NIRMAL SINGH Vs. KULDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application is preferred against the judgment of acquittal dtd. 18/12/2018 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ratia in a complaint filed under Ss. 323/342/506 of IPC and 3/4 of SC/ST Act registered at Police Station Ratia.

(2.) In brief, the complainant's case is that on 17/9/2014, his brother Tarsem Singh @ Soma had gone for labour work in the fields of Harvinder Singh and Gurvinder Singh. At that time, Kaka @ Gurvinder sent his son for taking a mobile and his son concealed the mobile. Harvinder Singh (respondent No.3 herein), Gurvinder Singh (respondent No.4 herein) and Kuldeep Singh (respondent No.1 herein) leveled the allegation of stealing the mobile on namely Tarsem Singh, and they have also assaulted his brother. The accused persons have also threatened to kill Tarsem Singh and kept him confined in the motor room till evening. When Tarsem Singh narrated his plight to him, he called up Harvinder Singh on his mobile, but the accused threatened to teach him a lesson. In the meantime, accused Jitender Pal Singh (respondent No.2 herein), Harvinder Singh, Gurvinder Singh sons of Sh. Kuldeep Singh, Kuldeep Singh son of Sh. Partap Singh with dandas and lathies came there and caused injuries on his person as well as to his son Sukhdev Singh and his brother Tarsem Singh. When he raised alarm, many people came there and rescued them from the clutches of the accused. The matter was reported to Police Station Ratia, but no action was taken. Hence, the present complaint.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant and after perusing the record of the case with her able assistance, it transpires that there is a delay of 06 months in filing the present complaint, which remains unexplained and only introduces a trumped up versions to rope in innocent persons. It is the complainant's own case that the accused persons were armed with lathis and dandas and they had already confined his brother for reasonable time in motor room and it is not the case that there was any prior enmity or dispute with the accused persons resulting into the alleged confinement and thereafter assaults on their person. No time of alleged confinement as well as assault on complainant and other persons was mentioned in the record. The MLRs of the complainant, his son and brother reflects that they were examined after about 02 hours of accused persons' examination, which reflects that the present complaint is filed just to counter the police case against the complainant and others. Further, there are many infirmities and contradictions in the testimonies of the witnesses and no any independent witness has been examined, who can explain the incident independently. There is nothing on record to substantiate that the accused threatened to kill the complainant. As such, the complainant has failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable shadow of doubt.