STATE OF H.P. Vs. JAI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, dated 22.1.1999, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charges under Sections 325/323/447 I.P.C.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that a report was lodged by the complainant to the police that on 26.10.1993 that the accused persons started reconstruction of the obra and when the complainant prevented them, they gave him beatings with stones and he suffered fracture on his arm. The case was registered and respondents were charge sheeted under the above sections and were tried by the learned trial Court. The case resulted in acquittal, hence the present appeal filed by the State of H.P.

(3.) ON a perusal of the evidence led by the prosecution, it is clear that the case of the prosecution mainly rested upon the statements of complainant Om Parkash(PW-1) and three other witnesses, namely, PW2 Sita Ram, PW3 Joginder Kumar and PW5 Sadhu Ram, whose evidence was appreciated by the learned trial Court. It was observed that there was contradictions and their testimony cannot be believed by the Court. A perusal of the statement of PW1 Om Parkash, complainant shows that he had alleged that the obra on falling was being tried to be roofed by the accused persons on the day of occurrence. In his report to the police, he had mentioned the word 'house' and not the 'obra' as stated by him. In his statement he stated that he had wrongly mentioned the word 'house' though it was a obra. Apart from this material contradiction, he had not stated as to how many stones were thrown by which of the accused persons or whose stone had hit his forearm which resulted in the fracture. It is not his case as per his statement that number of stones were thrown upon him by all these three accused persons or he could not visualize their number or which stone had hit him. In case, he had stated that number of stones had been thrown upon him, it was not necessary to specify whose stone had actually hit him at the relevant time.