STATE OF H.P. Vs. KULDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 15.9.1999 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class-I , Dharamshala in Crl. Case No.23-II/ 99 acquitting respondents under Sections 451, 506 read with Section 34 IPC .

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that on the complaint of PW-1 Rakesh Kumar FIR Ex.PW-4/A was registered at Police Station, Shahpur. The further case is that on 12.11.1998 respondents came to the shop of PW-1 in drunken state and asked him why his father is constructing a road without their permission. He told them that they could ask this question to his father, on this they abused and threatened him. On 20.11.1998 at about 8.30 pm the Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes respondents again came in his shop and abused him, they held him from neck and slapped him. In the meantime PW-2 Mohinder Singh came there and saved him from the respondents, on this respondents left the place and threatened him with dire consequences. The matter was reported to the police and FIR Ex.PW-4/A came to be registered. On completion of investigation, challan was put up against the respondents and charge was framed against respondents under Sections 451, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution examined five witnesses. The statements of respondents were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.. They pleaded their innocence but did not lead any evidence in defence. The trial Magistrate acquitted the respondents, hence this appeal.

(3.) THE respondents have been charged for the occurrence dated 20.11.1998, but prosecution case is in two parts. It has been alleged that on 12.11.1998 the respondents came to the shop of PW- 1 Rakesh Kumar, abused him and they again came on 20.11.1998 and gave him beatings. PW-1 Rakesh Kumar has stated that he is running confectionary shop at Draman. On 12.11.1998 at about 8.30 pm respondents came to his shop under the influence of liquor. They asked him why his father was constructing road without their permission, they abused him. He asked them to talk to his father. On this respondents threatened him and they left the place. PW-1 has not named any person who witnessed the occurrence dated 12.11.1998. He has further stated that on 20.11.1998 at about 8.30 pm the respondents again came to his shop abused him, the respondent NO.3 pulled him out of the shop and caught hold him from neck. The remaining respondents gave him beatings with kicks and fist blows. Mohinder Singh rescued him on both the occasions. Thereafter he went to the Police Station, reported the matter to the police on the same day. Police visited the shop but respondents were not there. He was not medically examined. In cross- examination he has stated that shop of Mohinder Singh is at a distance of 30-35 yards from his shop and opposite to his shop across the road there are 20-25 shops. He has further stated that on 20.11.1998 he did not report to the police but police came there on their own at about 9.15 pm. On the spot Mohinder Singh and 5-7 persons were there. Mohinder Singh accompanied him to the police.