Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Ravinder Kumar And Another on 30 September, 2022
Author: Sushil Kukreja
Bench: Sushil Kukreja
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
.
ON THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.307 of 2010
Between:-
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
.... APPELLANT
(BY MR. BHARAT BHUSHAN, ADDITIONAL
ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH MR. KUNAL
THAKUR, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL)
AND
1. RAVINDER KUMAR
SON OF SHRI UTTAM CHAND,
R/O KALOHA, POLICE STATION,
JAWALAMUKHI, DISTT. KANGRA, H.P.
2. RISHPAL SINGH,
SON OF SHRI ROSHAN LAL,
R/O KALOHA, POLICE STATION
JAWALAMUKHI, DISTT. KANGRA, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. RAHUL MAHAJAN,
ADVOCATE)
RESERVED ON : 15TH SEPTEMBER, 2022.
DECIDED ON : 30TH SEPTEMBER, 2022.
::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS
2
This appeal coming on for judgment this day, Hon'ble
Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, delivered the following:
.
JUDGMENT
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/ State of H.P., challenging the judgment dated 22.03.2010, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No.II, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. in Criminal Case No.21-II/2007, titled State of Himachal Pradesh versus Ravinder Kumar and another, whereby the respondents/accused persons were acquitted of the offences under Sections 451, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is that on 17.10.2006 complainant Suresh Kumar lodged a complaint at Police Station Jawalamukhi, to the effect that he was working as labourer for the last two months in the house of one Shanti Devi for construction of her house and on 16.10.2006, at about 9.00 pm., when he was taking dinner in the verandah of the house of Shanti Devi, the accused persons, namely, Ravinder Kumar and Rishpal Singh came there, shouted abuses and asked him to come out. They caught hold of the complainant, gave fist and kick ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 3 blows and dragged him outside the verandah. The complainant cried for help, on this, Shanti Devi and her daughter-in-law .
rescued him from the clutches of the accused persons. The complainant sustained injuries on his left arm, chest and other parts of the body. As per version of the complainant, he was employed by accused Ravinder Kumar to pluck mangoes, but he had not been given the wages and when complainant had asked accused Ravinder Kumar to pay his wages, he threatened him and had also given him beatings.
3. On the basis of statement of complainant, a case under Sections 451, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was registered against the accused persons. The complainant was got medically examined. During investigation, spot map was prepared and statements of the witnesses were recorded. The injuries on the person of complainant were found simple in nature. After the completion of investigation, challan was prepared against the accused persons.
4. On finding prima facie case against the accused persons, notice of accusation was put to them under Sections 451, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 4 vide order dated 05.05.2008, to which, the accused persons did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
.
5. In order to prove its case, during trial, prosecution has examined six witnesses. After the close of prosecution evidence, accused persons, when examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prayed that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. However, the accused persons did not examine any witness in their defence.
6. Learned trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated 22.03.2010, acquitted the accused persons from the offences under Sections 451, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34, IPC.
Hence, the present appeal by the State of Himachal Pradesh.
7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court, State had filed the present appeal.
8. Learned Deputy Advocate General has contended that the learned trial Court has adopted a hyper technical approach by ignoring the prosecution evidence as it has been proved on record that the accused persons had given beatings to the complainant and also threatened him with dire consequences.
::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 5With all these submissions, he has prayed for acceptance of the appeal.
.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the accused persons has contended that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt, therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused persons from the charges framed against them.
10. I have heard learned Deputy Advocate General as well as learned counsel for the respondents/accused persons and have also gone through the record carefully.
11. At the very outset, it needs to be observed that the appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the trial Court rendering acquittal as an order of acquittal adds up to the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused. In Dhanapal vs. State By Public Prosecutor, Madras, (2009) 10 SCC 401, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the presumption of innocence of the accused is strengthened by the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment reads as under: -
"25. The same principle has been followed in Atley v. State of U.P. AIR 1955 SC 807 (at pp.::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 6
809-10 para 5), wherein the Court said:
"5. ...It has been laid down by this Court that it is open to the High Court on an appeal against an .
order of acquittal to review the entire evidence and to come to its own conclusion, of course, keeping in view the well-established rule that the presumption of innocence of the accused is not weakened but strengthened by the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court Thus, the Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the Trial Court rendering acquittal. Which had the advantage of observing the demeanor of witnesses whose evidence have been recorded in its presence.
It is also well settled that the court of appeal has as wide powers of appreciation of evidence in an appeal against an order of acquittal as in the case of an appeal against an order of conviction, subject to the riders that the presumption of innocence with which the accused person starts in the trial court continues even up to the appellate stage and that the appellate court should attach due weight to the opinion of the trial court which recorded the order of acquittal."
12. In N.Vijaykumar vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 3 Supreme Court Cases 687, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him and secondly, the presumption of his innocence is further strengthened by the judgment of his acquittal passed by the trial ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 7 court. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment reads as follows: -
.
"20. ......... By considering the long line of earlier cases this Court in the judgment in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415 has laid down the general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal. Para 42 of the judgment which is relevant reads as under:
"42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge :-
(1) to (3) xxx xxx xxx (4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
13. In Jafarudheen & Ors. vs State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 403, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the presumption that enures in favour of the accused has to be ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 8 disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment reads .
as under:-
"25. While dealing with an appeal against acquittal by invoking Section 378 of the Cr.PC, the Appellate Court has to consider whether the Trial Court's view can be termed as a possible one, particularly when evidence on record has been analyzed. The reason is that an order of acquittal adds up to the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused. Thus, the Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the Trial Court rendering acquittal. Therefore, the presumption in favour of the accused does not get weakened but only strengthened. Such a double presumption that enures in favour of the accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters."
14. Therefore, the instant appeal has to be decided in view of the aforesaid settled legal preposition. In the case in hand, the prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses.
The complainant has been examined as PW-1, whereas, PW-3 Shanti Devi and PW-4 Meena Kumari are his relatives. PW-5 HC Vipan Chand is the Investigating Officer, whereas, PW-6 Dr. Satinder Verma is the Medical Officer. It has come in the evidence on record that there is enmity between the accused ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 9 persons and PW-3 Shanti Devi for the last 5 to 7 years and there is no social interaction between Shanti Devi and the accused .
persons. No independent witness has been examined by the prosecution despite the fact that there are various houses situated near the place of occurrence. PW-3 Shanti Devi, in her cross-
examination, has deposed that there are 5 to 7 houses situated in between her house and the house of the accused persons and the quarrel lasted for 30-45 minutes. PW-4 Meena Kumari admitted that some persons had assembled on the spot on hearing the noise and she had also stated that there are 5-7 houses in between the houses of Shanti Devi and the accused persons. Therefore, it is highly improbable that no one came out from their houses to the spot. Hence, non-association of the independent witnesses creates a doubt about the truthfulness of the case of the prosecution.
15. There are also various contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. As per statement of PW-3 Shanti Devi, she had accompanied Suresh Kumar to the Police Station on 17.10.2006 and her statement was recorded on that day itself at the Police Station and PW-1 Suresh Kumar had ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 10 stated, in his cross-examination, that Shanti Devi was with him when he went to the police station to lodge the F.I.R. and her .
statement was recorded by the police on that day itself, but the perusal of the statement of PW-3 Shanti Devi recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., reveals that her statement was recorded on 18.10.2006. PW-6 Dr. Satinder Verma also admitted, in his cross-
examination, that the injuries sustained by the complainant are possible on account of fall. There is also a contradiction qua the alleged place of occurrence and the site plan. Moreover, there is a delay in lodging the FIR by the complainant as the occurrence had allegedly taken place on 16.10.2006 at about 9:00 p.m., whereas, the F.I.R.was lodged with the police on 17.10.2006 at 5:00 p.m., however, there is no explanation qua the delay in lodging the FIR by the complainant.
16. Thus, all these things creates a serious doubt about the truthfulness and genuineness of the case of the prosecution, as such, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt against the accused persons and the learned trial Court did not commit any illegality in passing the impugned ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS 11 judgment of acquittal.
17. The State has failed to point out any irregularity or .
illegality much less perversity in the judgment of the acquittal passed by the learned trial Court, as such, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. The bails bonds, if any, furnished by the accused persons are discharged. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back.
r (Sushil Kukreja)
Judge
September 30, 2022
(VH)
::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2022 09:49:09 :::CIS