STATE Vs. SUNIL KUMAR BHASIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment passed by Sub -Registrar (Munsiff), Jammu. By means of impugned order dated 30th July, 1988 in File No. 169/ Challan, Magistrate below has acquitted the respondents for offences under Sections 452, 325, 323, 148 and 149 RPC.

(2.) AS per prosecution case on 19.01.1985 Vikas Sharma (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) reported at Police Station Bakshi Nagar, Jammu that at about 8 PM that he was sitting in the varandh of house of his teacher Om Parkash Kohli. Brother of Om Parkash Kohli was also there. Abruptly seven persons trespassed into the house of Om Parkash Kohli, amongst them Sunil Kumar, respondent was armed with hockey stick and he hit the complainant. This resulted in causing injuries to Vikas Sharma on his eye and belly. Similarly another person, who was identified being husband of Mst. Mohindro also appeared at the spot and he was wielding a knife. With this knife 4/5 injuries were given by the said person to Vijay Kumar Kohli, as result of which the latter sustained injuries on his thigh, forehead and pit. Since other persons were masked, as such the complainant was not in a position to identify them. It was further reported by the complainant that Sunil Kumar had also attacked Om Parkash Kohli, his teacher with hockey stick which was snatched away. On receipt of which information action was initiated by the investigating agency and the case was taken up for investigation by Khalil -ul -Rehman, A.S.I. Police official got two of the injured examined namely Om Parkash Kohli and Vijay Kumar Kohli. Initially case was registered under Section 452, 148, 149 RPC but since fracture was found on right scaphoid bone with dislocation etc., therefore on conclusion of the investigation Challan under Sections 452,325,323,148, 149 RPC was filed in the court below.

(3.) ON examination of Challan papers filed by the police, trial Magistrate was satisfied that there are prima facie grounds for proceedings against the respondents. The respondents therefore were charge sheeted for the said offences to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In their statements under Section 342 Cr. PC, the case of the respondents was that of denial simplicitor and they also led defence evidence. In the final analysis all the respondents have been acquitted, by the court below, hence this appeal.