Dismissed

State v. Satpal Singh

Himachal Pradesh HC5 May 2010CR.A/465/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the State's appeal against the acquittal of respondents in a criminal case involving assault and hurt. The court found that prosecution evidence was unreliable and the accused's claim of fighting could not be ruled out, thus the acquittal stood. Bail bonds were discharged.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed. Bail bonds furnished by the respondents shall stand discharged.

State Vs Satpal Singh — Cheque Dishonour | Himachal Pradesh HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶2

Cr. Appeal No.465 of 2003

¶3

Date of decision: 5.5.2010

¶4

State of H.P.		Appellant
	Versus
Satpal and another		Respondents

¶5

Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, J.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting¹ ? No.

¶7

For the appellant: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer, For the respondent: Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate.

¶8

V.K.Ahuja, J. (Oral):

¶9

This is an appeal filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Sirmaur at Nahan dated 3.8.2002 in a case under Sections 451,323 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶10

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 9.10.2001, at about 9.30 A.M., a rapat was lodged with the police by one Amodit Singh that he is running a dairy farm on Shimla road. At about 8.15 A.M. respondent No.1 Satpal Singh his driver accompanied by his father Jagjit Singh, came to his dairy farm and asked him to settle his accounts. At this instance, both the respondents started giving him abuses. It was further alleged that the respondents caught hold of him from his neck, dragged him outside the office and gave him fist blows. He raised an alarm and on hearing his alarm one Arvind who was his labourer came to the spot and rescued him. On this rapat, a case was registered subsequently. Medical

¶11

Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes.

¶12

¶13

examination of the complainant was got done and after investigation, the challan was filed before the learned trial Court who tried the respondents as detailed above, leading to their acquittal.

¶14

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone though the record.

¶15

On appraisal of the record of the case, it is clear that the respondents have taken a defence that rather they were given beatings and abuses by the complainant. A plea has also been taken that the occurrence had taken place outside the office of the complainant and not inside. A plea was also taken that the complainant sustained injuries by fall.

¶16

In regard to the defence plea set up by the accused, it has been admitted by PW-6 HC Ram Gopal Investigating Officer that a complainant was also lodged by the accused Jagjit Singh and his medical examination was also got done. This finds further credence from the copy of Rapat Ex.DA proved in evidence from statement of PW-5 Constable Anil Kumar and the said report was also lodged on the same day at about 9.30 A.M. In such circumstances, when a report was also lodged by the respondent and he was medically examined, it was required by the I.O. to have conducted investigation into the case and proved the medical evidence on record in case the offence was cognizable. A report was required to be made by the I.O. as to the fate of the said report but there is nothing on record to show that he investigated the case and filed any report or that the allegations made were found to be false.

¶17

Apart from the above, a perusal of Ex.RW-1/A shows that he had named only one person Arvind Kumar PW-3 as an eye witness who had rescued him but subsequently he also produced PW-2

¶18

¶19

Chanderbir Singh as an eye witness and, therefore, his statement does not inspire confidence.

¶20

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that there is possibility that the accused demanded for settlement of the amounts and a quarrel might have taken place and both the parties might have suffered injuries during scuffle, the case against the accused cannot be said to have been proved beyond any reasonable doubt and the possibility of the complainant having suffered injuries cannot be ruled out. The statement of the complainant as well as both the eye witnesses examined by the prosecution were held as unreliable by the learned trial Court leading in acquittal of the respondents, which findings cannot be termed as perverse calling for an interference by this Court.

¶21

In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant, which is dismissed accordingly. Bail bonds furnished by the respondents shall stand discharged.

¶22

May 5, 2010 ( V.K. Ahuja ) (SDS) Judge

State v. Satpal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State v. Satpal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ishwari Nand Vs State

S.B.I. Vs Prem Lal

State Vs Ramesh Kumar

L.A.C. Vs Inder Singh

State Vs Yash Raj Singh

Lalan Devi Vs Man Singh