Himachal Pradesh High Court
Pushap Raj And Another vs Dile Ram on 27 February, 2017
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
.
Cr. Appeal No. 414 of 2008
Decided on : 27/02/2017
Pushap Raj and another .....Appellants.
of
Versus
Dile Ram .....Respondent.
Coram
rt
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
For the Appellants: Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate.
_______________________________________________________
Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (Oral)
The complainants stand aggrieved by the verdict of acquittal pronounced upon the accused/respondent by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi.
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP...2...
2. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed .
by complainants Pushap Raj and Yash Pal against the accused that with the motive to harm their reputation and to defame them, the accused has levelled false allegations calling them criminals in the presence of public, relatives, near and dears. It is of alleged that the accused has declared publicly that they have set rt on fire the shop of the accused on 12.11.2004. The complainants in their preliminary evidence examined Pushap Raj as CW-1, Yash Pal complainant as CW-2, Hukam Chand as CW-3, Hem Raj as CW-4 and one Tej Singh as CW-5 and placed on record copy of legal notice Ex.CW-1/A and copy of reply Ex.CW-
1/B.
2. After recording of preliminary evidence Court of the SDJM took cognizance against the accused and notice of accusation under Section 500 I.P.C was put to him on 28.6.2007 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to prove its case, the complainants examined 7 witnesses. On closure of complainants' evidence, the statement ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...3...
of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal .
Procedure, was recorded in which he pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. He did not choose to lead any evidence in defence.
4. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned of trial Court returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused.
5. The rt learned counsel for the complainants' has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation by it of the relevant material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal being reversed by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of conviction.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has with considerable force and vigour contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the Court below standing based on a ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...4...
mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record by the .
learned trial Court and theirs not necessitating any interference, rather theirs meriting vindication.
7. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side has with studied care and incision, of evaluated the entire evidence on record.
8. rt The learned counsel for the complainants has contended qua the learned trial Magistrate mis-analyzing/mis-appreciating the testimonies of the complaints' witnesses wherein they with utmost categoricality besides with inter-se harmony, voiced qua the incriminatory derogatory utterances holding echoings therein qua the complainants' setting ablaze his shop on 12.11.2004 standing pronounced by the accused upon the complainants' on 16.12.2004. For testing the vigour of the contention addressed herebefore by the counsel for the complainants' it is imperative to advert to the statement of the complainants besides their witnesses, as stood recorded at the pre-summons issuance stage.
At the stage prior to the learned trial Magistrate ordering for ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...5...
issuance of summons upon the accused, the complainants had .
testified therein qua on 16.12.2004, on theirs visiting the house of the accused qua thereat the accused, in their presence besides in the presence of the respectables of the village also in the presence of the Pradhan of the Panchayat concerned, confessing of qua his rearing false allegations qua the complainants' setting rt ablaze his shop on 12.11.2004. However, subsequent to the learned trial Magistrate putting notice of accusation to the accused for his committing an offence punishable under Section 500 IPC, the complainants' in proof thereof had apart from leading into the witness box one Tej Singh, the Pradhan of the Panchayat concerned in whose presence a confession stood made on 16.12.2004 by the accused, led other witnesses into the witness box, yet the dependence made by the complainants' upon witnesses other than the Pradhan of the Panchayat concerned, to succor the allegations constituted in the complaint, may not hold any tenacity, contrarily their statements are discardable apparently when the complainant Pushap Raj in his ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...6...
testimony recorded at the stage preceding the putting of notice .
of accusation to the accused by the learned trial Magistrate, he omitted to with specificity pronounce their names therein whereupon an inference is erectable qua the complainant subsequently contriving the naming of witnesses other than Tej of Singh, the Pradhan of the Panchayat concerned who significantly rt on 16.12.2004 whereat on the complainants' visiting his house overheard the accused making a confession before them qua his rearing false allegations against the complainants' qua theirs setting ablaze his shop. Consequently, the statement of the complainants' beside the statement of Tej Singh recorded at the stage subsequent to the putting by the learned trial Magistrate the notice of accusation upon the accused, remains alone to be analyzed, for discerning therefrom qua the complainants' emphatically succeeding in leading convincing evidence qua the allegations made by them in the complaint. A close circumspect reading of the deposition of CW-2 unveils qua in his cross examination his underscoring his acquiescence to the suggestion put to him by ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...7...
the learned counsel for the accused qua his on the day .
subsequent to his shop standing gutted in a fire, his making a statement before the Tehsildar and before the Police, who in quick spontaneity thereto visited the relevant site of occurrence, holding echoings qua his shop catching fire on account of short-
of circuit. The aforesaid acquiescence made by CW-2 in his cross-
rt examination holding therewithin echoings qua the accused, not at the outset inculpating the complainants, for theirs setting afire his shop, when construed in tandem with the testimony of CW-5, one Tej Singh the Pradhan of the Panchayat concerned, in whose presence the complainant in his testimony recorded at the pre summons issuance stage, communicates qua on 16.12.2004 on the complainants' visiting the house of the accused, thereat the latter in the presence of CW-5 confessing qua his rearing false allegations qua the accused setting ablaze his shop, unveils qua his though corroborating the testimony held in the cross-
examination of the CW-2 qua the accused at the outset both before the Tehsildar and before the Police officials who in quick ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...8...
spontaneity to the relevant shop catching fire visited the relevant .
site making a proclamation before them qua the eruption of fire in his shop arising from short circuiting, nonetheless qua the pivotal factum of the complainants, visiting the house of the accused on 16.12.2004 whereat the latter made a confessional of statement before CW-3 qua his rearing an allegation qua the rt complainants setting ablaze his shop also visibly holds intra se corroborative echoings adversarial vis.a.vis the defence.
Reiteratedly in his examination in chief CW-3 rather has corroborated the version propounded in the examination in chief of CW-1 qua on 16.12.2004, the accused in his presence besides in the presence of Tej Singh making a confession qua his rearing false allegations qua the complainants' setting afire his shop.
Consequently, even if the complainant had before the Police besides before the Tehsildar who in quick spontaneity to the ill-
fated occurrence visited the relevant site of occurrence ascribed the reason of his shop catching fire to short circuiting yet exculpation thereat of the guilt by the complainant by the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...9...
accused, holds no relevance conspicuously in the face of the .
uncontroverted visible factum of both CW-2 and CW-3 with intra se corroboration deposing qua on 16.12.2004, the accused, on the complaints' visiting his homestead his thereat in the presence of the complainants' besides in the presence of CW-3 confessing of qua his nursing false allegations qua the complainants' setting rt his shop on fire. The aforesaid deposition of the complainants' witnesses when remained un-eroded of their sanctity hence constitute formidable evidence of sinewed vigour, for succoring the allegations constituted in the complaint whereas the learned trial Court in its verdict has remained unmindful of the impact of the afore referred depositions besides obviously has omitted to analyze their probative value. Consequently, this court is constrained to conclude qua the learned trial Magistrate omitting to appreciate the best evidence emphatically pronouncing upon the guilt of the accused/respondent. In aftermath, reinforcingly, it can be formidably concluded, qua the findings returned by the learned trial Court meriting interference. In summa, the verdict ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP ...10...
recorded by the learned trial Magistrate suffers from a gross .
infirmity as well as a perversity of non appraisal of the relevant and germane evidence whereupon this Court is constrained to reverse the findings of acquittal pronounced upon the accused.
The appeal is accepted. The impugned judgement is quashed of and set-aside. The accused be produced before this Court on rt 20th March, 2017 for his thereon being heard on the quantum of sentence.
27th February, 2017. ( Sureshwar Thakur ) ™ Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:56:54 :::HCHP