PAWAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant hereinafter referred as 'the accused ' has laid challenge in this appeal against his conviction passed by the learned trial Court in Sessions Case No. 75 -P/VII/10/09 Session Trial No. 1/2011 under Sections 449, 323, 302 and 506 Indian Penal Code, decided on 21.1.2011, for the offences punishable under Sections 449, 323, 302 and 506 Indian Penal Code whereby he was sentenced as under:

(2.) FACTS , shorn of all unnecessary details, can be stated thus. PW11 Guddi Devi @ Jagtamba and her deceased sister Vidya Devi, "kumha"r by caste, were unmarried and residing together in their village at Rajerh. They were having a house and landed property of about 28 Kanals on which the co - villagers were having an eye. It is alleged that on 18.10.2008 at about 4.30 p.m. complainant Guddi Devi aforesaid noticed accused loping beul tree for fodder belonging to he complainant. She asked the reason for doing so, but the accused took away the cut branches and threw rubbish and left over it in her field and left the place. But he returned after about half an hour. When both the sisters were taking their meals in the house, accused entered in their veranda and dealt a blow on the head of Vidya Devi with a 'Y ' shape danda having nails on its head which caused deep wound and bleeding injury to the complainant and gave beating to her and complainant Guddi Devi when she tried to rescue her sister. None of them had provoked the accused but both were badly beaten and left the place proclaiming that his uncle was a police officer, neither they could report to police not Panchayat and threatened them with dire consequences. The danda also got broken and few pieces fell on the spot and other longer part was taken by him.

(3.) TO prove its case, prosecution examined complainant PW11 Guddi Devi besides examining doctors, Pradhan Amar Singh, who did not support the case of the prosecution, the Investigating Officer PW18 Dy. S.P. Badri Singh and other formal witnesses. Accused was also examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He admitted that he was resident of the same village and his house situate nearer to the house of the complainant but denied about the incident. According to him, the complainant only deposed against him due to enmity.