IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 53 of 1995 Date of decision: 31.10.2008 State of H.P. Appellant Versus Sanjay Kumar and another Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the appellant: Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr. Y. Paul, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3. Respondent No. 1 dead. Per V.K.Ahuja, J.: This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge(2), Kangra at Dharamshala, dated 5.3.1994, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them under Section 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 6.7.1992, a statement was made by one Ashok Kumar before a police officer that he is running a Karyana and Tea shop by the road side. On the previous night he closed his shop at 9.00 P.M. and proceeded towards Jandera to see a Jagrata, at about 10.20P.M., one Naresh called him Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 who was accompanied by two other boys. He was accompanied by one Raj Kumar and one of the boys accompanying said Naresh inflicted a knife blow on the person of Raj Kumar who raised an alarm. He went to rescue the said Raj Kumar and the same boy inflicted a knife blow on his chin and all the three persons ran away from the spot. It was alleged that no vehicle could be arranged during night time and in the morning, he and Raj Kumar were brought to the hospital where statement was made by the complainant/injured. On this report, a case was registered and after investigation, the challan was filed before the Judicial Magistrate who committed the case to learned Sessions Judge who assigned the case to learned trial Court, who tried the respondents leading to their acquittal. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. A perusal of the charge shows that a charge was framed as against the respondents that in infurtherance of their common intention a knife blow was given to Raj Kumar and Ashok Kumar. A perusal of the evidence shows that the complainant Ashok Kumar was examined as PW-1 and now he had come up with a plea that Raj Kumar flashed his torch and some dispute took place as to why the torch was flashed. He stated now for the first time that Sanjay Singh i.e. respondent No.1 inflicted knife blow on the side of stomach of Raj Kumar and when he interfered, Sanjay Singh attacked him with the knife. He stated that two knife blows were given on the left side of stomach, third blow near his neck above chest. He also stated that at that time Naresh Kumar and Sanjay Kumar accused had caught hold of him from arms and Sanjay Singh gave one more knife blow on his chin adjacent to lower lip. This clearly shows that in the first report lodged with the police Ext. 3 P-1, the complainant had only alleged that one blow was inflicted on his chin by the said person whose name has not been stated by him. In his statement in Court, the complainant has come up with the plea that two blows were given on the left side of his stomach, third blow near his neck above chest and fourth blow was given on his chin and at that time, the remaining two accused had caught hold of him from arms. This clearly shows that he made major improvements and stated about four injuries, though in the report he had mentioned about one injury only. He made improvements implicating two other accused having helped the main accused in inflicting the blow. He had nowhere named the two respondents, namely, respondents No.1 and 2 or the fact that this injury was inflicted by Sanjay Singh, perpetrator of crime, who is since dead and the said Sanjay Singh as alleged had inflicted the blow on the person of Naresh also. The fact that the complainant mentioned the names of two accused which were not stated by him earlier and had also made major improvements in regard to the injury or role played by two other respondents, makes his version doubtful and cannot be believed. He had nowhere stated that he was not knowing names of the accused persons or had learnt about the names subsequently or will furnish the names to the police on an inquiry, but came up with the plea that this blow was given by this person or what was the part played by the other two accused. Coming to the testimony of other injured PW-2 Raj Kumar, he had stated that one injury was inflicted by Sanjay Singh on the left side of his stomach and when Ashok Kumar intervened, two of the accused caught hold of Ashok Kumar from the arms and Sanjay Singh inflicted knife blows. He stated that he came to know subsequently that one of blows caused was injury on chin of Ashok which fact could 4 have been clear to Ashok at that time itself and not that he would have learnt it subsequently. He clearly stated that name of Sanjay Singh was known to him 9-10 days prior to the occurrence and therefore, he could have easily told the name to complainant Ashok Kumar when he lodged the report, which is not so. The Medical Officer PW-3 Dr. S.P. Chauhan had stated about four incised wound on the person of injured Ashok Kumar. But according to the first information report, only one blow was given on the person of Ashok Kumar with a knife. The other evidence is not very material. In view of the above discussion, it is clear that the statements of the complainant or that of the other injured are not such upon which reliance could be placed keeping in view the major improvements made in these statements and, therefore, the learned trial Court had rightly held that the prosecution has failed to prove their case beyond any reasonable doubt. Those findings cannot be said to be perverse calling for an interference by this Court. In view of the above discussion, we accordingly hold that there is no merit in the appeal, which is dismissed. The bail bonds furnished by the respondents shall stand discharged. ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge October 31, 2008 ( V.K. Ahuja ) (BSS) Judge 5