IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 51 of 1997 Date of decision: 27.05.2010 State of H.P. ... Appellant Versus Nirmala Devi and another … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant: Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondent: Mr. K.R. Thakur, Advocate. Per V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. under Section 378 Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, dated 26.7.1996, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them under Sections 326, 324 and 506 read with Section 34 I.P.C. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 17.7.1993, a report was lodged with the police by one Smt. Garboo Devi, in which she alleged that she had gone for cutting of grass on 4.7.1993, at about 9.00 AM. She alleged that Nirmala Devi and Bhoop Ram, her husband had put up barbed fencing and she asked 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 them to remove the same. At this instance, Nirmala Devi gave a Drat blow on her right leg and also gave beatings with fists and legs. She further gave abuses and also gave a threat to take her life and her husband also reached there, who also gave a threat to take her life. It was alleged that the occurrence was witnessed by Krishna Devi and her younger sister, who were also cutting grass nearby. On this report, a case was registered and after investigation, the challan was filed before the learned trial Court, who tried the respondents for offences as detailed above, leading to their acquittal. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 4. On appraisal of the statement of complainant and other evidence, it is very much clear that the occurrence is of 4th July, 1993, at about 9.00 A.M. The report in question has been lodged after a delay of nearly 13 days on 17.7.1993. No plausible explanation has been given by the complainant for the delay in lodging the report except that she was scared of the Court as well as the police. This was no ground for not lodging the report with the police at the earliest. Moreover, she has stated that she was got admitted in the hospital by the villagers on 9.7.1993. In case, she had been got admitted in the hospital on 9.7.1993, there is nothing on record to show what prevented her to make a report to the Doctor or make a statement to the police for the registration of the case. Thereafter also, no report was lodged with the police and her sister’s son Puran Chand PW-4 came to the hospital and thereafter, she lodged a 3 report with the police. The explanation given by the complainant is not plausible, which makes the prosecution story doubtful and statement of the prosecution witnesses cannot be believed. 5. Apart from the above, the complainant in her statement has stated that she sustained two injuries on her person, one on left hand and another on the right leg, but the eye witness examined by her PW-3 Krishna Kumari has stated only about one injury with Drat on her right leg and she is silent about the other injury having inflicted with Drat. She also stated about the injuries given by Nirmala Devi with legs and fists blows, but this was not so stated by the complainant as PW-1 in her statement. Therefore, the statement of the complainant Garboo finds no corroboration in regard to the injuries inflicted upon her person. 6. Apart from the above, PW-1 Smt. Garboo has stated that she was taken to the hospital by the villagers after 5 days, whereas PW-3 Krishna Kumari has stated that she had gone to the hospital alone and was admitted there. Moreover, PW-4 Puran Chand had tried to give an explanation about the delay that the complainant was living alone, but the fact remains that she was got admitted in the hospital by the villagers after 5 days and her son is also living in village apart from other relatives, as has come up in the testimony of PW-4 Puran Chand. He also admitted that he got FIR lodged by the complainant after 14-15 days and the explanation given by the complainant is not plausible since PW-4 Puran Chand has clearly 4 admitted that Garboo’s relatives including Devar and Jeth were living in the same village. 7. The Medical Officer PW-6 Dr. Rajeev Sood, who examined the injured had found the following injuries on her person:- “….. I found the injuries as mentioned in Ex. PW6/A being caused by sharp as weapon. The injury No. 1 was sharp as wounds which was V shape and was caused by sharp weapon. Second injury was foot drop which was due to the injury of underlying nerve. The injuries were grievous. …..” 8. He has stated that he examined the injured on 17.7.1993, though she was admitted in the hospital on 9.7.1993 at P.H.C. Suni. There is nothing on record to show that as to why her medical examination was done after so many days. Moreover, MLC Ext. PW6/A proved in evidence shows that in the history of the case, the complainant had alleged that she had a history of fall and sustained injury on the right leg. This was the first version given by the complainant to the Medical Officer, who examined her on 17.7.1993, in which she had attributed the injuries as a result of fall, which makes her story doubtful that these injuries were inflicted upon her person by respondent No. 1. 9. The net result drawn by the learned trial Court holding that the prosecution had failed to prove their case beyond any reasonable doubt cannot be termed as perverse, calling for an interference by this Court. 5 10. In view of the above discussion, we accordingly hold that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant, which is dismissed accordingly. The bail bonds furnished by respondents shall stand discharged. ( R.B. Misra ), Judge ( V.K. Ahuja ), May 27, 2010 Judge (BSS) 6