The need for reliable, cogent, and convincing evidence to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt, and the importance of corroborating witness statements.

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal has been filed against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Rajouri, in File No. 10/Cr. Appeal in case titled ‘Pritam Singh and others vs. State of J&K’ on 01.11.2008, whereby the conviction recorded by the trial Court vide order dated 31.07.2003, has been set aside and the accused/respondents were acquitted. The said order of acquittal, passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Rajouri, has been challenged in this appeal, precisely on the ground that the trial Court, after properly appreciating the evidence, convicted the accused/respondents vide judgment dated 01.11.2008 and sentenced them to imprisonment.

2. There was enough substantial evidence on record to justify the conviction so recorded by the trial Court but the learned Sessions Judge, has by misappreciating the evidence of the prosecution witnesses acquitted the accused by setting aside the judgment passed by the trial Court. The order of acquittal, thus, recorded in appeal is bad in law and against the evidence.

3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also gone through the evidence recorded by the trial Court as well as the judgment passed by the trial Court and the impugned judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge.

4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that, on 30.06.2002, the accused (respondents herein) removed the Mangoes from the trees belonging to the complainant and on 30.07.2002, when complainant Sunita Devi enquired from the accused as to why they had taken away the Mangoes, accused entered into the compound of the complainant while they were armed with sticks and inflicted injuries to her and her husband and also abused them.

5. A report was made regarding such occurrence which was investigated by the Police and on investigation, the Police found the involvement of the accused in the alleged occurrence and found offences punishable under Sections 451, 323, 504 and 34 of RPC established against them and, accordingly, presented a Challan before the Court of JMIC, Nowshera.

6. The trial Court recorded the statements of the respondents accused under Section 242 of CrPC and put the allegations to them to which they pleaded not guilty and opted for trial. To prove the allegations, the prosecution produced and examined PWs Sunita Devi, Sat Paul, Babu Ram, Girdhari Lal, Dr. Khem Raj Khajuria, Dr. K.K. Sharma, Surgeon Specialist, ASI Isher Singh (I.O) and the I.O. recorded the statement of the accused in terms of Section 342 CrPC. The respondents accused produced in defence DW Subash Chander and Iqbal Kour as witnesses.

7. After recording the statement of the witnesses, the trial Court fond offences punishable under Sections 451 and 323 of RPC established against the accused and, accordingly, sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 451 of RPC and three months for offence under Section 323 of RPC and also fine of Rs. 1000/- to each of the accused.

8. The said judgment, convicting and sentencing the accused was challenged before the learned Sessions Judge in appeal and the learned Sessions Judge, after having appreciated the evidence on record found that there are material contradictions in the evidence produced by the prosecution and the evidence is such on which conviction cannot be recorded, therefore, the learned Sessions Judge, held that the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court was not sustainable and the same is not based on sound principles of law and while setting aside the judgment, acquitted the accused.

9. The record of the trial Court would reveal that the accused were prosecuted and tried on the allegation that on 30.06.2002, they removed Mangoes from the trees of Sunita Devi in her absence and on 03.07.2002, at about 07:00 AM, when she enquired from them as to why they had removed the Mangoes, accused abused her and thereafter they armed with sticks with criminal intention trespassed into the compound o