made any such inquiry. No test identification parade has been made in this case. As per the injured, the accused were not known to him prior to the incident. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove as to how the injured identified the accused, as the two assailants. One cannot lose sight of the fact that in the present case, the incident allegedly took place on 17.11.1995 and it was reported to the police on 20.11.1995. This gave more than ample time to the complainant and his colleagues to cook up any case. There is no plausible explanation as to why the matter was not reported to the police once the senior officers were aware that an assault had taken place on a constable belonging to ITBP. It was also their duty to have informed the police immediately. They could not have waited for three days for this purpose. Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the judgement of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Bail bonds, if any, furnished are ordered to be discharged. December 15, 2008 (Deepak Gupta), J. ™