SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(HP) 189

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
M.R.VERMA
JASWANT RAI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF H.P. - Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 10 of 1998
Decided On : 09/15/1999

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Ms. P. P. Grewal, Advocate For the Respondent:Mr. K. D. Batish, Addl. A.G.

Headnote:INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - Section 21 - Public servant - Held that persons in the service or pay of a local authority, a corporation established by or under a central or provincial or state act or a Govt. company as defined in the Companies Act 1956 Is indisputable a public servant therefore provisions of Section 332 (hurt to public servant) of I.P.C. are duly applicable in their case - Revision petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT

M. R. Verma J.: This Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dated 22.1.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan whereby the conviction of and sentence awarded to the-petitioners by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class(2), Paonta Sahib under Section 332 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was maintained.

2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of the present petition may be summarised as follows;

3. The accused alongwith so many other persons are the employees of Cement Corporation of India1 Ltd. Rajban which is a Government of India Enterprise. In the year 1986 there was a strike by the contract labourers in the said Corporation in which Atma Ram and Baldev Singh were suspended. When the strike was called off they were re-instated. On 27.10.1986 Atma Ram and S.K. Minhas were suspended for disobedience. On 29.10.1986 the petitioners and their co-accused formed an unlawful assembly at about 9 AM. Accused Alma Ram blew siren of the Factory of the Corporation and thereafter the accused including the petitioners started raising slogans against the Management. PW-4 Tarsem Lal sent PW-6 N.C. Patial to inquire about the blowing of the siren. In the meanwhile, the accused entered the office of PW-4 Tarsem Lal and started beating him. The accused also damaged the furniture lying in his office. He was dragged out of the office in the presence of PW-12 K.V. Karup. The accused further caused simple hurts to PW-1 G.S. Anand, PW-4 Tarsem Lal, PW-6 N.C. Patial, PW- 7 R. J. Pillay, PW-12 K.V. Karup, A.K. Srivastwa, G.S. Husain, B.P. Gupta and D.P. Gupta while they were dis-charging tbeir official duties. The matter was reported to the police by PW-4 Tarsem Lal vide complaint Ex.PW-4/A whereupon F.I.R. Ex. PW-11/A came into being at police station Paonta Sahib. The injured were medically examined by PW-8 G.P. Devadi who issued the M. L. Cs Exts. PW-8/A to E. On completion of the investigation the investigating Agency presented a charge-sheet under Sections 147, 149, 353, 332, 427, 452,504 and 5061.P.C. against Atma Ram, Suresh Kumar, Puran Chand, Girdhari Lal, Raja Ram and the petitioners in the Court of concerned Judicial Magistrate. The accused were charge-sheeted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 332 read with Section 149,427 read with Section 149 and 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code to which they pleaded not guilty. To prove the charge against the accused the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses.

4. The accused in their statements under Section 313 Cr. P.C. denied the prosecution case as a whole and claimed that they are the office bearers and Executive Members of the CCI employees Union Rajban. On 28.10.1986 the Chairman of the C.C.I, visited Rajban and the Union representatives handed-over a memorandum to him alleging mis-appropriation of about Rs.6 crores by the Management and due to this enmity they have been falsely involved in the case. The accused led defence and examined DW-1 Gita Ram and DW-2 Gulab Singh.

5. The learned trial Magistrate found the accused Atma Ram and the accused-petitioners guilty of the commission of the offence punishable under Section 332 of the I.P.C. and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for two months each.

6. Feeling aggrieved the accused-petitioners and Atma Ram accused preferred and appeal against the conviction and sentence awarded to them which came to be heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan who vide the impugned judgment modified the order passed by the learned trial Magistrate and convicted the accused under Sections 332 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced them to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay fine in the sum of Rs.500/- each Failing which they were to suffer simple imprisonment



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top