STATE OF H P Vs. LATIF MOHAMMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 4-9-1997, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur, at Nahan, thereby acquitting the respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') of a charge under S. 325, I.P.C., the State of H.P. has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26-4-1994, at about 10 a.m., when Bakhtawar Singh (P.W. 1) was passing by the side of the house of the accused, wife of the accused asked him whether that was the path? P.W. 2 replied that he was passing through a path, but next time, he would not pass through that path. In the meanwhile, accused came on the spot and gave slaps and fist blows to P.W. 2, whereby he fell down and sustained injuries to his right hand thumb and right pit. He reported the matter to the police vide Rapat Rojnamcha Ex. P.W. 5/A, on the basis of which, FIR Ex. P.W. 6/A came into being at Police Station, Sadar, Nahan. P.W. 2 was got medically examined and was found to have sustained two injuries i.e. swelling of the right hand thumb and pain in the lower chest and on X-ray, the first injury was found to be a fracture, whereas other injury was found simple having been caused within 24 hours of the medical examination on 26-4-1995 at 6 p.m. vide MLC Ex. P.W. 1/A issued by C. L. Sharma, Medical Officer (P.W. 1). During the course of investigation, police took in possession a lathi Ex. P-1 on production by the accused vide memo Ex. P.W. 2/A and recorded statements of the witnesses. On being satisfied that the accused had committed offence punishable under Ss. 325 and 323, I.P.C., the concerned officer-in-charge of the Police Station submitted a charge-sheet against the accused, who came to be tried by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on a charge under S. 325, I.P.C. To prove the charge against the accused, the prosecution examined 6 witnesses. Statement of the accused under S. 313, Cr. P.C. was recorded, wherein he denied the prosecution case and claimed that the case against him had been falsely made out because the family members of the complainant (P.W. 2) had in fact assaulted the accused and others, regarding which a case is pending. Accused led defence and examined three witnesses to support the defence version.

(3.) On the basis of the evidence on record, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate found that the prosecution had not been able to prove that the injuries sustained by P.W. 2 were caused to him by the accused and accordingly acquitted the accused. Hence the present appeal.