IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 25 of 2003 Decided on : 11th September, 2009 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Leela Dutt …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondent: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge (Oral) Appellant has appealed against the judgment, dated 28.5.2002 of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, whereby respondent Leela Dutt, who was charged with and tried for offences, under Sections 341 and 323 IPC, has been acquitted. 2. On 3.11.1998, PW-3 Rudar Dutt, accompanied by PW-7 Gopal Chand, travelled by a taxi van upto the road head from Kandaghat, for going to his village. After alighting from the van, the two started moving towards their villages. The path was common upto a certain point and the two walked upto that point, together. They stopped at that point and started talking to each other, because from there they were to take different paths. In the meanwhile, respondent Leela Dutt Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… appeared and dealt a blow with a danda on the arm of PW-3 Rudar Dutt. He fell down and his arm got fractured. He was taken to the hospital. His medical examination was conducted at 9.10 p.m. Police was informed. PW-5 HC Dharam Singh went to the hospital. He recorded statement Ext. PW3/A of injured Rudar Dutt and sent the same to Police Station for registration of the case. FIR Ext. PW5/A was registered. 3. On completion of investigation, respondent was challaned. Trial Magistrate charged the respondent with offences, under Sections 341 and 325 IPC. Respondent pleaded not guilty and was, therefore, put on trial. 4. During the course of trial, prosecution examined injured Rudar Dutt as PW-3, Gopal Chand, who was accompanying him as PW-4 and Dr. R.K. Bhardwaj, who conducted the medical examination of the injured, as PW-2. 5. Respondent took the plea that his mother is the sister of the father of Rudar Dutt, who, during his life time, gave his property to his (respondent’s) mother and because of that civil litigation has been going on between the parties. He stated that on the relevant date, PW-3 Rudar Dutt accompanied by PW-4 Gopal Chand came to his house, in a drunken state, and both of them started pelting stones at their house, as a result of which his brother DW-1 Suresh Chand was hurt and he lodged a report with the police on 4th November, 1998. The report has been proved which is Ext. DX. …3… 6. It is not in dispute that the injured and the respondents are cousins and the father of injured Rudar Dutt gave some property to the mother of the respondent. These facts are admitted by PW-3 Rudar Dutt, the injured. It is also admitted by him that he had filed cases even against his own father, on account of his having given some property to the mother of the respondent. It is also proved on record that a report Ext. DX was lodged against PW-3 Rudar Dutt by DW-1 Suresh Chand, a brother of the respondent, on 4.11.1998, alleging that on the previous night he and PW-4 Gopal Chand had come to their house in a drunken state and pelted stones and one stone hit DW-1 Suresh Chand on his head. PW-5 HC Dharam Singh admitted that such a report had been lodged. 7. A suggestion was thrown to injured Rudar Dutt and PW-4 Gopal Chand that when they were chased by DW-1 Suresh Chand and other people to prevent them from pelting stones, Rudar Dutt fell and his arm was fractured. They denied this suggestion. However, in view of the fact that DW-1 Suresh Chand also lodged a report Ext. DX on the very next day and some material contradictions, possibility cannot be ruled out that PW-3 Rudar Dutt sustained the injuries on account of fall, especially when it has come in the evidence that the parties are on inimical terms. 8. Contradictions in the statements of PW-3 Rudar Dutt and PW-4 Gopal Chand pertain to the place of occurrence. According to PW-3 Rudar Dutt, danda blow was given when he and Gopal Chand had reached the point, from …4… where they were to take different paths for their respective villages and were talking to each other. However, PW-4 Gopal Chand says that they were walking along the common path, when the assault was made. 9. Medical evidence also creates doubt about the correctness of prosecution version. According to PW-3 Ruddar Dutt and PW-4 Gopal Chand, only one danda blow was given, but the doctor noticed two injuries, one on the forearm and the second on the upper arm. 10. In view of the above stated position, I do not think this to be a fit case for interfering with the judgment of acquittal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. September 11, 2009(ss) (Surjit Singh), J