PITAMBER Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was charge-sheeted and tried alongwith his brothers, for the offences punishable under Sections 436, 427, 429, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Except him, others were acquitted, however the appellant was convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under Sections 436, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as follow:-

(2.) Precisely, the case of the prosecution, as emerges from the evidence on record, can be stated thus. In the year 2005, PW11 Balvinder Kumar was a Foreman in the firm "M/s Ravel Singh and Company", engaged for dry mud cordrilling. The Company had raised some tents on the ground nearby work-site.

(3.) After completing investigation, the challan was presented in the Court for the trial of the appellant and his brothers. They were accordingly charge-sheeted and put on trial and at the end of trial, co-accused were acquitted, however the appellant was convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid, hence the present appeal.