MADAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the 'Code') is directed against the judgment dated 16.05.2007, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 27-D/X/2002, whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners and affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (II), Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., on 9/11.09.2002, in Case No. 39-II/2002, whereby the petitioners were convicted and Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each under Section 325 IPC and in default of payment of fine the convicts were directed to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The convicts were also sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for three months under Section 323 IPC and were also sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for three months under Section 342 IPC. The r to convicts were further sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for three months under Section 506 IPC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 09.07.2001, the complainant went to the shop of the petitioner-Madan Kumar for purchasing of eggs at about 9:00 p.m. where Parshottam Lal brother of Madan Kumar was also present. When he asked for one dozen of eggs then the petitioner-Madan Lal asked him that he connived with the police to search the shop of the petitioner and the petitioners started to call bad names. When he asked not to call bad names then Petitioners (both brothers) closed the shutter of the shop and confined the complainant inside the shop and gave beatings with danda. Petitioner-Madan Lal gave a blow with danda on his right hand and right eye and blood started oozing out. He fell down and started calling Bachao-Bachao. On hearing this, Surjit Singh, Vipan Singh and Onkar Chand entered into the shop and rescued him from the clutches of the petitioners. The complainant reported the matter to the police vide his rapat No. 4, dated 10.07.2001 which was Ext.PW1/A and on the basis of rapat FIR Ext. PW7/A was registered against the petitioners.

(3.) On the basis of the FIR, statements of the witnesses were recorded and accordingly both the accused were challaned for the offences punishable under the aforesaid sections. Both the accused were put to charges to which they pleaded not guilty and preferred trial.