Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Narender Kumar on 13 May, 2015
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CRMPM No.101 of 2015 Date of Decision : 13.5.2015 .
State of Himachal Pradesh ....Petitioner.
versus
Narender Kumar ...Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. R.S. Verma, Additional Advocate General.
For the Respondent
r : None.
Sanjay Karol, Judge
Petitioner-State has filed the present petition under the provisions of Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 22.9.2014, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Case No.90-II/2012, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh v. Narender Kumar, whereby accused-
respondent Narender Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the accused) stands acquitted of the charge for having committed offence, punishable under the provisions of Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:10:28 :::HCHP...2...
2. In connection with FIR No.146, dated 21.9.2011 (Ex. PW-7/D), registered at Police Station, .
Dehra, under the provisions of Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, accused Narender Kumar was charged to face trial, for having committed an offence, punishable under the provisions of Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on 11.9.2011 at 11 a.m., when complainant Rajinder Kumar (PW-5) and his mother Shankri Devi (PW-6) were taking meals, accused having a bamboo stick in his hand came there and gave beatings to the complainant, who received injuries on his left hand and back. Complaint was lodged, on 12.9.2011 at 1.25 p.m, at Police Station Dehra, which was entered in the Daily Diary (copy Ex.
PW-2/A), on the basis of which FIR No.146, dated 21.9.2011 was registered. Investigation was conducted by ASI Kuldeep Kumar (PW-7), who visited the spot on 2.10.2011; prepared site map (Ex.PW-7/A); took into possession danda (Ex.P-1), vide Memo (Ex. PW-1/A), in the presence of Pawan Kumar (PW-1) and Shankri Devi (PW-6).
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:10:28 :::HCHP...3...
4. Based on the testimonies of witnesses and the material on record, trial Court acquitted the accused .
of the charged offence. Hence, the present petition for leave to appeal by the State.
5. Mr. R.S. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, has taken me through the record of trial Court, including testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.
6. The complaint, belated in nature, does not inspire confidence, with regard to the genesis of the dispute. There is prior animosity inter se the parties and there are contradictions, exaggerations and improvements, rendering the version, so disclosed by members of the complainant party, i.e. Rajinder Kumar (PW-5) and Shankri Devi (PW-6), to be shaky and uninspiring in confidence. No elaborate discussion is required, for the findings returned in paras-13, 14 & 15 of the judgment and the reasoning so adopted by the trial Court, cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the record, which stands perused in Court.
7. Hence, trial Court, in my considered view, rightly acquitted the accused. There is no error apparent on the face of record or illegality or perversity, resulting ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:10:28 :::HCHP ...4...
into miscarriage of justice, in the findings returned by the trial Court, warranting interference by this Court.
.
As such, present petition for leave to appeal, being without any merit, is dismissed and disposed of.
( Sanjay Karol ),
May 13, 2015(sd) Judge.
r to
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:10:28 :::HCHP