Back
2016 Supreme(HP) 1223
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
State of H.P. - Appellant
Versus
Avinash Gulati & others - Respondents
Cr. Appeal No. 192 of 2007
Decided On : 27-07-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Vivek Singh Attri
For the Respondent: Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Mr. Vivek Sharma
The judgment emphasizes the importance of a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record in reaching a decision.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Criminal Law - Sections 323, 324, 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code - The judgment discusses the evidence on record and the prosecution's case of the accused belabouring the victims with kick and fist blows, and the dislocation of the victim's tooth. The court evaluates the testimonies and medical evidence, concluding that the trial court's acquittal was based on a mature and balanced appreciation of the evidence, and affirms the judgment of acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were charged with committing offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 325 read with Section 34 of the IPC for allegedly assaulting the complainant and his mother. The trial court acquitted the accused based on an appraisal of the evidence on record.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court's acquittal was based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and did not suffer from any perversity or mis-appreciation of evidence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the trial court's acquittal of the accused was based on a proper appreciation of the evidence on record.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the evaluation of the entire evidence on record and the finding that the trial court's analysis did not suffer from any perversity or mis-appreciation of evidence.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of acquittal recorded in favor of the accused by the trial court was affirmed.
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
The instant appeal stands directed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. 2, Dehra, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, rendered on 20.01.2007 in Cr. Case No. 106-II/04 whereby, the learned trial Court acquitted the accused/respondents herein for theirs allegedly committing offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Panel Code.
2. The facts relevant to decide the instant case are that on 20.08.2004 at about 10 a.m. accused Avinash Gulati was carrying construction work of his house and had thrown soil on land belonging to the complainant party to which complainant's mother objected and accused Avinash Gulati hurled abuses to which she again objected. Accused Avinash Gulati caused fist blows on complainant's mother and accused Usha Gulati caught hold her from hair and head and severed fist blows and grounded her. When the complainant tried to rescue his mother, he too was beaten by fist blows by accused Avinash Gulati, Usha Gulati and Suresh Gulati. The complainant and his mother were rescued by Vijay Sood wife of Shri Sham Sood and the incident was witnessed by Bhuvnesh Master, resident of Deh. It is alleged that due to the beatings given by the accused, the complainant sustained injuries on his face, tooth, leg and his mother also sustained injuries on her ear, gums and other parts of the body. On the aforesaid complaint, FIR was registered at Police Station, Jawalamukhi against the accused. Thereafter, the police machinery came into motion and completed the investigation formalities.
3. On conclusion of the investigations, into the offence, allegedly committed by the accused, report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed in the Court.
4. The accused were charged by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 325 read with Section 34 of the IPC. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded by the trial Court, in which they claimed innocence and pleaded false implication in the case. However, they did not lead any defence evidence.
5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court, returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused/respondent herein.
6. The State of H.P. is aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court. The learned Deputy Advocate General has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of the evidence on record, rather, theirs being sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of the material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal being reversed by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of conviction.
7. On the other hand, the learned defence counsel has with considerable force and vigour, contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication.
8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record.
9. The learned Deputy Advocate General contended with force qua with absolute concurrence existing inter se the unfoldments qua the occurrence embodied in the FIR with the respective MLCs comprised in Ex.PW7/A, Ex.PW7/B and Ex.PW9/A, prepared by the doctors concerned vis-a-vis the victims, renders the proven genesis of the prosecution case of the accused belabouring the victims with kick and fist blows besides striking them with a danda, hence sequeling the d
