(OLD NO.1229 OF 1998) v. State of Uttarakhand

2.2.1991 PW1 Pramod Kumar lodged a First Information Report at P.S. Tehri alleging therein that the appellant-accused Kripal Singh is running his shop nearby their camp. He bears enmity with security staff because they did not permit him to come inside the camp area. Today on 2.2.1991, Chowkidar Kashmir Singh was on duty at Ditco Colony since 7 PM to 7 AM, then both the appellants-accused along with their 3 or 4 companions came there at about 11 PM. They were armed with lathi and dandas by which they started beating PW2 Kashmir Singh. On hearing his cry, Harbhajan Singh, chowkidar of ‘L’ Colony reached there. He was also beaten by the appellants-accused with their lathis and dandas resulting injuries on the head of both the chowkidars. Harbhajan Singh Chowkidar told at the camp about the said quarrel and then the complainant alongwith Harbhajan Singh Dhillon (PW3) and Boota Singh Security Supervisor reached at the spot through Jeep No.DED 950. Then both the present appellants-accused along with their companions pelted stones on the jeep resulting serious injuries on the head and eyes of Dhillon (PW3). In self- defence, the chowkidars snatched the lathis from the hands of the appellants-accused, in which the appellants-accused also received simple injuries. With the same averments, the present FIR was lodged which is Ext.Ka-1. On the basis of this FIR, Chik FIR of the case was prepared, i.e. Ext.Ka-6. Necessary entry were also made in the G.D., carbon copy of which is Ext.Ka-

7. The investigation of the case was entrusted to S.I. Sunahri Lal Lavania (PW8). Kashmir Singh and Harbhajan Das were medically examined by Dr. Narendra Jha on 3.2.1991 at 12:10 AM and 12:30 AM, 3 respectively. Injury report of Kashmir Singh is Ext.Ka-2 and that of Harbhajan Dass is Ext.Ka-3. On the same day at 12:15 PM, injured Harbhajan Singh Dhillon was also medically by Dr. Mridul Pandey (PW7). Injury report of H.S. Dhillon is Ext.Ka-5. During the course of investigation, the I.O. recorded the statement of witnesses and inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site-plan Ext.Ka-8 and on completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet against the appellants-accused, which is Ext.Ka-9.

4. After receiving the charge sheet, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehri committed the case to the court of Sessions on 13.2.1992, after giving necessary copies to the appellants/accused as provided u/s 207 Cr.P.C.

5. On 19.8.1992, learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal framed the charge of offence punishable under Sections 307 and 427 of IPC against the appellants-accused. The charge was read over and explained to each of the appellant-accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 Pramod Kumar, complainant of the case, PW2 Kashmir Singh, PW3 H.S. Dhillon and PW4 Harbhajan Dass, all injured witnesses of the case, PW5 Dr. Narendra Jha, who conducted medical examination of Harbhajan Dass and Kashmir Singh, PW6 Dr. Y.S. Rana, who referred the injured H.S. Dhillon to PGI Chandigarh, PW7 Mridul Pandey, who conducted medical examination of H.S. Dhillon and PW8 Sunahri Lal Lavania, I.O. of the case. 4

7. Thereafter the statements of the appellants- accused were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The oral and documentary evidence was put to each of them in question form, who denied the allegations made against them. In defence, Madhusudan was got examined as DW1.

8. After appreciating the entire evidence on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal vide his judgment and order dated 26.5.1998 convicted and sentenced the appellants-accused as mentioned above. Against the said judgment and order, the appellants- accused have preferred the present appeal.

9. Before any further discussion, it would be pertinent to mention the injuries found on the person of PW2 Kashmir Singh, which are reproduced as under:- i) One Lacerated wound 2.5 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on right side of head, 12 cms from right mastoid, fresh blood clots present on and around the wound. ii) One lacerated wound 1 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on right side of scalp, 5 cms from occiput, fresh blood clots present over it. iii) One abrasion 7 cms x 0.2 cm, superficial present on vertral aspect of right wrist forearm. Opinion:- All injuries are simple and caused by blunt object. Duration of injuries - within 1 to 2 hours. 5

10. PW5 Dr. Narendra Jha also conducted the medical examination of Harbhajan Dass and found the following injuries on his person:- i) One abrasion 5 cms x 2 cms on right side of scalp, 10 cms above right mastoid process, fresh blood clots present over it. ii) One abrasion 3.5 cms x 2 cms on left side of head, 8 cms from left mastoid, fresh blood clots present over it. iii) One abrasion 3 cms x 2 cms on right knee. Opinion:- All injuries are simple and caused by blunt objects. Duration of injuries-within 1 to 2 hours.

11. On the same day, injured Harbhajan Singh Dhillon was also medically examined by PW7 Dr. Mridul Pandey, who found following injuries on his person:- i) Contusion left upper and lower eye-lids (black eye), blue in colour, eye-lids swollen. ii) Contusion on scalp 6 cms x 5 cms above left ext.ear, reddish in colour. iii) Contusion 12 cms x 2 cms horizontal in direction 7 cms from spine (vertebral column), red in colour. iv) Contusion 12 cms x 2 cms just below and parallel to injury no.3, red in colour. Opinion:- All injuries have been caused by some hard and blunt object within 24 hours. For nature of injury no.1 and 2, x-ray of skull AP and lateral and observation of 6 injuries is required. Injuries no.3 and 4 are simple in nature.

12. To prove the above-noted injury reports, the prosecution has examined PW5 Dr. Narendra Jha, PW6 Dr. Y.S. Rana and PW7 Dr. Mridul Pandey. PW5 Dr. Narendra Jha has conducted medical examination of Kashmir Singh and Harbhajan Singh. He has proved the injury reports Ext.Ka-2 and Ka-3. PW6 Dr. Y.S. Rana referred injured Harbhajan Singh Dhillon from Combined Hospital, Tehri to PGI Hospital Chandigarh on 3.2.1991. He has proved the certificate Ext.Ka-4 prepared by him. PW7 Dr. Mridul Pandey has conducted medical examination of Harbhajan Singh Dhillon on 3.2.1991 at 12:15 PM and prepared his injury report Ext.Ka-5. He has proved the injury report Ext.Ka-5 prepared by him.

13. To prove its case further, the prosecution has examined PW1 Pramod Kumar, who is the complainant of the case. He has reiterated the version of the FIR and has also proved the FIR Ext.Ka-1 lodged by him in the police station.

14. PW2 Kashmir Singh is the injured witness of the case. He has stated that the said incident took place on 2.2.1991. On that day at about 11 PM while he was doing his duty at Ditco Colony as watchman he saw the appellants-accused and two or three persons standing at their door. They were armed with dandas. The appellants-accused attacked him and beaten him with dandas. On his alarm, watchman Harbhajan Dass came there, who was also beaten by the appellants-accused with dandas. Harbhajan Das ran 7 away. After ten minutes, Harbhajan Dhillon, Pramod Kumar Sharma, Buta Singh and Harbhajan Das came at the spot through Mahindra Jeep. On seeing the jeep coming, the appellants-accused pelted stones on the jeep resulting which the glass of jeep was broken and Harbhajan Dhillon who was driving the jeep also received injuries. As soon as Harbhajan Dhillon stepped down from the jeep, the appellants-accused and their companions also beaten him by dandas. Due to injuries, Sri Dhillon became unconscious. Thereafter, the appellants-accused and their companions beaten Harbhajan Das, Buta Singh and Pramod Kumar. They save them by taking away the dandas of the accused persons. Thereafter, the appellants-accused ran away from the place of occurrence.

15. PW3 H.S. Dhillon and PW4 Harbhajan Das are also the injured witness of the case. They have supported the statement of PW2 Kashmir Singh.

16. PW8 Sunahri Lal Lavania is the Investigating Officer of the case. He has proved the Chik report Ext.Ka-7 and G.D. entry Ext.Ka-8. He stated that during the course of investigation, he recorded the statement of witnesses, inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site-plan Ext.Ka-8. On completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet against the appellants-accused, i.e. Ext.Ka-9.

17. Thereafter the statements of the appellants- accused were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. The oral and documentary evidence was put to each of them in question form, who denied the allegations made 8 against them. In defence, Madhusudan was got examined as DW1.

18. DW1 Madhusudan has stated that he had a shop at Simlasu since 1982 to 1992. On 2.2.1991 at about 11:30-12 in the day time a quarrel took place between the personnel of Thapar Company and the appellant-accused Kripal Singh. On hearing the cry of Kripal Singh, he went to the house of the Kripal Singh where he had seen 7-8 persons of the company beating Kripal Singh. On his asking, all the persons who were beating Kripal Singh came out. They were giving filthy abuses to Kripal Singh and were also threatening him for life. Wife of Kripal Singh was also crying that Kashmir Singh has taken her chain. Blood was oozing out from the body of Kripal Singh and Masta Singh. He asked Masta Singh and Kripal Singh to lodge the report. When Masta Singh came on the road on his scooter, the police personnel sat Kripal Singh and Masta Singh in the jeep and taken them to the police station.

19. Learned counsel for the appellants-accused argued that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants- accused. I do not find force in the argument put forth by learned counsel for the appellants-accused for the reason that Kashmir Singh, who is the injured witness of the case has clearly stated in his statement that on

2.2.1991 at about 11 PM while he was doing his duty at Ditco Colony as watchman he saw the appellants- accused standing at their door. They were armed with dandas. The appellants-accused attacked him and he was beaten by the appellants-accused with their 9 dandas. On his alarm, watchman Harbhajan Dass came there. Then the appellants-accused also beaten him with dandas. Harbhajan Das ran away. After ten minutes, Harbhajan Dhillon, Pramod Kumar Sharma, Buta Singh and Harbhajan Das came at the spot through Mahindra Jeep. On seeing the jeep coming, the appellants-accused pelted stones on the jeep resulting which the glass of jeep was broken and Harbhajan Dhillon who was driving the jeep also received injuries. As soon as Harbhajan Dhillon stepped down from the jeep, the accused beaten him by dandas. Due to injuries, Sri Dhillon became unconscious. Thereafter, the appellants-accused and their companions beaten Harbhajan Das, Buta Singh and Pramod Kumar. They save themselves by taking away the dandas of the accused persons. Thereafter, the appellants-accused ran away from the place of occurrence. The evidence of this witness is reliable, believable and natural and inspires implicit confidence and the same also gets full corroboration from the oral evidence of PW1 Pramod Kumar, PW3 H.S. Dhillon and PW4 Harbhajan Das, who have fully supported the prosecution case in their statement. Apart from above, the evidence of P.W.2 Kashmir Singh further gets full corroboration from the injury reports Ex.Ka-2, Ka-3 and Ka-5 as well as from the medical evidence of PW5 Dr. Narendra Jha, who medically examined the injured Kashmir Singh and Harbhajan Das, PW6 Dr. Y.S. Rana, who referred the injured H.S. Dhillon to PGI Chandrigarh and PW7 Dr. Mridul Pandey, who medically examined the injured H.S. Dhillon. All these facts and circumstances give full support and, therefore, wholly corroborate the statement of injured persons. As such, the prosecution has been able to 10 prove its case u/s 323 IPC beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants/accused. The trial court is correct and justified in convicting and sentencing the appellants/accused as discussed above and I also concur with the view taken by the trial court in convicting and sentencing the appellants/accused as discussed above.

20. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. The judgment and order dated 26.5.1998 passed by Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in convicting and sentencing the appellants-accused, as discussed above, needs no interference by this Court and the same is hereby made affirmed. Interim order dated 14.7.1998 is hereby vacated.

21. A copy of this order along with the record shall be sent back to the trial court concerned for compliance forthwith. (Dharam Veer, J.) August 19, 2010 RG