SATVINDERJIT SINGH Vs. REENA RANI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present criminal revision petition, at the hands of complainant, is directed against the impugned judgment dated 16.01.2014 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, SBS Nagar, whereby accused -respondents were acquitted of the charges framed against them.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as recorded by learned trial Court in para 2 of the impugned judgment, are that the complainant was married with Reena Rani (Accused No. 2). Accused No. 1 -Sadhu Ram was the father -in -law of complainant while accused No. 3 -Bhagwanti was his mother -in -law. Accused No. 4 & 5 -Rajinder Kumar and Dimple Kaur were the brothers of accused No. 2. Accused No. 8 -Gian Chand was the relative of accused No. 1 to 6 while accused No. 7 was posted as ASI in Police Station Garhshankar. Although the marriage between the complainant and accused No. 2 -Reena Rani was dissolved by way of custom prevalent in the communities of the parties on 13.01.2014, but even after the said divorce, the accused have been terrorizing and harassing the complainant. On 18.09.2006 at about 2.00 PM, when the complainant was going back to his village after attending the Courts at Nawanshahr and reached on the main GT Road near the main entry gate of District Courts, Nawanshahr, a Maruti Car came and stopped and accused No. 1, 2, 4, 5 & 8 alighted from the same accompanied by some other unidentified persons and forcibly lifted the complainant and put him into the car and then took the complainant towards Rahon side at a secluded place and after stopping the car, the said accused No. 1, 2, 4 & 5 forcibly administered liquor to the complainant and also gave slaps to him as well as kick and fist blows. At about 4.30 PM, the complainant was forcibly taken in that car to Garhshankar and thereafter the complainant brought out of the car and threatened that in case he dared to roam towards the beauty parlour being run by the accused No. 2, he will be done to death. The complainant pleaded that since after divorce, he had never came to Garhshankar, but these pleas of complainant went into deaf ears and the accused forcibly made the complainant to roam in the vicinity of the beauty parlour and by that time, accused No. 3 & 6 also joined and they also gave slaps and fist blows to the complainant and also broke the spects of the complainant. The accused No. 4 also dealt a danda blow hitting on the nose of the complainant and blood started oozing out of the same and also gave fist blows on the ear of the complainant, due to which the complainant has become hard of hearing. Then the accused forcibly took the complainant to PS Garhshankar in an injured condition and there made a false report to the accused No. 7 -ASI Balwinder Singh that the complainant was roaming by the side of the beauty parlour of accused No. 2 and was hurling abuses. Further that he had been forcibly abducted by the accused and was given injuries after administering liquor to him, but the accused No. 7 instead of taking action against the accused No. 1 to 6 and 8, forcibly put him behind the bars and at about 6.00 PM, accused No. 7 sent the complainant to Civil Hospital, Garhshankar where he was medically examined. The doctor advised that the complainant be got admitted, but the accused No. 7 and the other accused brought the complainant out of the room of the doctor and threatened that in case he got himself admitted, he will face dire consequences. The doctor also advised X -ray examination of nose and ear of the complainant, but the accused despite medical advise brought him back and again gave fist and kick blows to the complainant and he was put behind the bars by the accused No. 7. The accused also threatened that in case he did not agree for compromise with the accused, he will be involved in a serious case and got the signatures of the complainant on blank papers under coercion and was kept in the police station for overnight. The complainant also made a complaint in writing to the Deputy Commissioner, Nawanshahr who sent the same to the police, but no action was taken. In this way, the accused have committed the offence under Ss. 365, 367, 342, 323, 506, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) and the accused be summoned and punished accordingly.

(3.) After considering the preliminary evidence led by the complainant, the learned trial Court summoned the accused to face criminal trial for the offences under Ss. 323, 342 IPC. Finally, accused put in appearance and were released on bail. In the pre -charge evidence, complainant produced 02 witnesses, besides producing other documentary evidence and closed his evidence.