Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Sanjay Karol & P.S. Rana, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Vs.
Amar Nath and another – Respondents
Cr. Appeal No. 296 of 2008
Decided On : 26.8.2014
Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the accused persons attempted to murder the victim by inflicting injuries with a sharp-edged weapon and tearing her clothes. The victim's statement and medical examination supported the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the non-examination of a material eyewitness, material improvements in the victim's testimony, and contradictions in witness statements raised doubts about the prosecution's case. The court also noted that the forensic report did not conclusively link the accused to the weapon used in the attack.
Issues: Non-examination of key witnesses, material improvements in victim's testimony, contradictions in witness statements, and forensic evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution's case lacked sufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, citing legal principles on the evaluation of evidence and the need for a strong prosecution case.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of acquittal, giving the benefit of doubt to the accused persons.
P.S. Rana, J.
1. Present appeal filed against the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Kullu HP in Sessions Trial No. 7 of 2007 titled State vs. Amar Nath and another decided on 29.10.2007.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE PROSECUTION CASE
2. Brief facts of the case as alleged by prosecution are that on dated 16.8.2006 at 10.00 PM at village Shat accused persons namely Amar Nath and Tirath Ram in furtherance of common intention gave blow with the aid of darat (sharp edged weapon) on the neck of Radha Devi with intention to cause death of Radha Devi. It is further alleged by prosecution that on the aforesaid date, time and place accused persons caused grievous hurt to Radha Devi. It is further alleged by prosecution that on the same date, time and place accused persons in furtherance of common intention used criminal force to outrage the modesty of prosecutrix. It is further alleged by prosecution that accused persons also torn off the clothes of prosecutrix. It is further alleged by prosecution that after sustaining injuries by prosecutrix blood was oozing out and the clothes of prosecutrix were stained with blood. It is further alleged by prosecution that prosecutrix had also handed over blood stained shirt Ext P2 vide memo Ext PB to the police. It is further alleged by prosecution that medical examination of the prosecutrix was conducted at CHC Hospital Jari and as per MLC report prosecutrix sustained grievous injuries. It is further alleged by prosecution that site plan was prepared and torn off clothes were also took into possession by Investigating Officer. It is further alleged by prosecution that report of Forensic Science Laboratory Junga also obtained. Accused persons did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
3. The prosecution examined as many as twelve witnesses in support of its case:–
S. No. Name of Witness
PW1 Radha Devi
PW2 Chaman Lal
PW3 Dr. Rajinder Kohli
PW4 Mehar Chand
PW5 Hira Singh
PW6 Hira Lal
PW7 Narender Kumar
PW8 HC Jia Lal
PW9 HHC Jai Krishan
PW10 SHO Sarwan Kumar
PW11 ASI Khem Chand
PW12 SI Mohinder Kumar
4. Prosecution also produced following piece of documentary evidence in support of its case:–
S. No. Description
Ext. PA Statement of Radha Devi
Ext. PB Seizure memo of blood stained shirt
Ext. PC Carbon copy of application for medical examination of injured
Ext. PD Copy of MLC
Ext. PE & Ext. PF Seizure memo of T-shirt
Ext. PG Specimen of seal impression T
Ext. PH Specimen of seal impression H
Ext. PJ Disclosure statement
Ext. P3 to Ext. P7 Photographs
Ext. P8 & Ext. P9 Negatives
Ext. PK Sketch of darat
Ext. PL Seizure memo of darat
Ext. PM Copy of rapat No. 19
Ext. PO Photo copy of RC
Ext. PP Receipt of RC
Ext. PN Extract of malkhana entry
Ext. PQ Spot of map
Ext. PR Report of Chemical examiner
Ext. PS Site plan
Ext. PT Copy of FIR
Ext. PU Endorsement of Ext. PA
5. The statements of accused persons were also recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. Accused did not examine any defence witness. Learned trial Court acquitted both the accused persons.
6. Feeling aggrieved against the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court appellant filed the present appeal.
7. We have heard learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Anup Chitkara learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents and also gone through the entire record carefully.
8. Question that arises for determination before us is whether learned trial Court did not properly appreciate oral as well as documentary evidence placed on record and learned trial Court had committed miscarriage of justice.
ORAL EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY PROSECUTION
9. PW1 Radha Devi has stated that she is house wife and her husband is agriculturist. She has stated that on dated 14.8.2006 her husband had gone to Punjab to sell apples. She has stated that her husband informed her on telephone that he would reach at home on 16.8.2006. She has stated that her husband did not reach home up to 10.00 PM and she got worried and thereafter she along with one Gorkha went in sea
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
