LAWS(UTN)-2014-4-136

ASHA RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

Decided On April 28, 2014
ASHA RAM Appellant
V/S
State of Uttarakhand and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal challenges the judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.1.2004 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Rudraprayag in Criminal Complaint Case No. 110/2003. The accused persons Bachchi Lal (A1), Smt. Rukmani Devi (A2), who is wife of A1, and Suran Mani (A3), who is son of A1, were tried for the offences of Section 427, 323, 504, 506 IPC. The trial culminated into acquittal from the said offences.

(2.) It is pertinent to mention that the complainant and the A1 are the real brothers residing in the same village as well as they are the next-door neighbours. Somehow on the succession of immovable property, the dispute erupted and quarrel of some trifling nature cropped up between the two. Asha Ram made a complaint to the Pradhan on 15.6.1997. A meeting of the Gram Panchayat was called, but Bachchi Lal did not put his appearance in the said meeting. So, Asha Ram was inspired by the villagers to lodge the complaint. Nayab Tehsildar came at the spot after considerable gap and found that certain portion of the house of Asha Ram was broken. Stone plates and the planks were dislocated from their place. But still no chargesheet was filed after investigation. Hence, Asha Ram instituted a complaint case and examined his witnesses Kishori Lal and Pooran Lal under Section 202 CrPC.

(3.) Cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate. However, after levelling of the charges against the accused persons, the complainant neither examined the witness under Section 244 CrPC nor he examined Kishori Lal under Section 246 CrPC. Only one witness Pooran Lal was examined under Section 246 CrPC, whose statement was made the basis of levelling of the charges against the accused persons. This witness too has nowhere claimed himself to be the eyewitness of the scuffling and assault as well as causing mischief to the house of the complainant. Other witnesses too have not given any ocular version of the alleged mischief, which has been averred in the complaint by Asha Ram.