SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(P&H) 926

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J.
Ramdia - Appellant
Vs.
Krishan And Others - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (A) No. 33 of 2014
Decided On : 21-08-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Ramesh Hooda, Adv., V.D. Sharma, Adv., Himmat Singh, Adv.

The need for strong evidence to challenge a judgment of acquittal and the importance of consistent and reliable testimony.

Headnote:

Section 378 Cr.P.C. - Appeal against Acquittal - Indian Penal Code - Sections 323, 452, 506, 34 - [SUMMARY OF ACT SECTIONS]

Fact of the Case:

The complainant alleged that the accused persons forcibly entered his house and assaulted him, but the trial court dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the complainant's evidence was not consistent and failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court also noted discrepancies in the evidence and the complainant's conduct, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

Issues: Inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence, failure to produce key witnesses for cross-examination, and a pattern of filing false complaints by the complainant.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for strong evidence to overturn a judgment of acquittal and highlighted the importance of consistent and reliable testimony.

Final Decision: The application for leave to file an appeal was dismissed due to the lack of infirmity in the judgments of the lower courts.

JUDGMENT :

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J.

Prayer in this application, filed under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to file appeal, is for setting aside the judgment of acquittal dated 24.11.2011 passed by the trial Court, vide which complaint filed by the applicant under Sections 323, 452, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), was dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that previously, the complainant had borrowed some amount from the accused persons, which he paid to them but they are greedy and clever. On 30.09.2004, they threatened him to teach a lesson for not making full payment. On 02.10.2004 at about 7.30 a.m., when the complainant was present at his house, accused persons forcibly entered in his house, having lathies and dandas in their hands. Accused Krishan raised lalkara to kill him and thereafter, accused Prem gave lathi blow on the back of complainant. On this, complainant fell down and accused Prem gave blows on his sole. Accused Rajinder gave danda blow on his arm. Accused Kalawati also gave danda blow on his sole. Sonu and one Ram Mehar came on the spot and rescued him from the cluthes of accused persons. While leaving, they threatened him with dire consequences. Thereafter, the complainant himself medico-legally examined on 03.10.2004 at CHC, Julana. He approached the police but no action was taken and therefore, he has filed the complaint.

3. The complainant led preliminary evidence and in view of the same, the trial Court summoned the accused persons vide order dated 15.10.2007 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 323/452 and 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

4. In pre-charge evidence, the complainant had examined Ram Mehar son of Ram Dhan as PW1, himself as PW2, his son Sonu as PW3 and Dr. Surender Singh, Medical Officer, G.H. Jind as PW4. After going the precharge evidence, the trial Court vide order dated 20.11.2009, dismissed the complaint and discharged the accused persons. This order was challenged by way of filing a revision petition and vide judgment dated 09.09.2011, the revision petition was accepted and the order dated 20.11.2009 passed by the trial Court, was set aside. Thereafter, the accused were charge-sheeted under Sections 323, 452, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. In after-charge evidence, PW1 Ramdia-complainant, PW2 Ram Mehar, PW3 Sonu were recalled for further cross-examination by the learned defence counsel. Thereafter, after-charge evidence of the complainant was closed.

6. Statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein they had denied the allegations of assaulting the complainant and denied the averments of the complaint and pleaded their innocence. In their defence, the accused persons tendered documents Mark A to Mark G and closed the defence evidence.

7. The trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated 24.11.2011, dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused-respondents. The operative part of the impugned judgment of acquittal reads as under:-

    "..... After hearing the arguments from both sides at length, I am of the considered view that the complaint is liable to be dismissed due to the following reasons mentioned below. A perusal of case file shows that this complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 30.7.2007 passed by the then learned JMIC Jind and file was ordered to be consigned to the record room. Thereafter an application for restoration of the complaint was moved on 2.8.2007. The original file was requisitioned from the record room and fresh statements of witnesses were ordered to be recorded but in the light of the observation held in a case titled M/s Indian Express Press, Bombay and another Vs. Shri N.P. Shrivastava, (1986) 1 Crimes(HC) 656, it has been categorically observed by Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court that once the accused are discharged due to the fact that complaint was dismissed in default, an application for restoration of the com

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top