IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Appeal No.4103 of 2013

Reserved on: 02.12.2025

Decided on: 01.01.2026

State of H.P.

...…. Appellant

Versus

Manohar Singh & others f …. Respondents

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the Appellant : Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional

Advocate General.

For the Respondents : M/s Parav Sharma and Shekhar

Badola, Advocates.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

g The present appeal is directed against the judgment

idated 20.03.2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First

Class, Court No. II, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court), vide which the respondents (accused before the learned Trial Court) were acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, and 325, read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (The parties shall

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes.

hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 323 and 325 read with Section 149 of the IPC. It was asserted that the informant, Balwant Singh (PW-1), owned the land adjacent to the house of Manohar Singth (accused No. 1). A Seesham tree existed on his land, which fell on 08.07.2009 due to heavy rain. Balibhadar Singh (PW-2) and Krishan Singh (PW-4) went to cut it. Manohar Singh, his two sons, his wife and daughter came out of the house and got into a quarrel with Balwant Singh and hother persons at about 4:45 a.m. They also gave beatings to gBalibhadar Singh (PW-2). Accused Manohar Singh picked up a stick and inflicted a blow on the head of Balibhadar Singh (PW-2), who suffered a bleeding injury. The informant and Balibhadar Singh (PW-2) sustained injury in the incident. Krishan Chand (PW-4) rescued the informant from the accused. The matter was reported to the police, and the police registered the F.I.R. (Ext.PW-1/A). SI Baldev Singh (PW-12) investigated the matter. He filed an application (Ext.PW-12/A) for the medical examination of the injured. Dr Arun Gupta (PW-9)

medically examined Balibhadar(PW-2) and found he had sustained multiple injuries. He advised an X-ray and the opinion of the dental surgeon. No fracture was detected in the part x-rayed. Dr Arun Gupta advised C.T. Scan. Dr P.K. Soni (PW-11) conducted the CT scan of the injured. Dr Ankit Shukla (PW-10) went through C.T. scan of Bfalibhadar and issued a report (Ext.PW-10/A) describing a fracture of the right nasal bone. Dental Surgeon, Dr K.K. Bansal (PW-7), examined Balibhadar (PW-2) and found that he had not sustained any fracture or dislocation of the tooth. He issued his opinion (Ext.PW-7/B). Dr Arun issued his final opinion that the nature of the injury was grievous. He issued MLC (Ext.PW-9/C). Dr Arun Gupta (PW-9) also examined the informant Balwant Singh (PW-1) and found that he had sustained simple injuries. He issued MLC (Ext.PW-9/D). ASI Madan Mohan (PW-8) investigated the matter. He visited the spot and prepared the site plan (Ext.PW-8/A). Balwant Singh (PW-1) produced one Kurta (Ext.P1) and Pyjama (Ext.P2), which were torn during the incident. These were put in a cloth parcel, and the parcel was sealed with five seal impressions of seal ‘A’. Balibhadar produced under vest (Ext.P4), and T-shirt (Ext.P5), which were put in a cloth parcel and the parcel was sealed with five seal impressions of seal ‘A’. The seal impression (Ext.PW-8/B was taken on a separate piece of cloth, and the seal was handed over to Hoshiar Singh after its use. Cloth parcels were seized vide memos (Ext.PW-1/A and Ext.PW-1/B). Manohar Singh produced the stick (Ext.P3), which was used for inflicting injury on the head of Balibhadar Singh (PW-2). Thfe stick was seized vide memo (Ext.PW-1/C) The statements of prosecution witnesses were