IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 623 of 2000 Date of decision: 28.09.2010 _________________________________________________________ The State of H.P. .....Appellant. Versus Bhagwan Dass & ors. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra,J. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? __________________________________________________________ For the appellant: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr. B.C. Negi, Advocate. R.B. Misra, J (Oral). The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been granted in reference to the impugned judgment and order dated 31.03.2000, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, in Criminal Case No. 30-II of 1991, acquitting the alleged accused- respondents under Sections 326, 451, 324, 506 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, in reference to FIR No. 45 of 1990 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? ...2... dated 05.08.1990. 2. The prosecution case is that on 05.08.1990, at about 6 p.m. Smt. Chanchla Devi while cooking vegetable in the kitchen, accused-respondents entered in the courtyard of her house armed with deadly weapons. Thereafter, accused-respondent Ramesh told the complainant (Chanchla Devi) that Ram Krishan was his son and when the complainant told him as to how said Ram Krishan could be his son. On this, accused-respondent Ramesh attacked her and Ram Krishan closed the door and bolted the same from inside. Upon this accused Ramesh pushed the door with the tip of the sword, as a result of which the sword pierced the shutter of the door and hit on the knee of the left leg of the complainant. The complainant raised alarm and on seeing through the chink of the door she found that accused-respondent Ramesh had also given beatings to Smt. Shakuntla outside the house and Shri Vijay Kumar and Ramesh had saved her from the clutches of the accused-respondents. After the occurrence the complainant reported the matter to the police and FIR was registered. The accused-respondents were charged for the aforesaid offences and the case was tried by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. 3. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses, including PW-1 Chanchla Devi, PW-2 Shakuntla Devi, PW-3 Reshma, PW-4 Ram Krishan and PW-5 Vijay ...3... Kumar, eye witnesses of the occurrence. All of these witnesses have turned hostile and have also been cross-examined by the prosecution. The accused-respondents through their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case. 4. PW-1 Chanchla Devi (complainant) has stated that on the date of occurrence at about 4 p.m., when she was preparing meal at her house, she did not see any person causing hurt to any one. This witness was declared hostile and even during her cross- examination she did not support the prosecution case. 5. PW-2 Shakuntla Devi was also declared hostile and she did not support the prosecution case. PW-3 Reshma stated that on the date of occurrence, on hearing noise, she went to the spot where accused-respondent Ramesh was giving beatings with fist blows. According to her, accused Ramesh was alone. PW-3 was also declared hostile. PW-4 Ram Krishan son of PW-1 Chanchla Devi stated that on the date of occur rence he was at Ludhiana. PW-4 has denied about the occurrence and as such was declared hostile. PW-5 Vijay Kumar has also not supported the prosecution case. 6. On analysis of the prosecution witnesses and the material on record, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has rightly found that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The medical evidence could not testify the occurrence and the vital prosecution witnesses have been ...4... declared hostile, in these circumstances the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt against the accused-respondents. In these circumstances, criminal appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed. (R.B. Misra) Judge (V.K. Sharma) Judge 28th September, 2010 (virender)