STATE OF H P Vs. KARNAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal stands directed against, the judgment rendered, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Solan, District Solan, H.P., upon, Sessions Trial No. No.08-NL/07 of 2017/11, where through, vis- -vis, charges drawn under Sections 307, 341, 506, read with Section 34, of, IPC, he pronounced an order of acquittal, upon, the accused.

(2.) Fir, embodied in Ext. PW14/A, became recorded, at the instance, of, a purported eye witness, to, the relevant occurrence, inasmuch as, one Chander Shekhar, who therein, has, made a narration, qua on 13.8.2010 at about 7 p.m., upon his arriving, in village Gagguwal, thereat his sighting accused Karnail Singh, and, his son Jaggi, to hold swords in their hands, and, both chasing the victim/injured one Ram Pal, (i) and, despite his interception, another accused, also arriving at the site of occurrence, with a mattock in his hand,(ii) and also therein makes narration(s), vis- -vis, his sighting all the afore(s), to deliver beating(s), with user(s) thereof, upon, the afore Ram Pal. He has also echoed therein, vis- -vis, the accused threatening the victim/injured Ram pal, and, thereafter, he makes echoing(s) therein, vis- -vis, one Karan, and, one Nirmal, lifting Ram Pal, and that the latter being taken, on the motorcycle of Karan and Nirmal, to, Government Hospital, Nalagarh, and, wherefrom, he became referred to PGI, Chandigarh. The injuries, enumerated, in, the apposite MLC, as, prepared by the Doctor concerned, upon the victim being subjected, to medical examination, makes the hereinafter extracted unfoldment(s):

(3.) Be that as it may, the afore conclusion(s), coax(es) this Court, to make a befitting concomitant inference, qua PW-4, one Chander Shekhar, neither being an ocular witness to the occurrence, nor obviously, his previously recorded statement(s), in writing, and, of, the victim, being amenable for any credence, nor also any deposition(s), hence made with interse corroboration thereto(s), by both, nor any corroboration, meted, vis- vis, testification(s), of, the injured victim, through, the, testification, of, PW-3, rather holds any evidentiary weight or vigor. Consequently, therethrough, the genesis, of, the prosecution case, becomes unhinged, and, also the validity, if any, of, the recovered weapon(s), of, offences, as made through proven recovery memo(s), becomes completely belied, and besides the deposition, of PW-1, who voices therein the cause, of, injuries, to be a sequel, of, users, upon the body, of, the victim/injured, the, weapons', of, offence, hence shown to him, during the course, of, his examination-in-chief, also holds no veracity, (a) conspicuously with there being rife interse contradiction interse medical, and, ocular evidence, qua the occurrence, and, an untrustworthy ocular account, blunting effect(s), if any, of, medical evidence.