Back
2016 Supreme(HP) 2357
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.
State of H.P. - Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar and others - Respondents
Cr. Appeal No. 606 of 2008
Decided On : 28-11-2016
For the Appellant : Mr. R.S. Thakur, Additional A.G.
For the Respondents: Mr. N.S. Chandel.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of proper appreciation of evidence and the prosecution's burden to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Criminal Law - Sections 325, 323, 506, 451, 34 IPC - The judgment discusses the misappreciation of evidence, contradictions in witness testimonies, and the failure of the prosecution to prove the charges under Section 325 IPC. The court reversed the findings of acquittal and convicted the accused for offenses under Sections 451, 323, and 506 read with Section 34 IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant reported an incident where the accused threatened and assaulted her son. The prosecution charged the accused under Sections 325, 323, 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court's acquittal was based on misappreciation of evidence and reversed the decision, convicting the accused for offenses under Sections 451, 323, and 506 read with Section 34 IPC.
Issues: Misappreciation of evidence, contradictions in witness testimonies, failure to prove charges under Section 325 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the misappreciation of evidence, contradictions in witness testimonies, and the failure of the prosecution to prove the charges under Section 325 IPC.
Final Decision: The court reversed the findings of acquittal and convicted the accused for offenses under Sections 451, 323, and 506 read with Section 34 IPC.
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
The instant appeal stands directed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the impugned judgment rendered on 7.6.2008 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, in Case No. 287/2 of 2004/2001, whereby she acquitted the respondents (for short 'accused’) for the offences charged.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 15.2.2001 the complainant Kailash Devi came to the Police Station alongwith her son Mukesh Kumar and Kashmiri Devi Pradhan Berthin. The complainant reported that on 15.2.2001 in the morning they were in their house when at about 8.30 the accused Kishore Kumar came in side their house and asked where is Mukesh Kumar. She stated that Mukesh Kumar was in side the house. On this the accused Kishor Kumar asked her to bring Mukesh outside into the courtary. The complainant Kailash Devi asked the accused Kishore Kumar what the matter was, however, Kishor Kumar accused insisted that he shall himself ask to Mukesh Kumar and became angry. The accused Kishor Kumar pulled the arm of shirt worn by the complainant and tore it from the arm and neck. The accused threatened that he will burn the vehicle belonging to the complainant and he will do away with like of Mukesh Kumar by using pistol. In the meanwhile, Mukesh Kumar came out side to rescue the complainant, however, accused Kishor Kumar pulled Mukesh Kumar towards the Berthin Chowk there accused Kishore Kumar along with his brother Ashok Kumar and co-accused Jeevan started beating Mukesh Kumar with kicks and fist blows. Due to these beatings Mukesh Kumar was injured in his stomach and back etc. On the statement of complainant the F.I.R. was registered. The injuries received by Mukesh Kumar were got medically examined. The injuries were found to be simple in nature except the dental injuries which were found to be grievous with the blunt weapon. Thus case under Section 325 IPC was made out against the accused. Police took into possession shirt belonging to Kailash Devi and prepared spot map and recorded the statement of witnesses. After completing all codal formalities and on conclusion of the investigation into the offence, allegedly committed by the accused challan was prepared and filed in the Court.
3. A charge stood put to the accused by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 325, 323, 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 6 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, were recorded in which they pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. They did not choose to lead any evidence in defence.
5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused.
6. The learned Additional 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 evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross misappreciation by it of the relevant 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. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 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 by the learned trial Court and theirs not necessitating any 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 trial Court had pronounced a verdict of acquittal upon the accused respondent
