RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant application has been filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 24.04.2013 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal whereby complaint filed by applicant under Sections 323, 506, 148, 149, 120 -B and 427 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') has been dismissed and respondents No. 2 to 6 have been acquitted of the charges framed against them.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the applicant -complainant under Sections Sections 323, 506, 148, 149, 120 -B and 427 of IPC with the averments that he has taken some agricultural land on lease at village Nand Karan Majra. His fields are being irrigated through a watercourse and there was some leakage of water from the said watercourse. In order to stop the said leakage, he spread the sheet of polythene over the surface and sides of the above said watercourse on 22.07.2009. Respondents No. 2 to 6 being the beneficiary of water from watercourse thereafter formed a grudge in their mind against him. On 29.07.2009, at about 8.00 p.m, when he was present in his field, Kishna told him that respondents No. 2 to 6 armed with dandas are destroying the polythene sheet covered in the watercourse. On receiving this information, he alongwith Kishna reached the spot and asked respondents No. 2 to 6 not to damage or destroy the polythene sheet, but despite that all the accused in his presence as well as in presence of Kishna damaged the polythene sheet. Thereafter, respondents No. 2 to 6 after hatching criminal conspiracy, in pursuance of their common object inflicted two injuries to the complainant. All the accused persons also threatened the complainant that he would be killed in future if he spreads polythene sheet again. In this way, respondents No. 2 to 6 destroyed the polythene sheet belonging to him worth Rs. 2,000/ -. Due to the fear and late hours, he could not report the matter to the police and in the next morning, he was medico -legally examined at General Hospital, Kaithal and thereafter an application was moved to the Police Station Rajound for taking action against respondents No. 2 to 6, but the police refused to take any action. Therefore, the complaint was filed.

(3.) IN pre -charge evidence, the complainant himself appeared into witness -box as PW 1 besides examining Dr. Anil Aggarwal as PW 2 and Kishna as PW 3. On the basis of pre -charge evidence, respondents No. 2 to 6 were charge -sheeted for the commission of offences under Sections 148, 323, 427, 506 read with Section 149 IPC, to which, they pleaded 'not guilty' and claimed trial.