KAPTAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-complainant has preferred this revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. to assail judgment dated 21st of May 2014, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaitaran, District Pali (for short, 'learned appellate Court'), whereby learned appellate Court has affirmed judgment dated 13th of September 2013 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Bar, District Pali (for short, 'learned trial Court'), acquitting respondents No.2 to 9 for offence punishable under Sections 147, 452, 323, 325 read with Section 149 IPC.

(2.) The facts, in nutshell, giving rise to this revision petition are that on 26th of June 2010, at about 9 PM, petitioner-complainant submitted a written report at Police Station Sendra, District Pali, stating therein that on that day at about 7:30 PM, when he was at his home, accused-respondents with 4-5 others barged inside his house and started beating him. The report further unfurled that accused persons were carrying wooden-sticks and iron-rods, and accused Ammi gave a blow on the head of complainant and when his father, mother & other family members came to his rescue, they were also given beatings. As per report, the family members of complainant also received injuries on their head, forehead, ribs and back. Attributing old rivalry, for the planned attack by respondent accused persons, it is also stated in the report that offence was committed by them in furtherance of common object as the members of unlawful assembly. On the basis of report, FIR No.127/10 was registered and investigation commenced. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet for offence under Sections 147, 452, 323, 325/149 IPC was submitted before learned trial Court against the accused persons. Later on, the learned trial Court, after hearing arguments on charge, framed charges against accused persons for the aforesaid offences and on their denial all of them were put on trial.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove the accusation, examined 8 witnesses besides tendering documentary evidence, which were exhibited as P/1 to P/11 respectively. After completion of prosecution evidence, statements of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and at their behest accused respondent No.2 Ammi himself appeared as DW1. The learned trial Court, thereafter, heard final arguments and by its judgment dated 13th of September 2013, acquitted all the accused-respondents for the aforesaid offences by extending benefit of doubt. While extending benefit of doubt, learned trial Court made sincere endeavour to appreciate the entire prosecution evidence and noticed many contradictions and inconsistencies. Upon examining the prosecution evidence, the learned trial Court also found that witness PW4 Jamila has projected a very blurred vision of the incident without attributing any specific role to any accused persons by citing reason of darkness at the scene of occurrence. Likewise, the Court has also found that evidence of PW5 complainant Kaptan is not inspiring confidence as he became unconscious. Referring to the statement of PW7 Aadam, the learned trial Court has recorded its finding that the said witness has also shown his inability to attribute specific role to any accused for causing injury. Thus, taking into account serious discrepancies in the testimony of all the prosecution witnesses, the learned trial Court recorded a definite finding that their testimony is not of sterling worth to bring home guilt against accused persons for the charged offences. It is in that background, the learned trial Court extended benefit of doubt to all the accused-respondents.