Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(P&H) 660

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUDHIR SINGH, KARAMJIT SINGH, JJ.
State of Hayana – Applicant
Versus
Karam Chand & Ors. – Respondent
CRM-A NO. 2248-MA of 2017 (O&M)
Decided On : 30-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Manish Dadwal, AAG, Haryana; For the Appellant
Mr. Karambeer Singh Randhawa, Advocate for Mr. Satbir Singh Gill, Advocate; For the Respondents

The court upheld the acquittal of the accused due to unexplained delay in FIR lodging and lack of corroborative evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307, 323, 341 - Acquittal of accused - The trial court acquitted the accused on grounds of unexplained delay in lodging FIR and lack of corroborative medical evidence, finding the complainant's testimony untrustworthy due to manipulation of medical records. (Paras 6, 12, 19)

(B) FIR - Delay in lodging - The court emphasized that undue delay in lodging an FIR raises suspicion and necessitates a satisfactory explanation from the prosecution, which was not provided in this case. (Paras 12, 20)

Facts of the case:
The complainant was assaulted by the accused, resulting in injuries, but there was a significant delay of six days in lodging the FIR, which the trial court found suspicious.

Findings of Court:
The trial court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish a trustworthy case due to the unexplained delay and manipulation of medical records.

Issues: The primary issues were the credibility of the complainant's testimony and the implications of the delay in lodging the FIR.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the trial court's acquittal was justified due to the lack of corroborative evidence and the significant delay in lodging the FIR, which raised doubts about the prosecution's case.

Result: Leave to appeal is declined.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Karamjit Singh, J.

This leave to appeal is directed against judgment dated 19.05.2017 rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa vide which, it acquitted the accused (now respondents), in a criminal case having FIR No.495 dated 23.05.2014 under Sections 307, 323, 341 IPC, Police Station City Sirsa.

2. The facts of prosecution case, in brief, are that complainant Banwari Lal was a tractor driver and on 17.05.2014, his employer (a tractor owner) called him to his house and the complainant was coming back to his house after meeting his employer and on the way at about 11:30 PM, he was intercepted by Bablu @ Suraj, who slapped the complainant upon which the complainant shouted and then Baljit, younger brother of Bablu @ Suraj, also came there and then both the brothers forcibly took the complainant to their house. Karam Chand father of Bablu @ Suraj and Baljit Singh was present in the house and then all three of them started beating the complainant. In the meantime, Ramesh son of Uday Pal and Billu son of unknown also reached there and they also started thrashing the complainant. One of the accused pushed the complainant as a result of which, head of the complainant struck against wall and he sustained injury. On the next morning, the complainant was found lying outside the main gate of house of his brother from where, he was taken to General Hospital, Sirsa where the concerned doctor conducted medico legal examination of the complainant and then complainant was admitted in a private hospital namely Bombay Neuro Multi Speciality Hospital, Sirsa where the complainant was undergoing treatment till 22.05.2014 and during this period, the concerned doctor declared the complainant unfit to make any statement. Finally, the statement of complainant with regard to aforesaid incident was recorded by the police on 23.05.2014 and consequently, FIR Ex.P-6 was registered against the accused persons. During investigation, the accused persons were arrested. On completion of investigation, challan was presented in the Court of Area Magistrate. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

3. On finding a prima facie case, the accused (now respondents) were charge-sheeted under Sections 307, 323, 325, 341 read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. The prosecution in support of its case examined PW-1 complainant Banwari Lal, who supported the version narrated by him in FIR Ex.P-6. PW-2 SI Raja Ram, proved FIR Ex.P-6 and police requests Ex.P-2 and Ex.P-4 seeking opinion of the concerned doctor regarding fitness of the complainant. PW-3 ASI Subhash Chander was author of FIR Ex.P-6 and he also proved endorsement Ex.P-17. PW-4 HC Mohan Lal, proved scaled site plan Ex.P-18 of the place of occurrence which was drawn by him. PW-5 Dhanpat Ram brother of the complainant deposed that on 18.05.2014, Banwari Lal was found lying outside the gate of his house and thereafter, injured Banwari Lal was taken to General Hospital, Sirsa from where, he was shifted to Bombay Neuro Speciality Hospital, Sirsa, he also proved recovery memo Ex.P-15 whereby the shirt which the complainant was wearing at the time of occurrence was taken into possession by the police. PW-6 Dr. Paramdeep Garg proved MLR dated 18.05.2014 Ex.P-19 of the complainant, being the doctor who conducted said medico legal examination in General Hospital, Sirsa. He also proved his endorsement Ex.P-3 and medical opinions Ex.P-10 and Ex.P-14. PW-7 Dr. Sandeep Sihag deposed that on 18.05.2014 at about 02:00 PM, complainant was admitted in their hospital namely Bombay Neuro Multi Speciality Hospital, Sirsa and he proved bed head ticket P-22 and his endorsements Ex.P-23 to Ex.P-27 spanning from 18.05.2014 to 22.05.2014, he also proved his endorsement Ex.P-28 whereby complainant was declared fit to make statement on 23.05.2014. He also proved his medical opinion Ex.P-11 dated 28..05.2014. PW-8 Dr. Santosh Aggarwal proved CT Scan report Ex.P-30 an