STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAJINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the court of learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan, dated 27.1.1992, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a report was lodged with the police by PW-5 Ranjit Singh in which he alleged that he learnt that Khem Chand had been given beatings by the respondents with kicks, fists, iron pipes and dandas and the complainant was informed about this fact. He lodged the report with the police and they went to the spot and found Khem Chand lying in injured condition having suffered injuries. The police came in motion and the case was registered. After investigation, the challan was filed before the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No.2, Paonta Sahib, who committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge, who framed charge as against the respondents under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and the respondents were tried by the learned trial Court leading to their acquittal.

(3.) During the course of arguments, we had also considered the question as to whether the arguments could be heard in the absence of respondent No.3, who had not been served and as to whether an amicus curiae or a counsel at State expense should be appointed to represent respondent No.3. To substantiate his plea that no amicus curiae or a counsel at State expense could be appointed to represent respondent No.3 since he was never served, the learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 had relied upon the following two decisions.