STATE OF H.P. Vs. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 29/8/2012, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 8/6/2007 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kangra at Dharamshala (learned Trial Court) were set aside. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 452, 323 and 506 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that the informant, Tara Chand (PW1), was present in his home on 11/5/2004 at about 11:30 PM. His pet dog was barking. The informant woke up and saw that the accused, Mahesh and Suresh, were standing outside his home, who were abusing and threatening him. The informant asked them to go away. They opened the door by kicking it and entered the house. They gave beatings to the informant, Tara Chand (PW1), and his wife, Bhujla Devi (PW2). Mahesh inflicted a stone injury on the mouth of Bhujla Devi. The accused left after the incident. The informant and his wife narrated the incident to Up-Pradhan Gorkhu Ram (PW4), who advised them to report the matter to the Panchayat Pradhan. They went to the house of Pradhan Dhani Ram, but he was not present at home. They reported the matter to the Police, who recorded an entry (Ex.PW1/A) in the daily diary. FIR (Ex. PW7A) was registered in the police station. HC Bhag Chand (PW9) investigated the matter. He visited the spot and prepared the site plan (Ex. PW9/A). He seized a broken torch (Ex. P1, dupatta (Ex. P2) and broken pieces of stones and slate (Ex. P3). These were put in a cloth parcel, and the parcel was sealed with three impressions of seal B. Seal impression (Ex. PW9/B) was taken on a separate piece of cloth. The parcel was seized vide memo (Ex. PW1/A). Sanjay Kumar (PW5) took the photographs (Ex. P1 to Ex. P4) whose negatives are Ex. P5 to Ex. P8. Dr KAS Dadhwal (PW10) examined informant Tara Chand and Bhujla Devi and found that they had sustained multiple injuries which could have been caused within 24 hours of the examination. He issued the MLCs (Ex.PW6A and Ex.PW6/B). Statements of witnesses were recorded as per their version, and after completion of the investigation, a challan was prepared and presented before the learned Trial Court.

(3.) Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, they were charged for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 452, 323 and 506 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.