Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.377 of 2001. Dated of Decision: May 02, 2008. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State of H.P. …… Appellant. Versus Jai Singh & Chhota and Ors. ……. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the Appellant : Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Dy. Advocate General. For the Respondents : Mr. B.P. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate. Surinder Singh,J (oral) : The respondents were tried and acquitted for the offences under Sections 451, 323, 325, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Their acquittal has been challenged in the instant appeal by the State. Precisely, the facts of the case on which the respondents were put on trial are that on 8.10.1999, at about 10.00 a.m., the respondents who are the family members of the complainant Fulan Devi, entered her house with intention to assault her and voluntarily caused simple hurt to her and thereafter to PW-2 Ashok Kumar, who sustained the grievous hurt. The respondents are also alleged to have used the filthy language and threatened the complainant with dire consequences, in terms of FIR Ex.PW1/A. Police proceeded to the spot, recorded the statements of the witnesses and prepared the site plan. The complainant as well as Ashok Kumar on the aforesaid date were got medically examined. Fulan Devi - 2 - had sustained the simple injuries, whereas, Ashok Kumar had sustained fracture of 4th Meta Carpal bone of his right hand. His MLC is Ex.PW4/A and that of Fulan Devi is Ex.PW4/B. After completing the investigation of the case, the challan was presented in the court for the trial of the respondents. Finding a prima-facie case under the aforesaid sections, the respondents were charge-sheeted, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To prove its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Fulan Devi, the complainant, PW-2 Ashok Kumar, PW-3 Budhi Singh, PW-4 Dr. Sangeeta, PW-5 Dr. N.K. Sankhyan, PW-6 Bant Ram and PW-7 S.I. Pritam Singh, the Investigating Officer. The respondents were also examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The circumstances, which were found attendant upon each of them, were put to them, to which they have denied. No specific defence was raised by them. At the end of the trial, the respondents were acquitted, on the grounds that there are material contradictions/ discrepancies occurring into the statements of the prosecution witnesses. Yash Pal respondent had also lodged the report Ex.D2 in the Police Station Bharari, regarding the alleged incident alleging that Fulan Devi and Ashok Kumar had attacked him with the darat and he had sustained the injuries. Therefore, in these circumstances, the trial court found it difficult to come to the right conclusion as to who was the aggressor, accordingly gave the benefit of doubt to the respondents. Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General has vehemently argued that the reasons for the acquittal recorded by the learned trial court are not correct and if the evidence of the prosecution is appreciated in the right perspective, there are grounds for the reversal of the impugned judgment of the acquittal. - 3 - On the other hand, Mr. B.P. Sharma, learned senior counsel, duly assisted by Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, learned Advocate, while supporting the impugned judgment of acquittal has pointed out the material contradictions in the statements of the material witnesses, which go the root of the case. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and have carefully reappraised the evidence on record. In the instant case, Fulan Devi and Ashok Kumar are the injured witnesses. Respondents are from the family of complainant party. The evidence of the injured witnesses is required to be re-assessed and examined very closely to find out the truth. Fulan Devi, injured in her initial version given in FIR Ex.PW1/A, has stated that there was a tiff inter-se her and her dewarani when she was picking up the cow-dung. In the meantime, Jai Singh, her dewar (brother of her husband) respondent came there and used the abusive language. When he came towards her, she ran away from the spot and entered into her room. She shut the door, but could not bolt it. Jai Singh respondent entered in to the room and started scuffling. In that process, the string of her Salwar got broken and her Salwar slipped down from her legs. In the meantime, respondent Yash Pal also entered in her room. She raised hue and cry. Ashok Kumar (PW2) came there. On seeing him, Jail Singh and Yash Pal respondents left the place. While leaving the place, they used the abusive language and threatened her with dire consequences. When they came out, the complainant as well as Ashok Kumar, both were given beatings. Chuha Ram and Tulsi Ram came in the verandah of her house, but they were only the spectators who had witnessed the said incident and they did not do anything. None of them were cited as the prosecution witness. As PW-1, the complainant Fulan Devi has given altogether a different version. She has rather contradicted the FIR in its totality in its - 4 - material particulars. She has stated that when she entered the room Jai Singh followed her. Her breasts were embraced by him and he broke the string of her Salwar and then she raised hue and cry. In the meantime, Ashok Kumar came there and he was caught hold by Bhura and Tulsi Ram. She sustained the injuries. PW-2 Ashok Kumar did not corroborate her this story, but has given another story that Yash Pal and Jai Singh attacked Fulan Devi. When she started crying, he went to relieve her from them. He introduced the story that Jai Singh broke open the door and entered in her room and on hearing the braking sound, he went to the spot and saw that the broken door. He met Kanshi Ram and Tulsi Ram in the compound of the house of Fulan Devi. Both of them gave beatings to him. It is pertinent to note that neither Kanshi Ram nor Tulsi Ram were initially named in the FIR as the assailants nor they were found involved in the instant case during the investigation of the case. As such, they were not arrayed as the accused persons in the instant case. It is admitted by both the witnesses that the place where the alleged occurrence had taken place is surrounded by 10-15 houses, which is inhibited by the villagers. Even Budhi Singh (PW3) who is alleged to be the witness of the incident has testified that he did not witness the occurrence, but he further added that the respondent had also pelted the stones on the complainant party, which was nobody’s case. The story of breaking the door also appears to be wrong because as per PW Fullan Devi, she did not bolt the door from inside as Jai Singh had entered the room. These are apparent irreconcilable contradictions, which makes the case highly doubtful. Dr. Sangeeta (PW4) found one contusion on the medical examination of Fulan Devi (PW1) and Dr. N.K. Sankhayan (PW5) found the fracture of Meta Carpal Bone on the right hand of PW-2 Ashok Kumar. Ex.D2 is the report lodged by Yash Pal respondent against the complainant party, wherein as already stated above has alleged that he was attacked with a darat by the complainant party. - 5 - In view of the above, it is manifest that the complainant Fulan Devi and injured Ashok Kumar have materially deviated from the initial story of the prosecution and there are material omissions and contradictions which makes their statements highly suspect, more specifically in view of Ex.D2. The real nexus of the alleged incident remains hidden like an ice-berg. Thus the basis of the aforesaid discrepant evidence, the conviction of the respondents cannot be passed. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the reasons for acquittal passed by the learned trial court are borne out from the record, which cannot be said to be perverse. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the state is dismissed. The respondents are discharged of their bail bonds entered upon by each of them at any stage during the proceedings of the case. Send down the records. May 02, 2008. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.