The main legal principle established in the judgment is the requirement for credible and trustworthy evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court emphasized the importance of natural human conduct in assessing the testimonial potency of witnesses and highlighted the significance of consistent and reliable testimony.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Sekhri, J.

1. Challenge in this appeal has been thrown to judgment dated 18.08.2007 propounded by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (hereafter referred to as 'trial court'), in File No. 315/Challan titled 'State v. Sham Sunder & Ors.' and FIR No. 123 of 2001 of Police Station, Bahu Fort Jammu, for offences under sections 302, 307, 332/34 of RPC, vide which, respondents have been acquitted of the charges.

2. Shorn of verbosity, the appellant/prosecution case is that on 09.07.2001, at about 12:50 midnight Police Post, Narwal Bala received oral information from SPO Ashok Kumar that on 08.07.2001, while he along with Sher Mohammad, 343-J were on patrolling and reached near transport Yard, Sunjwan at 11:30 p.m., they found 10 to 15 persons present outside their Jhuggies (Shanties) and they were asked to go inside. However, one of them, namely, Sham Sunder (respondent No. 1), in furtherance of criminal intention made an assault on the police party, hurled abuses and they refused to go to their Jhuggies. When they again exhorted them to return to their Jhuggies, the said accused, namely, Sham Sunder attacked Ashok Kumar on his head in furtherance of criminal intention to eliminate. It was also alleged that rest of the persons present on the spot also attacked the police party and pelted stones. Thereafter, accused persons made an attempt on the life of Sher Mohammad with a pipe, who started bleeding and rest of the persons present on the spot also attacked Sher Mohammad with sticks and stone pelting. Initially, FIR came to be registered for the alleged commission of offences under sections 307, 336, 332, 147 and 148 RPC. However, Sher Mohammad later succumbed to his injuries on 10.07.2001 and offence under section 302 RPC was added.

3. Respondents were charge-sheeted by the trial Court on 12.06.2002 for offences under sections 302, 307, 325/34 of RPC whereby they pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried, thereby persuading learned trial court to ask for the prosecution evidence. Prosecution has examined as many as 23 witnesses in support of its case. However, learned trial Court on appreciation of the prosecution evidence is of the opinion that prosecution having failed to prove charges against the respondents, the final report filed in the trial court was liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, respondents have been acquitted of the charges.

4. Before a closer look at the grounds urged in the memo of appeal, it shall be apt to give a resume of the prosecution evidence, which runs as below:

5. PW-1 Ashok Kumar is stated to be the complainant and injured in the case. He has deposed that on 08.07.2001, at about 11 p.m., while he along with Sher Mohammad were on patrol duty at Transport Nagar, they spotted 10 to 15 persons. Sher Mohammad asked them as to what were they doing and on this, they told them that they will neither move nor allow the Police to leave the place. Accused Sham Sunder went inside his Jhuggi, came out with an iron pipe and attacked him. He suffered the blow on his hand in a bid to ward of the attack. However, accused Sham Sunder made repeated attack and he suffered a blow on his head and blood oozed out. Thereafter, the said accused made an assault upon Sher Mohammad on his head, as a result Sher Mohammad fell on the ground. Rest of accused persons had caught hold of Sher Mohammad and thereafter accused Sham Sunder had assaulted Sher Mohammad. He informed the Police. He has admitted his report EXPW-AK. He has further stated that he had informed Pawan Kumar (PW) present on the spot that he was going to inform the police. Sher Mohammad died on third day of the occurrence. He also received stitches. He has identified the weapon of offence in the court allegedly used in the occurrence by accused Sham Sunder. He had identified accused during the test identification parade conducted during investigation through Tehsildar. In cross examination, he has stated that he knew Pawan Kumar (PW) and accused Sh