R. S. A. No. 1172 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : R. S. A. No. 1172 of 2010 Date of Decision : February 22, 2011 Anant Ram .... Appellant Vs. Chalti Devi and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. N. D. Achint, Advocate for the appellant. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Plaintiff Anant Ram, having lost in both the courts below, is in second appeal. Case of the plaintiff-appellant is that defendants no.1 and 2 and father of defendants no.3 to 6 lodged FIR No.46 of 1987 against plaintiff and other accused persons and resultantly, they were prosecuted, but the plaintiff was ultimately acquitted vide judgment dated 04.05.1999 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class. The plaintiff alleged that at the time of alleged occurrence, he was not present in the Village and was rather appearing in L. L. B. First Year Examination in a College at Hanumangarh R. S. A. No. 1172 of 2010 2 (Rajasthan). Accordingly, the plaintiff sought damages on account of malicious prosecution under various heads. Defendants no.1 and 2 resisted the suit. While admitting that the plaintiff and other accused persons were prosecuted in the aforesaid FIR, other plaint allegations were broadly denied. It was asserted that plaintiff was involved in the occurrence. It was also pleaded that except the plaintiff, all other accused persons including family members of the plaintiff were convicted vide judgment dated 04.05.1999. Various other pleas were also raised. Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal, vide judgment and decree dated 03.08.2007, dismissed the plaintiff's suit. First appeal preferred by the plaintiff has been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Kaithal, vide judgment and decree dated 09.03.2009. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiff has preferred the instant second appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file. There is only self-serving statement of the plaintiff as PW-2 in support of his version, in addition to the documents proved by Record Keeper (PW-3) from the file of the criminal case. Clerk (PW-1) was summoned with some record, but he stated that record was not in his custody. It is correct that plaintiff was acquitted in the aforesaid criminal R. S. A. No. 1172 of 2010 3 case. However, it is equally true that plaintiff's co-accused including his family members were convicted in the case vide judgment dated 04.05.1999. Consequently, merely because the plaintiff was acquitted in the case, it cannot be said that he had been prosecuted maliciously. Self- serving statement of the plaintiff in this regard is not sufficient to prove malicious prosecution of the plaintiff. No other witness from the Village has either been examined by the plaintiff. No witness from the College at Hanumangarh, where the plaintiff was allegedly appearing in examination on the date of occurrence, has either been examined to prove that the plaintiff was appearing in examination at Hanumangarh on the date of occurrence. Finding recorded in the criminal case cannot be used against the defendants as the criminal case was being prosecuted by the State. There being no other evidence against the defendants, plaintiff has been rightly non-suited. In the instant case, plea of alibi set up by the plaintiff has not been established, there being no oral or documentary evidence in support of the said plea, except the statement of plaintiff himself. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant second appeal. Concurrent finding recorded by both the courts below against the plaintiff is justified by the evidence on record and is supported by cogent reasons. The said finding is not shown to be perverse or illegal in any manner nor it is based on misreading or misappreciation of evidence so as R. S. A. No. 1172 of 2010 4 to warrant interference in second appeal. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for determination in the instant second appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine. February 22, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE