STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAM SWAROOP CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been granted in reference to the impugned judgment dated 17.1.2005, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Court No. (V), Shimla, acquitting the respondents/accused for the offence under Sections 341, 342, 323, 326, 325 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 21.9.2001 Narain Singh made a complaint that he was retired from Army, and on 21.9.2001 at about 7.00 p.m. when he reached to his fields from his house, accused persons restrained him on the way stating that he takes much interest in construction of temples and claims to be brave person of Kargil war. The complainant was teased without any reason and was dragged inside the room and was locked and beaten up with legs blows and dandas. Accused Sunil and Ram Swaroop hit him with stone on his head. Victim was rescued by Satish Kumar and Rajiv Kumar and had sustained injuries on his both arms, head and hands. After investigation, accused were charged for the aforesaid offences.

(3.) PW -1 Narain Singh who is the victim, has stated that on 21.9.2001 at about 7.00 p.m. when he was going to his fields, Sunil Kumar and Ram Swaroop caught hold of him by his arms and dragged him towards their courtyard and locked him inside the kitchen of their house. They started beating him with danda, however, he does not know much because he had gone under an operation and is hard of hearing. In cross -examination he stated that he was made to understand about the complaint by police after narrating about the incident to him. He has denied any litigation between the accused persons. He also admitted that there is a ten feet high wall around the house of the accused persons. As revealed from the testimony of victim/injured/Narain Singh/PW -1 that whether both Sunil Kumar and Ram Swaroop were carrying dandas with them and how many blows were given and where the quarrel took place, he does not know much because of his having undergone an operation and as he was hard of hearing and he also does not know about the conversation made by accused persons with him. In his cross -examination, he stated that the whole narration was read and made to understand, is contrary to the fact that, he was heard of hearing.