CHAMELA RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by above-said appellant Chamela Ram (complainant) assailing the judgment dated 12.5.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal in criminal case bearing FIR No.96 dated 28.4.2012, u/Ss 452 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' - for short), Police Station Butana vide which accused Dharam Pal (herein respondent No.2) was acquitted in this case by giving him benefit of doubt.

(2.) The prosecution version, in brief, as put forth before the learned trial Court was that on 28.4.2012 ASI Joga Singh of Police Station Butana along with other police officials was present in the area of bus-stand, Nilokheri in connection with patrolling, where came to him complainant Chamela Ram son of Datu Ram, resident of village Sandir, who besides producing his MLR No.SA/6/12 of the said date made his statement Ex.P7 before him, which was as under:-

(3.) After recording the above statement of complainant, it was read over to him, who then thumb marked the same after admitting it to be correct. Then ASI Joga Singh made his endorsement on the above-said statement (Ex.P7) of the complainant and sent ruqqa to the police station, on the basis of which, the FIR (Ex.P9) was registered in this case. Then he visited the spot of occurrence and prepared its rough site-plan. Further he also recorded the statements of witnesses. He also arrested the accused who during interrogation suffered disclosure statement and got recovered the alleged parna (sheet of cloth) from his residential house which was taken into police possession vide a memo after preparing its parcel. Then opinion of the doctor with regard to nature of injury by producing before him this parna was taken, who gave his opinion that possibility of injury No.1 being caused by this parna cannot be ruled out, which was anyhow declared as simple in nature. On completion of investigation, challan against the accused was presented in the Court of learned Illaqa Magistrate who after making compliance of the provisions of Section 207, Cr.P.C., committed this case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Karnal for its trial.