STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. MANSHA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to judgment of acquittal dated 18.1.2008, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No.1, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, in Case No.244/I of 2001 whereby learned trial Court held respondents (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') not guilty of having committed offences punishable under Sections 427, 452, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and accordingly acquitted them.

(2.) Precisely, the facts of the case as emerged from the record are that on 23.5.2001, complainant Bansi Ram(PW-1) got his statement recorded at police Station, Bharari, alleging therein that at about 9:30 AM when he came back from his shop, he found that accused Mansha Ram(A-1) and Sonu son of Mansha Ram (A-2), Jasodha Devi, daughter of Mansha Ram (A-3), Kamla Devi wife of Mansha Ram (A-4) and Saraswati Devi sister-in-law of Mansha Ram(A-5) were arguing with his son, Sanjeev Kumar (PW-3) with regard to cutting of the trees. Complainant Bansi Ram (PW-1) requested accused persons not to do any altercation, however wife of accused Mansha Ram i.e. Kamla Devi (A-4) started pelting stones in the house of the complainant. Complainant as well as his son went inside their house, but accused Sonu and his father Mansha Ram allegedly entered in the house of the complainant having a Darat and Axe in their hands. Accused Sonu hit the complainant on his head with the Darat, whereas accused Mansha Ram hit the hands and wrist of the complainant with Axe. Having heard the hue and cry raised by the complainant and his son Sanjeev Kumar (PW-3), Surjit Singh and Kashmir Singh (PW-4) visited the spot, but accused Mansha Ram and his son Sonu fled away from the spot, whereas wife of the accused as well as sister-in-law kept on pelting stones towards the complainant party. Accused Mansha Ram and Sonu also started pelting stones after going outside, as a result of which, glasses of the window were broken. On the basis of aforesaid complaint lodged by the complainant Bansi Ram (PW-1), formal FIR Ex.PW1/A came to be lodged against the accused persons. After completion of the investigation, police presented the challan in the competent Court of law, who being satisfied that a prima-facie case exist against the accused persons, framed charges against them for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 427, 452, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) Prosecution with a view to prove its case examined as many as 11 witnesses, whereas accused in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the case of the prosecution in toto and claimed themselves to be innocent. Accused in support of their defence also tendered in evidence Ex.D-1, copy of order dated 26.6.1998 passed by Hon'ble High Court of H.P., in RSA No.235 of 1998, titled as Kamla Devi versus Kaushalya Devi, Ex.D-2 i.e. compromise dated 2.8.1995 entered between the parties and mark-X i.e. a copy of compromise.