JARNAIL SINGH Vs. PARAMJEET SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present appeal, appellant/complainant has challenged the judgment passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 1997 dated 23.01.2009, vide which, accused were acquitted, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 435/34, 436, 427 read with Section 149 I.P.C.

(2.) The case of the prosecution was that on 03.08.1993, at about 6.30 P.M. after the cremation of deceased Gurmeet Singh, a mob comprising of 500/600 people after having hatched conspiracy appeared on the spot having bottles of kerosene oil and danda etc. in their hands and proceeded towards the house of Amar Singh and they sprinkled kerosene oil on the grass storage and then set the same on fire. Police party comprising of HC Ram Parkash, Constable Nand Lal and Constable Santokha was provided for security of the house and family members of Amar Singh whose family members were alleged to be involved in the murder of deceased HC Gurmeet Singh. Some of the people of the mob broke open the doors of the house of Amar Singh and entered inside it and after sprinkling kerosene oil upon the articles in the house, put the same on fire. They also broke open the door of Desi Wine Shop. The mob also put the factory of Amar Singh on fire. It was further the case of the prosecution that the police party tried its best to stop and pacify the violent mob but were not successful. This resulted in heavy loss and destruction both to the house as well as the articles lying inside it. Fire could be controlled with the help of fire brigade. The matter was thereafter got investigated and challan was presented in the Court. As a prima facie case was found against the accused, they were accordingly charged for commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 435/34, 436, 427 read with Section 149 I.P.C., to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) Learned trial Court on the basis of material produced on record by the prosecution held that the prosecution miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused. Accordingly, while returning the said findings, learned trial Court acquitted the accused.