JAIPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that complainant Jaipal son of Banwari Lal of Jaat community, resident of Bani No.l, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa had brought a private complaint against the accused Gurcharan Singh,(J.E.) son of Sh.Dhan Singh (SDO Operation Sub Division), North, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as DHBVNL), Jeewan Nagar, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 325, 506 IPC, Police Station Rania.

(2.) As per the version of the complainant, he is an agriculturist having landed property in village Bani, District Sirsa; he has got installed a tubewell in his agricultural land; there was a dispute regarding electricity connection to that tubewell; in that connection a case was registered against the complainant and his brother; the electric tubewell connection was disconnected; however, with the intervention of the Civil Court, it was ordered that the connection would be installed at the earlier place, where it was existing; on 13.4.2012, accused Gurcharan Singh, Junior Engineer, an officer of DHBVNL along with other officials of the said concern reached at tubewell of complainant; instead of installing the connection at the previous site as per the order passed by the Court, the accused started removing the pipe and other equipments to install the connection at different place; when the complainant objected to that, the accused became agitated and threatened to teach a lesson to him; in the scuffle between the complainant and the accused, the accused manhandled the complainant; the accused who was having a player (plaas) in his hand hit the complainant; the player hit the complainant on lips and teeth; his gold chain also got missing; hue and cry was raised; Mohan Lal and Sita Ram also reached on the spot; on observing them, accused started abusing the complainant and went away from the site; brother of the complainant had helped the complainant to take him to CHC, Rania, where he was medico legally examined; the complainant remained in the hospital from 13.4.2012 to 16.4.2012; the police visited the hospital and statement of the injured/complainant was got recorded.

(3.) It was assured that proper investigation in the case would be conducted. However, no action was taken by the police. Rather police had filed a cancellation report. On getting notice, the complainant appeared and filed a protest petition alleging that there was sufficient evidence on record to proceed against the accused. Therefore, he be summoned for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 325 and 506 IPC. The complainant led oral as well as documentary evidence. Learned Magistrate observing that there was sufficient evidence to proceed against the accused summoned him for the offences under Sections 323 and 325 IPC, however, he observed that prima facie no offence under Section 324 and 506 IPC was found against the accused. The accused put in appearance. Charges under Sections 323 and 325 IPC was framed.