STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. JARAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ASSAILING the judgment dated 28.12.2005, passed by Special Judge, Chamba, Chamba Division, Chamba, H.P., in Sessions trial No. 57 of 2003, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Jaram Singh and others, State has filed the present appeal under the provisions of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) IT is the case of prosecution that Paras Ram (PW -1) was allotted Nautor land, by way of grant, by the State. Accused objected to the same as they were using the land, as a pasture. When Paras Ram raised construction of two rooms, it were dismantled by the accused and remnants of the house, set on fire. This was so done on 18.9.2003. Again, when Paras Ram constructed another room, accused by forming an unlawful assembly, with common intent and object, dismantled the same. Police was informed. Accordingly police official, Sukh Dev Singh (PW -11) reached the spot where he recorded statement (Ex.P -A) of Paras Ram, on the basis of which, F.I.R. No. 70/03 dated 19.10.2003 (Ex.PW10/A), under the provisions of Sections 147, 149, 435, 427 IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Preventions of Atrocities) Act, 1989, was registered at Police Station, Tissa. Investigation was conducted on the spot. Burnt pieces of wood (Ex.P -1) and ash (Ex.P -2) were recovered and sealed by associating witnesses Gurdev (PW -4) and Kirpa Ram (PW -2). The land in question was got demarcated through government officials, Quim Khan (PW -5), Jagdish Kumar (PW -7) and Dev Parkash (PW -8). For ascertaining as to whether complainant was entitled to protection under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Preventions of Atrocities) Act, 1989, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", certificate (Ex.PW6/A) so issued by Shri Dharampal (PW -6) was taken on record by the police. Investigation prima facie revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, hence, Challan was presented in the Court for trial.

(3.) IN order to establish its case, in all, prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses. Statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were also recorded, in which they took defence of animosity.