Point of Law: Criminal Law – Acquittal - High Court will not interfere with the acquittal by the trial court unless there are strong reasons based on evidence which can dislodge the findings arrived at by the trial court, which were the basis for the acquittal. High Court is not expected to reverse the acquittal merely because it would have taken the view against the accused had it tried the case.

JUDGMENT :

VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, J.

1. This Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 30th August 2014, passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Pulwama, (for short “Trial Court”) on a charge sheet presented by police station Pulwama in connection with case FIR No. 115 of 1998 under Section 447, 148, 452, 427, 354, 336, 323, 302, 201 RPC.

2. The case set up by the prosecution is that on 8th April 1988 at 11:30 AM, complainant, namely, Ramzan Dar S/o Jammal Dar R/o Katibugh, in an injured condition, accompanied by five persons, made a written complaint before Station House Officer, police station Pulwama, alleging therein that a trivial scuffle took place on a pigeon between two kids, one from complainant side and another from accused party. On the basis of said trivial scuffle between two kids, accused persons, with common intention, equipped with sticks entered into their compound by hurling abuses on them. Complainant and his family members objected them but accused persons attacked complainant and his family members and beat them ruthlessly. The accused persons also pelted stones on the house of complainant damaging windows and window panes of the house. The accused persons also barged into the residential house of complainant and caught hold of complainant and his family members inside their residential house and treat them severely, where complainant and his family members got injured. The women folk was also beaten ruthlessly and their modesty was outraged.

3. Upon receipt of complaint, police station Pulwama lodged FIR No. 115/1998 for offences punishable under Sections 148, 452, 336, 427, 354 RPC. Investigation was undertaken. Investigating agency is said to have gone on spot and prepared site plan of the place of occurrence. Complainant was examined by doctor and subsequently referred to SKIMS, Soura, Srinagar, for consultation of surgeon specialist. Injured persons were also taken to District Hospital Pulwama. The condition of injured worsened in SKIMS and on 9th April 1988 at 7:30 PM he was breathless and was shifted to ICCU. On 11th April 1988 at 8:00 AM, complainant died because of cardiac arrest. Death certificate was issued by SKIMS and postmortem of dead body was conducted by Block Medical Officer, Pulwama and thereafter body was handed over to brother of deceased-complainant. Supplementary statements of witnesses were recorded by Investigating Agency on 11th and 15th April 1988. Section 302 RPC during investigation was added. The police concluded that on the pretext of scuffle between the kids over a pigeon in fact the accused persons, with criminal intention, took revenge from complainant and attacked him and his family members, getting them injured and complainant succumbed to injuries. Eleven persons were found involved in this case, who were arrested. The investigation culminated in presentation of charge sheet against accused persons for commission of offences mentioned therein. Out of eleven accused persons, one accused was found minor, below the age of 16 years and therefore supplementary charge sheet was presented before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian under Children Act, who was acquitted vide judgment dated 8th July 2002 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian.

4. The charge was framed by Trial Court, to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and, accordingly, prosecution was asked to lead evidence. 19 witnesses were cited in the calendar of Challan for establishing charges against accused persons. It appears that the building of Trial Court gutted in a fire accident during intervening night of 29th and 30th September 1989; FIR in respect whereof was also registered and thereafter the record was reconstructed. The Tribunal Court vide order dated 6th July 2013 closed the defence evidence and counsel for parties were heard. The Trial Court, after discussing the defence evidence and submissions made by counsel for parties, found that offences punishable under Section 447, 304-II RPC were establis