IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 513 of 2002. Date of Decision:. 11th August, 2011. _______________________________________________ State of H.P. ….Appellant. Versus. Amar Singh and another. ….Respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice R.B.Misra, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1?. For the appellant :Mr.R.K.Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General. For Respondent. : Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocate vice Mr.Ajay Kochhar, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). This appeal has been preferred by the State challenging the acquittal of both the respondents herein for offences under Sections 307/34 I.P.C. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 12.1.1998 injured Kishan Singh (PW4) was assaulted by the accused in furtherance of their common attention. He was inflicted injuries with a ‘danda’ and sword. The prosecution examined as many as thirteen witnesses to prove its case. 3. We need not delve into the entire evidence since what we find is that the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment yes. 2 accused for the reason that injured could not identify the person who had inflicted the injuries upon his person. The genesis of the prosecution story is in Ext.PW1/C which is a statement which has made by the accused to the police on 13.1.1998. He states: “Bayan kiya ki maay uprokat patay ka sathai niwasi hoo tatha pesha jamidara karta hoo. Maay pichalay kal dinak 12.1.1998 ko sham karib 6.30 p.m. shaam apnay uncle kaay pas joo sinchai bibhag maay bator pump operator hai Manlog gaon kaay nechay khud maay gaya thaa. Mera uncle waha nahi meelay maay waha karib 10.30 pm. Raat pahunch gaya thaa. Maay waha say vapice via Manlog aa raha that toh rastay maay karib 12.30 p.m.raat Manlog gaon say thora aagay mujhey 3/4 adami milay jinkay nath maay dandey wa aik kay hath maay talwar thee. Uan admeyo koo maay pechan nahi sakta unhonay aik daam mera baya hath kalai say kata hai tatha daya hath hathalay say katta hai. Meray jisam maay bhi kafi chotay eye hai. Maay waha par neechay geer gaya waha sab adami waha say bhag gai. Thori deyer baad maay waha sab adami waha say bhag gai. Thori deyer baad maay waha utha aur Bojha tak pahuncha. Waha per mainey apney dosat Bal Kishan ko jagaya jisnay aspatal phone karkey ambulance mangwai jo mujhey elaaj kay leelay aspatal pahunchaya. Maay hustaksar nahi kar sakta kayonki meray donoo hath maay chotay laggi hai. Jismay pateeya bandh rakhi hai.” Translated: Stated that I am permanent resident of village Ber and agriculturist by profession. Last day, on 12.1.1998 at around 6.30 p.m. in the evening I went to my uncle, who is working as pump operator in the Irrigation Department in the Khud at Manlog village. I reached at around 10.30 p.m. at night but my uncle did not meet me there. When I was coming back via Manlog, then on the way at around 12.30 p.m. in the night, a little distance from village Manlog, 3/4 persons met me, who were armed with sticks and one of them was holding sword. I cannot identify those persons. They caught hold me by my wrist. Those people attacked me and injured my left hand with danda and sword. Such persons inflicted number of injuries on my body. 3 I fell down and those people fled from the spot. After some time, I got up and reached at Bhoja. There I met my friend Bal Kishan, who took me to the hospital. I cannot sign because both my hands are badly injured and bandaged”. Statement of the injured was recorded pursuant to an application (Ext.PW1/C) having been made by the police seeking the opinion of the Doctor as to whether the injured was in a fit state to give a statement. Certificate (Ext.PW1/D) appended by the doctor which reads: “It is certified that this statement has been recorded in my presence, read over again and is correct and the injured was fully conscious at the time of recording of the statement. Sd/- 13.1.1998. 5.15 A.M.” 4. This was the basis for the registration of the First Information Report and subsequent investigation. Reading of the statement coupled with the certificate appended by the doctor clearly shows that the complainant was fully conscious of the fact that the accused were not known to the injured and he could not identify them. Further we find that the names of the accused were not disclosed to PW3 Bal Kishan whom the injured met immediately after the incident and asked for his help. This witness states in his evidence that on the night of 12/13.1.1998 at around 2.00 P.M., he was in his house when the injured PW4 Kishan Singh knocked his door. When this witness came out, he found that PW4 Kishan Singh had sustained injuries on his palms and lower part of the body and blood was also oozing from his wounds. The injured asked him for water and to take him to a hospital for treatment. The important part of his testimony then reads: “When I enquired from injured he told that a quarrel took place. The injured did not disclose the name of person who had inflicted injuries upon his person. Thereafter I went to the residential 4 house of Paras Ram who is my neighbourer. I and Paras Ram took the injured in the shop of Kishori Lal. Kishori Lal opened his shop and he telephone to Hospital and Ambulance was called. Ambulance came to hospital and injured was taken to hospital by me and Paras Ram. I admitted the injured in the hospital and went to the residential house of Kishan Singh injured and informed his wife.” 5. We also note that most of the prosecution witnesses have turned hostile. But that apart, what we find is that the names of the accused do not figure either in the statement noted by us, F.I.R. or in the report made to the Police by the injured himself when he was fully conscious. Coupled with the fact that he immediately went to the house of PW3 Bal Kishan to request him for medical aid, again he did not disclose the names of the accused, we do not find that there is any substance in the submission made by the State that the learned trial Court has mis-appreciated the evidence or has come to the conclusion which are absolutely perverse. That apart, if there was any doubt about the identity of the accused, surely an identification parade could have been conducted which was not done. We find no infirmity in the judgment of the learned trial Court, this appeal is accordingly dismissed. 6. Bail bonds furnished by the accused shall stand discharged. (R.B.Misra), Judge. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. August 11, 2011(R)