IMPORTANT POINT
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless it finds a clear error or illegality in the trial court's judgment.

JUDGMENT :

1. This criminal appeal under Section 378 (iii) and (i) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant-State laying a challenge to the judgment of acquittal dated 03.03.1994, passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar in Sessions Case No.24/1992 (State Vs. Phosa Singh & Ors.), whereby the accused-respondents were acquitted of the offences under Sections 302/149/148/323/149, 326/149 & 452 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The matter pertains to an incident which had occurred on the intervening night between 08.11.1991 and 09.11.1991 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1995.

3. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by Mr. C.S. Ojha, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the appellant-State are that the incident said to have happened on the intervening night between 08.11.1991 and 09.11.1991. The FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint given by Nikshtra Singh in which he stated that at Chak 3 SKM, they were at their Dhani in the fields along with his father Nihal Singh, his brothers Teja Singh and Sukhdev Singh and other family members. He further stated that at about 12:30 a.m., they heard the sound of gun shot being fired upon which they woke up and saw that their Dhani was attacked by the accused-respondents Gurdeo Singh, Balveer Singh, Bagicha Singh, Ram Singh, Kala Singh @ Mukhtiyar Singh and 10-15 other persons who were armed with weapons. They snatched away two guns which belonged to his father-in-law Balwant Singh. Gurdeo Singh caused a Gandasi blow to him with the intention to cause death. Teja Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Nihal Singh (father of the complainant) and Seema were also attacked by these attackers. His father Nihal Singh sustained injuries which were caused by the Gandasi blow. It was also written in the FIR that there was a land dispute which was going on between the parties and therefore, the accused persons attacked them with full preparation.

4. On the basis of the written report submitted by complainant – Nikshtra Singh, an FIR bearing No.202/1991 was registered for the offences under Sections 307/382/452/324 & 323 of the Indian Penal Code in the Police Station, Rawla, District Sriganganagar. Due to a head injury, Nihal Singh subsequently expired and, therefore, Section 302 IPC was added. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet against the seven accused-respondents namely – Phoja Singh, Balveer Singh, Jogindra Singh, Bagicha Singh, Ram Singh, Mukhtiyar Singh @ Kala Singh and Gurdeo Singh for the offence under Sections 302/307/323/324/ 326/452/147/148 & 149 of the Indian Penal Code and the trial commenced.

5. The learned trial Court framed the charges against the accused-respondents for the aforesaid offences.

6. During the course of trial, the testimonies of 10 prosecution witnesses were recorded and 38 documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution and 7 defence documents were exhibited on behalf of the accused-respondents. The accused-respondents were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which they pleaded innocence and their false implication in the criminal case in question.

7. Thereafter, upon hearing the contentions of both the parties as well as after considering the material and evidence placed on record, the learned Trial Court, acquitted the accused-respondents, vide the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 03.03.1994, against which the present appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-State.

8. As per the report dated 21.08.2024 received by the learned Public Prosecutor, sent by the SHO, P.S. Rawla, the main accused-respondents Gurdeo Singh, Phoja Singh, Ram Singh and Bagicha Singh have already expired and the proceedings qua aforesaid accused-respondents have already been abated vide order dated 11.09.2024, passed by this Court. The report submitted by the SHO concerned is already taken on record.

9. Mr. C.S. Ojha, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of t