IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 597 of 2002 Date of decision: 4. 6. 2009 State of H.P. …..Appellant Versus Chander Mohan ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 . For the Appellant: Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy. Advocate General. For the respondents : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Advocate. Surinder Singh, J. (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. The acquittal of the respondent in case No. 63-1 of 1997 decided on 26.4.2002 by the learned trial court, has been challenged by the State in this appeal. Admitted facts of the case are that the complainant Shri Prakash Nath Chawla (now dead) was the father of the respondent. The accused-respondent was married to Smt. Gita Chawla daughter of Sh. Kishan Gopal (PW-4). From Smt. Gita Chawla he has two daughters. It appears that accused and Gita Chawla were not pulling well as such she started residing with her parents along with her daughters. It 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. - 2 - is alleged that the respondent married Beena Rajput during the subsistence of his previous marriage. The case of the prosecution is that Smt. Gita Chawla was owning a house and the respondent insisted upon her to transfer it in his name which caused annoyance to him as well as to the complainant,his father. The Complainant was residing separately from his respondent son in the rented premises of PW-1 Bal Krishan in Prem Nagar Mohalla at Una. It is alleged that on 14.5.1997 after attending the hearing of the court, the complainant returned to his rented house along with Kishan Gopal (PW-4), father of Smt. Gita Chawla aforesaid. When both of them were sitting in the room, the respondent entered the room and started abusing his father and caught hold of him from his neck and started giving him the shoe beatings and also fisticuffing which caused injury on his nose and other parts of the body. On raising hue and cry, owners of the premises Bal Krishan Sharma (PW-1) came there and saved the complainant from his clutches. It is also alleged that the respondent took away an amount of Rs. 3000/- from the pocket of the complainant forcibly with the result the shirt - 3 - pocket also got torn and thereafter respondent ran away from the spot. On the complaint of the petitioner the present case was registered. On the same day, the complainant was got medically examined and Doctor A.K. Sharma issued the Medico Legal Certificate Ext. PW-2/A. During the investigation of this case, police took into possession the broken spectacles of the respondent and his shoes lying on the spot and also prepared the site plan. Shirt of the complainant was also taken into possession. After completing the investigation case was presented in the court for trial of the respondent. Finding a prima facie case against the respondent, he was charge sheeted for the offences aforesaid. The respondent was put to trial and at the end of the trial he was acquitted which has been assailed in this appeal by the State. To prove its case, prosecution examined its witnesses and respondent was also examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. No evidence in defence was led by the respondent. - 4 - The complainant filed by Prakash Nath Chawla could not be substantiated because of his death. However, prosecution relied upon the statement of Bal Krishan owner of the rented premises where Pran Nath Chawala was residing. He was attracted by the noise from the room of the complainant and on reaching there found the respondent allegedly beating the complainant with his shoes and at that time, he is also alleged to have used the abusive language. Further, in the cross- examination, when he was probed about the alleged incident to which he is alleged witness, he stated that when he entered the room he only saw that respondent had thrown his shoe on the floor and there was bleeding injury on the nose of the complainant. He did not say anything about the presence of the other witnesses. However, he specifically stated that in the vicinity has inhabited areas. He specifically stated that he did not notice the sister-in-law of the complainant in the room. Further, no reference was made by him in his statement with respect to taking of the currency notes from the pocket of his father, as alleged. But it was the complainant who is alleged to have complaint like this to him. He further stated that his statement was recorded by the police but it is - 5 - pertinent to note the statement of the Investigating Officer Shri Shamsher Singh (PW-3). In his cross-examination, he stated that nothing came in his notice with respect to the fact that the complainant was the tenant of Bal Krishan. Further, the said officer has caused the dent to the prosecution case by saying that when the police reached the spot, respondent was found present there and was arrested. Further, the conclusion of the investigation also revealed that the story of taking an amount of Rs. 3000/- was false. It is pertinent to note that the complainant appears to have exaggerated the whole incident which gives an impression of false implication of the respondent in the case as there was no snatching of the currency notes and PW Bal Krishan and Kishan Gopal, father-in-law of the respondent has specifically stated that after causing the injury, respondent had fled away from the spot than how the respondent was arrested by the police on their arrival on the spot, makes the story more doubtful. Further, as already stated above, presence of PW-4 Kishan Gopal has neither been noticed by PW-1 on the spot nor that of his sister-in-law was mentioned in the complaint. Kishan Gopal has a motive to depose against - 6 - the respondent for the reasons that he being father of Smt. Gita Chwala previous wife of the respondent with whom respondent was not pulling well. He has shattered the prosecution case while saying that Smt. Sumitra, wife of the complainant was also present there at the time of the occurrence but neither this fact has been mentioned in the complaint nor deposed by any other witness. Spectacles as well as of the shoes which were alleged to have been taken from the spot have not been connected with the respondent by any legal method known to the law. Dr. A.K. Sharma’s statement coupled with the Medico Legal Certificate Ext. PW-2/A reveal that there was a superficial injury on the nose of the complainant and all other alleged injuries from Sr. Nos. 2 to 6 were only the complaint made by the complainant about pain on his various parts of the body and that too without any sign of ecchymosis which could have been there in case of fisticuffing. Thus, in my considered opinion, there are no grounds to interfere with the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial court, which are borne out from the - 7 - record, as such the appeal sans merit and is accordingly dismissed. The respondent is hereby discharged of the bail bonds entered upon by him at any stage during the proceedings of this case. Send down the records. June 4, 2009 (Surinder Singh),J. (cm)