GURSEWAK SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) present application has been filed under Section 378(4) of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 12.12.2014 passed by the trial Court. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on the complaint filed by the applicant under Sections 323/354/447/382/506/148/149 IPC before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bathinda, the accused respondents were summoned. A prima facie case under Sections 323/506/354 read with Section 149 IPC was made out against them and they were chargesheeted.

(2.) accused persons faced trial and were acquitted of the charges by the trial Court vide its judgment dated 12.12.2014. The judgment of acquittal has been challenged by applicant/complainantGursewak Singh by raising various grounds.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the judgment of the trial Court is against law and facts available on record. The applicant led evidence and proved his case against respondents No.2 to 6 but the trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence by giving undue advantage to the version put forward by the accused-respondents and the evidence led by the applicant was discarded. Learned counsel also submits that there were minor discrepancies/contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses but a wrong finding has been recorded by the trial Court that DDR No.12 dated 27.06.2009 lodged at the instance of the applicant by the police was not proved, whereas, the certified copy of the said DDR was exhibited as Exhibit CW6/A. It was held by the trial Court that the Head Constable Pushpinder Singh-CW6 was not cross examined and his testimony cannot be read into evidence. The observation made by the trial Court was contrary to the fact and evidence. The cross examination of the said witness was deferred by observing that the Court time is over. The ocular evidence was supported by medical evidence and a wrong observation has been made that there was delay in filing of the complaint. At the end, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the judgment of the trial Court is liable to be set aside as the same is not based on proper appreciation of evidence available on record. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant and have also gone through the judgment of the trial Court as well as other evidence available on the file.