STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. YASHPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 12.08.2004, delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala, in Sessions Case No. 26N/02, whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed offences punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. Both the accused were charged with murdering one Chhanku Ram on 21.07.2002 at about 10.30 a.m., in pursuance of their common intention.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that on 21.07.2002, Chhanku Ram (deceased) alongwith his son, PW3, Naresh Kumar; daughterinlaw, PW5, Amita Kumari and other family members, were at their house. At about 10.30 a.m., accused Yashpal @ Ashok Kumar and Kirpal Singh came to the house of the deceased and started cutting bushes from near their courtyard. PW3, Naresh Kumar and his father, Chhanku Ram, came outside their house and asked the accused why they were cutting the hedge. The accused started abusing PW3 and his father. They both also started beating PW3, Naresh Kumar. Thereafter, they left Naresh Kumar and accused Kirpal Singh caught hold of Chhanku Ram and started giving him fist blows. Accused Yashpal @ Ashok Kumar gave a blow of a danda on the back of the head of Chhanku Ram and Chhanku Ram fell down on the spot. PW3, Naresh Kumar, received minor injuries. Thereafter, PW3, Naresh Kumar, alongwith other villagers and relatives managed to save Chhanku Ram from the clutches of the accused. While leaving, the accused threatened to kill PW3, Naresh Kumar, and his father. In the initial complaint, it is mentioned that there is some dispute with regard to the land between the two sides.

(3.) A case was registered under Section 307 IPC against the accused. Later Chhanku Ram expired as a result of the injuries sustained and the case was converted into Section 302 IPC. Post mortem on the body was conducted and as per the post mortem report, Ex. PW18/A, Chhanku Ram died as a result of odema of the brain as a result of fracture of subrechnoid haemorrhage and contusion following head injury. The accused were arrested and it is alleged that Yashpal accused made disclosure statement, Ex. PW9/C which led to the recovery of danda, Ex. P1, in the presence of witnesses Ravi Dutt, PW9 and Surinder Kumar, PW10. After completion of the investigation, the accused were charged with having committed the offences aforesaid. After trial, they have been acquitted. Hence, this appeal by the State.