Dismissed

Balwan Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Dec 2014CRA-S/1595/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the criminal revision appeal filed by Balwan Singh against the acquittal of two accused persons in a case alleging molestation, assault, and threat to kill. Upholding the Special Court's acquittal, the Court found reasonable doubt due to witness discrepancies, delayed FIR, and lack of medical evidence.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed upholding the judgment of acquittal.

Balwan Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

212

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRA No.S-1595-SB of 2014 Date of Decision: December 04, 2014

Balwan Singh

...Appellant

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr.Sagar Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant.

¶11

Ms.Shubhra Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

¶12

Mr.Ankit Grewal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

¶13

¶14

INDERJIT SINGH, J.

¶15

Appellant Balwan Singh has filed the present appeal against State of Haryana and other respondents challenging the judgment dated 05.03.2014 passed by learned Judge, Special Court for Heinous Crimes against Women, Kurukshetra, vide which the accused-respondents No.2 and 3 were acquitted of the charges framed against them.

¶16

It is mainly stated in the grounds of appeal that Balwan Singh made a complaint to the police on 04.06.2012 alleging therein that his daughter was teased by Jitender but the matter was settled in the panchayat. Again on 01.06.2012 and 03.06.2012, she was assaulted and molested by Jitender, Virender and Narender, who

¶17

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.17 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

CRA No.S-1595-SB of 2014 -2-

¶19

caught her by the arm with bad intention and pressed her breast and on the same day, Jitender, Virender, Narender, Ishwar and Jaipal came with common intention and caused injuries with lathis to complainant's brother Subhash. A case was registered under Sections 323, 341, 354, 506, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Sadar, Thanesar on the statement of Balwan Singh and challan was presented against accused Virender and Narender in the Court of Area Magistrate and against accused Jitender before the Juvenile Justice Board. Ishwar and Jaipal were, however, found innocent. Both the accused namely Virender and Narender were acquitted by the trial Court. It is further stated in the grounds of appeal that learned trial Court failed to appreciate the statements of the witnesses.

¶20

Notice of motion was issued in this case and learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 3 appeared and contested the present appeal.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

¶22

From the perusal of the record, I find that learned Judge, Special Court for Heinous Crimes against Women, Kurukshetra, vide judgment dated 05.03.2014 acquitted the accused Narender and Virender for the charges framed against them. Learned trial Court, after discussing the evidence in minute detail as well as law on the point, held that the charge against the accused person is that they wrongfully restrained the victim and molested her on 01.06.2012, 03.06.2012 and in March 2012, caused injuries to Subhash and also

¶23

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.17 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶24

CRA No.S-1595-SB of 2014

¶25

-3-

¶26

threatened to kill him. The Court also held that as regarding the incident of March, 2012, no day and date of the incident has been mentioned and this incident has not been reported in a reasonable period after the occurrence. The Court also discussed the fact that it was the victim, who had allegedly told the complainant Balwan Singh and her uncle PW-5 Subhash about the occurrence. The testimony of Balwan Singh and Subhash is hearsay, which is not permissible in evidence. It is further held that the occurrence, which was held in March, 2012 was only against Jitender, who is facing enquiry before Juvenile Justice Board. As regarding the incident on 01.06.2012, it is held by the trial Court that occurrence was not seen by anybody, which took place at 6.30 a.m. in the morning. The Court pointed out discrepancies in the testimonies of the witnesses and held that a reasonable doubt has been created about their truthfulness. The victim stated that her clothes were not torn whereas complainant Balwan stated that clothes of victim were torn. No such torn clothes were produced before the police. The Court also held that no site plan was prepared where the occurrence had taken place on 01.06.2012 etc.

¶27

The Court also discussed the occurrence dated 03.06.2012 and held that there were two independent witnesses namely Mahavir and Rohtash, but they were given up. The Court held that there are discrepancies in the statements of PWs Subhash and Balwan Singh. Their veracity is shaken very badly. The Court held that as per the prosecution version, Subhash and Balwan went to

¶28

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.17 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶29

CRA No.S-1595-SB of 2014

¶30

-4-

¶31

Bara after the incident of 03.06.2012 and Jitender, Narender and Virender were present over there and they threatened them. After that Subhash went to the house of Jitender to complain to his father Ishwar where he was asked to go out of the house as stated by witness Balwan. This is also testimony of Subhash which is different from Balwan. He stated that he and Balwan went to the house of Ishwar where they were pushed out of the house.

¶32

At the time of arguments, it was brought to the notice of this Court that FIR under Section 307 IPC has been registered against complainant side regarding occurrence of same day i.e. 03.06.2012 and the present FIR was a counter blast. Further, the present FIR has been got registered on 04.06.2012 whereas the occurrence took place firstly, as stated, in March 2012, then on 01.06.2012 and 03.06.2012 in the morning. Therefore, this delay further creates doubt in the prosecution version.

¶33

Next, I find that though the injuries were shown on the person of Subhash but he has not got himself medico legally examined from the Civil Hospital. It is in the evidence that injured was fit and he walked down to his house but it is the case of the prosecution that when police reached in the hospital and sought opinion of the doctor, the doctor declared the injured unfit. Otherwise also, the injuries are of such a nature that injured cannot be held as unfit. All these facts, create reasonable doubt in the prosecution version.

¶34

In view of the above discussion, I find that the impugned

¶35

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.17 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶36

CRA No.S-1595-SB of 2014

¶37

-5-

¶38

judgment dated 05.03.2014 passed by learned Judge, Special Court for Heinous Crimes against Women, Kurukshetra is correct and as per law which does not require any interference from this Court and the same is upheld.

¶39

Therefore, finding no merit, the present appeal stands

¶40

dismissed.

¶41

December 04, 2014 Vgulati

¶42

(INDERJIT SINGH) JUDGE

¶43

VINEET GULATI 2014.12.17 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Balwan Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwan Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parveen Mattu & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kashmir Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Subeg Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sandhuri Lal Mittal Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Gurpal Singh Vs State of Punjab