(1.) INSTANT application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.PC' for short) seeking leave to appeal, is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 7.5.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narnaul, whereby accused -respondents No. 1 to 5 were acquitted of the charges framed against them, in a complaint case under Sections 323/324/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC for short), filed at the instance of the present applicant.
(2.) BRIEFLY put, facts of the case, as noticed by the learned trial court in para 2 of the impugned judgment, are that applicant -complainant and accused Hari Ram and Giyarsi were real brothers, having common well and agricultural land. They filed a civil suit in the court, which was pending for 7.1.2005. On 12.12.2004 at about 4:00 P.M., accused Hari Ram and Giyarsi were raising construction on the common land of the well, without getting the same partitioned. On coming to know about the same, the complainant, his wife sheela, their son Laxman and Shankar also reached there and requested them not to raise construction on the land till decision of the partition case. Accused felt offended and gave two lathi blows on left hand of Shankar -son of the complainant. Shankar fell down and when the complainant tried to rescue him, he was also given a lathi blow on his head by Giyarsi. He was given another lathi blow on his head by Hari Ram. Laxman was given farsi blow on his head by Joginder. Giyarsi also gave a lathi blow on his left arm. When Sheela -wife of complainant tried to intervene in order to rescue the complainant, she was given lathi blow on his right arm by Hari Ram. Raju gave a lathi blow on her waist. When Manoj, son of Gayan Chand, Madan, son of Banwari, tried to rescue the complainant, Manoj was given lathi blow on his ankle by Hari Ram. When the complainant was lying on earth, he was given beatings by kick and first blows by Khem Chand and Sheoram. The complainant raised hue and cry. While leaving the spot, accused extended threat that they would kill him in future. The matter was reported to police station Narnaul and rapat No. 17 dated 12.12.2004 was registered but no action was taken by the police, rather challan under Sections 323/325/34 IPC against the complainant and his son was filed by the police. Having been left with no other option, applicant moved his abovesaid complaint before the Court.
(3.) IN his after charge evidence, applicant -complainant examined himself as PW -1 and Shankar as PW -2. Thereafter, statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C, were recorded. They pleaded false implication and claimed complete innocence. In their defence, accused produced numerous documents in the form of Ex. D1 to D8, as recorded by the learned trial court in para 9 of the impugned judgment.