Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Vijay Pal Singh And Ors. on 13 April, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH Court No. - 27 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 378 No. - 80 of 2013 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Vijay Pal Singh And Ors. Counsel for Applicant :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard Sri Brijendra Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.
This application has been filed for leave to appeal to challenge the the judgment and order dated 08.02.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court no.6 District Sitapur in Sessions Trial No.941 of 2003 arising out Case Crime No. 369 of 1998 under Sections 452 and 323 read with Section 34 and 506 IPC, Police Station Mishrikh, District Sitapur thereby acquitting the respondents from the charges levelled against them.
As per prosecution case, complainant/ Shripal (P.W.-1) has stated in the FIR that his son had gone to school on 27.11.1998 and some altercation took place on the way between his son and the boys of Raj Nagar. He has mentioned in the FIR that due to aforesaid enmity, the accused-respondents entered into his house at about 10.00 a.m. on 28.11.1998 and they had beaten him due to which head of the complainant got fractured. He further assigned the role of assault with Stick, Lathi Danda and Kanta to the accused-respondents. He has further mentioned in the FIR that after raising alarm, Ram Lotan son of Jawahar and Hirai son of Chotkau came to the spot and saved him and thereafter the accused persons ran away from the spot. The FIR was lodged at 11.30 a.m. at 28.11.1998 in Case Crime no. 369 of 1998 under sections 452,323 read with section 34 506 IPC and 3(1) 10 of SC/ST Act at police Station Mishrikh District Sitapur.
The injured (P.W.-1) was examined by the doctor and he had received four injuries which are as follows:-
pksV ua0&1& 6lseh X 0.5 lseh X LdSYi rd xgjh QVk gqvk ?kko tks 'kjhj ds nk;h vksj nk;s dku ls 15 lseh0 Åij FkkA pksV ua0&2& 7lseh0 X 3 lseh ds {ks=Qy esa uhyxw fu'kku tks nkfguh Hkqtk ds ckgjh fgLLks ij FksA ;g da/ks ds tksM+ ls 10 lseh0 uhps FksA pksV ua0&3& 5lseh0 X 4 lseh0 ds {ks=Qy esa [kjk'k ;qDr uhyxw fu'kku cka;s vxz Hkqtk ds fiNys fgLls esa dykbZ ds tksM+ ls 9-00 lseh0 Åij FksA pksV ua0&4& 5lseh0 X 5 lseh0 ekal rd xgjk QVk gqvk ?kko tks cka;s gkFk ds e/;ek o fjax fQaxj ds chp gFksyh ij Fkk tks dykbZ ds tksM+ ls 8-00 lseh0 uhps FkkA^ The case was investigated by Investigating Officer, who filed the charge-sheet against the accused respondent under sections 452,323,506 and 3(1) X of the SC/ST Act. The case was committed on 03.11.2003 and thereafter charges were framed on 26.10.2006 and the accused pleaded not guilty of the charges and requested for trial.
The prosecution had produced four witnesses, namely, Shripal ( P.W.-1) , Guddi Devi ( P.W.-2), Constable Ram Pratap (P.W.-3) and Dr. S.K. Rawat (P.W.-4). The accused-respondents were confronted under section 313 Cr.P.C. and they deposed before the court that they were falsely implicated and also deposed that due to pressure of Village Pradhan case was lodged against them because enmity was going on against Pradhan. He further deposed before the court that injured Shripal ( P.W.-1) is related to Gram Pradhan , who lastly implicated the case against them.
After adducing the evidence, learned trial court acquitted the accused- respondents, hence the present application for leave to appeal has been filed by the State.
Shripal (P.W.-1) has reiterated the same fact before the court in examination-in-chief as has been made in the FIR. Guddi Devi (P.W.-2) is wife of Shripal (P.W.-1) has also tried to support the prosecution case. The other persons Ram Lotan and Herai, who were present on the place of incident, were not examined and Smt. Guddi ( P.W.-2) who is the wife of Shripal has been examined, thus she does not appear to be witness of the FIR. Dr. S.K. Rawat (P.W.-4 ) has examined and he has deposed before the Court that injuries nos.2 and 4 are simple in nature and injuries no. 1 and 3 are kept in observation and the same could have been caused by hard and blunt object. He further deposed that all the injuries could have been caused by Lathi and Danda.
The incident took place on 28.11.1998 at 10.00 a.m. as per version of the F.I.R. and the F.I.R. was lodged on the same day on 11.30 a.m.. The distance between the police station and the place of occurrence is about 08 kilometers.
Shirpal (P.W.-1) in his cross examination has admitted that he fell down on the ground and was unconscious and remained unconscious for three hours and when he came to the hospital then he became conscious after three hours. He further deposed that he went to police station at about 02.00 p.m. in day time thereafter report was lodged.
Guddi Devi ( P.W.-2) was also examined before the court below and she deposed that she went to the hospital and it was about 12.00-01.00 in day time . She further stated that injured got conscious after one and half hours and at that time it was time about 2.30-3.00 p.m. in day time. She further deposed before the court that she met Darogaji at about 3.00 and FIR was lodged at 04.00 p.m. in day time. it appears that the report was lodged in between 02.00-4.00 p.m. in day time but the actual time indicates that it was lodged at 11.30 a.m. thus the FIR is anti time .
Shripal (P.W.-1) has deposed before the court that all the accused-respondents came to his house and had beaten with lathi, danda, Kanta and other weapons. The injured,Shripal (P.W.-1) has not specified the specific role to any accused-respondent that who had caused injury with hard weapon. He also could not identified who caused the head injury. In the examination-in-chief Shripal (P.W.-1) has deposed that Vijay Pal Singh having Kanta and Ravindra Singh having Lathi. Shripal, in his cross-examination has not indicated any weapon to other accused-respondents whereas the statement given by Guddi Devi ( P.W-2) indicates all the accused respondents entered into the house and they had beaten the injured Shripal (P.W.-1) indiscriminately. Guddi (P.W.-2) has further deposed that Vijay Pal Singh having Kanta in his hand and other accused respondents having lathi in their hand. Shripal ( P.W.-1) has deposed in his cross-examination that he received injury in his head with Kanta whereas Guddi ( P.W.-2) in her cross-examination has stated that 3 to 4 blows has been caused with sharp weapon. She has further deposed that 25-30 injuries have been caused with lathi and danda but as per medical report there is no injury of sharp weapon.
Dr. S.K. Rawat ( P.W.-4) has already deposed before the court below that injuries could have been caused by hard blunt object. There are major contradiction between Shripal (P.W.-1) and Guddi Devi ( P.W-2) and the injuries which has been received by the injured Shripal.
Guddi Devi ( P.W-2) has not been mentioned as witnesses in the FIR and she was also not witness of the incident and she has also not received any injury, therefore, the presence of Guddi Devi ( P.W-2) is doubtful.
Shripal (P.W.-1) has also admitted in the cross examination that witness Herai is uncle and Ram Lotan is also relative but they were not examined before the court who belongs to the same locality.
Since no independent witness was produced by the prosecution side, the case appears to be doubtful. The another fact has come on record in the cross-examination of Guddi Devi ( P.W-2) that the FIR was lodged at the behest of Gram Pradhan, who had named the accused-respondents. She further deposed that Sant Ram, Gram Pradhan got report written with the help of Advocate and he had relation with the police personnel .
Looking into the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any good ground to interfere in the order dated 08.02.2013 passed by the court below. The application for leave to appeal is liable to be rejected.
Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is rejected.
Since, the application for leave to appeal is rejected, the appeal is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.4.2023 dk/