STATE OF H.P. Vs. GAURI DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENTS have been charged with and tried for offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 342, 452, 427, 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sundernagar. After recording the evidence of the prosecution and examination of the respondents under Section 313 Cr. P.C. and also recording the evidence led by them, the trial Magistrate, acquitted all of them holding that the evidence on record did not establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, as per evidence on record, may be summed up thus. On the night intervening 22nd and 23rd October, 1988, a mob of 100-150 persons went to the house of PW-1 Krishni Devi where she was sleeping alongwith her son Jeet Ram (PW10) and daughter Kunta Devi (PW11). Respondents were among the aforesaid mob. They allegedly entered the house of PW-1 Krishni Devi and assaulted her, her son and daughter and caused some injuries (simple) to them. Thereafter they made them to move out of the house and took them to a nearby place and kept them under a tree for the whole of the night. Then the house of PW-1 Krishni Devi was pulled down by them. Next morning matter was reported by PW-1 Krishni Devi to PW-5 Khazana Ram , a member of Panchayat. Police was apprised of the incident late in the evening vide complaint Ext.PW1/A. On the basis of this complaint, which was presented to ASI at 7.30 P.M., case was formally registered against the present respondents, all of whom were named in the said complaint.

(3.) EVIDENCE of the prosecution is full of improbabilities, contradictions, discrepancies and inconsistencies, which create reasonable doubt about the authenticity of the prosecution version. Krishni Devi PW-1, while in the witness box, stated that she did not know who had written the complaint Ext. PW1/A for her. She stated that she did not know the names of the respondents, but could identify them by their faces. However, in the complaint Ext.PW1/A all the eighteen respondents are named. The statement that she did not know the names of the respondents was made by Krishni Devi on 25th March, 1991, when the accused were not present in the Court. Therefore, the recording of her further examination was deferred. She was re- examined on 20the September, 1991 when the respondents were present. Strangely enough, on that date she named all the respondents in her testimony.