STATE Vs. ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant-State through Roshan Lal has filed this application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. seeking permission for leave to appeal against Ashok Kumar and other respondents, challenging the judgment dated 19.01.2015 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Hisar, vide which learned Court has not considered the appropriate provisions of law while acquitting the respondents in its judgment dated 19.01.2015.

(2.) As per the record, the complainant State through Roshan Lal filed a complaint against Ashok Kumar, Surender Kumar, Ram Partap Verma, Mahavir, SI Vijay Singh, SHO Rohtash Singh and Head Constable Dharambir under Sections 380, 455 and 506 IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. As per complainant's version, Murti Devi had sold her house bearing No.294, situated in Bhagat Singh Nagar, Hisar to the complainant vide sale deed No.3201 dated 23.07.2009. The complainant became owner in possession of the same. The accused No.2 was partner with the complainant in the business of property dealing. The complainant had given one room of his house on rent to accused No.4 Mahabir brother-in-law of accused No.2 Ashok, brother of accused Surinder. Later on, accused No. 1 to 4 became dishonest and they started placing their articles in that very room. They started to dispossess the complainant as well. On account of act of accused No. 1 to 4, on 17.10.2009, they had beaten the complainant and had threatened to dispossess the complainant from his house. Thus, a case under Sections 457, 380, 323 and 506 IPC was registered against the accused. The accused No.1 to 4 conspired with one another and succeeded in getting false and forged agreement in the name of Murti Devi on 20.02.2006, according to which, they had shown themselves to be in possession of the house, whereas the accused No. 1 to 4 were not in possession of the said house. The accused No.4 had also vacated the tenanted room on 09.04.2010. It is also stated that Murti Devi never executed any agreement in the year 2006. Even a civil suit was also filed by Ashok Kumar against the complainant and he by conspiring with accused No.5 to 7, wanted to take possession of the house which was in possession of the complainant. On 09.06.2010, accused Rohtash and Vijay Singh called complainant in Police Station, City Hisar and asked him to leave his claim for the house. On 10.06.2010, the house of the complainant was locked but at 5:00 p.m., he got an information that the accused No. 5 and 6 accompanied by 15-16 police officials reached house of the complainant including accused No. 1 to 3. Accused No. 5 and 6 with the help of other police officials were breaking open the lock of the house and they had broken the lock. When the complainant raised hue and cry, several people gathered at the spot but the accused taking advantage of their power and position encroached upon the house of the complainant and accused No. 1 to 3 had placed their articles and they took away house hold articles of the complainant along with documents. The complainant was picked up by the police and was involved in false FIR No. 530, dated 10.06.2010 under Sections 147, 148, 448 and 506 IPC.

(3.) Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Hisar, after discussing the evidence, acquitted the accused of the charges framed against them.