HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.A.No. 405 of 2001. Decided on: 9.7.2008. State of H.P. ………Appellant. Versus Nikka Ram and another ……Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the appellant: Ms.Shubh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr.Yoginder Paul, Advocate. V.K. Ahuja, J (Oral): This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the learned CJM, Bilaspur, dated 1.3.2001, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them under Sections 323, 324, 452, 147, 148 and 149 of the I.P.C. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 15.9.1996, a report was lodged with the police by one Smt.Kesri Devi that today in the morning at 10.00 a.m., the respondents alongwith other persons entered their house and gave beatings to her husband with axe and she was also given beatings with drat, dandas etc. and both of them suffered injuries. On this report, a case was ________________ 1.Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. - 2 - registered leading to the filing of the challan as against the respondents, who were tried by the learned trial Court, leading to their acquittal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. On appraisal of the judgment passed by the learned trial Court, it is clear that the learned trial Court had concluded that there was no evidence of criminal trespass since no witness had seen the respondents entering in the house of the complainant Kesri Devi and giving beatings to her as well as to her husband. It has been observed that the occurrence had taken place in the courtyard. Coming to the testimony of PW-2 Dev Raj, husband of the complainant, he stated about one injury having been inflicted on his head by one of the accused with an axe and he did not state about the other injuries inflicted upon his person with dandas by other accused persons. However, the prosecution has proved his medical evidence to show that he had suffered two other injuries also at that time. His wife Kesri Devi was examined as PW-1 who had come up with the plea that her husband was also given beatings with dandas, apart from the axe blow given by the accused persons. PW-1 Kesri Devi had not stated about other injuries. She has stated that on hearing their noise PWs Chando Devi and Sunka Ram came to the spot. The said Sunka Ram was examined as PW-4 who has simply stated that Nikka Ram and Dev Raj were quarrelling and children and women were also present there. He did not state having witnessed any of the injuries having been inflicted upon the person of Dev Raj or his wife Kesri Devi. The other witness, namely, PW-6 Chando Devi has stated that Nikka Ram inflicted axe blow upon the person of Dev Raj and his wife, and daughters - 3 - who were not accused before the trial Court, also gave injuries on the person of Dev Raj and his wife. It appears that some of the minor accused was tried by the Juvenile Court but the fact remains that a perusal of her statement shows that she had made material improvements in her statement. She had given earlier a version that she was present in the adjoining house and had come to the spot on hearing the noise from the house of one Kesri Devi. This clearly shows that she had made improvements to show that she was present at the spot at the time of occurrence though in the earlier version she had not stated so. The learned trial Court had not discussed the evidence in detail but the conclusion arrived at cannot be said to be perverse that the guilt of the respondents was not established beyond any reasonable doubt. These findings, therefore, do no call for an interference by this Court and as such there is no merit in the appeal filed by the State, which is dismissed accordingly. Bail bonds furnished by the respondents shall stand discharged. July 9, 2008 (V.K. Ahuja), (TILAK) Judge.