Dismissed

Karamjit Singh v. Ram Singh & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Oct 2014CRM-A/374/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous application filed by the applicant seeking leave to file a criminal appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., condoning a delay of 417 days. The Court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, finding the judgment was based on evidence and not perverse.

What did the court decide?

Leave to file a criminal appeal was denied and the criminal miscellaneous application was dismissed.

Karamjit Singh Vs Ram Singh & Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

Criminal Misc. No.31380 of 2013 and Criminal Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013 (O&M)

¶3

.....

¶4

Date of decision:17.10.2014

Karamjit Singh

Applicant

Ram Singh and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Present: Mr. R.S. Hooda, Advocate for the applicant.

¶11

Inderjit Singh, J.

¶12

Cr. Misc. No.31380 of 2013:

¶13

This criminal miscellaneous application has been filed for condonation of delay of 417 days in filing the criminal miscellaneous application seeking leave to file appeal and criminal appeal.

¶14

The applicant earlier filed Criminal Appeal No.265 on 27.03.2012 before the Sessions Court, however, the same has been declined vide judgment dated 30.1.2013 holding the same as not maintainable before Sessions Court, as by virtue of Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. appeal against the judgment of acquittal in a complaint case shall lie before the High Court.

¶15

Therefore, keeping in view the averments made in the application, which is supported by affidavit, the delay of 417 days in filing HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.10.18 16:43 the criminal miscellaneous application seeking leave to file appeal and I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶16

Cr. Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013(O&M) [2]

¶17

criminal appeal is condoned.

¶18

The criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of.

¶19

Cr. Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013 (O&M):

¶20

Karamjit Singh-applicant has filed this criminal miscellaneous application under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 22.2.2012 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh in criminal case No.585 of 4.2.2004.

¶21

It is stated in the application that the applicant has filed the accompanying appeal, which is most likely to succeed. The applicant is impugning the judgment dated 22.2.2012, whereby the respondents/accused have been acquitted from the charges for the offences under Sections 323, 506 and 34 IPC in criminal case No.585/4.2.204 titled as “Karamjit Singh v. Ram Singh”. It is stated that there are sufficient grounds for granting leave to appeal in the present case as the impugned judgment has rendered manifest injustice to the applicant and miscarriage of justice.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and have gone through the record.

¶23

The brief facts of the case are that the applicant filed complaint against Ram Singh, Sub Inspector and Lakhmir Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector alleging that the complainant is a D.P.E. Teacher in Government Model Senior Secondary School, Sector 46, Chandigarh. On 5.11.2003 at about 7.30 p.m., he was coming on Bullet motorcycle bearing registration No.CH-01P-5438 and when he reached in front of House No.3282, Sector HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.10.18 16:43 46-D, Chandigarh, one person driving Kawasaki Motorcycle bearing I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶24

Cr. Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013(O&M) [3]

¶25

registration No.GJ-5RR-2279, without Helmet came from opposite side, whose name he later on came to know as Piyush Anand son of Kamal Kishore. Said Piyush Anand was driving the motorcycle in a negligent manner and struck against the motorcycle of the complainant. For his fault, Piyush Anand felt sorry. As the motorcycle of the complainant was damaged, he called the Police by making a phone call. After some time, SI Ram Singh and ASI Lakhmir Singh along with Constables reached at the spot. In the meanwhile, father of Piyush Anand also reached there and met SI Ram Singh separately for some time and thereafter, SI Ram Singh extended favour to Piyush Anand and forcibly tried to drag the complainant towards Police Gypsy by holding him from collar. The complainant tried to save himself. A number of persons of the locality including Varinder Nagpal gathered there and tried to intervene in the matter, but SI Ram Singh threatened them and as such, they did not try to save the complainant from manhandling of SI Ram Singh. ASI Lakhmir Singh gave two slaps to the complainant and caught hold of him from arms. SI Ram Singh snatched mobile phone and gold chain of 20 Grams and gave slap and fist blows on the face, stomach and on left ear of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant was taken to Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh for treatment of injuries and SI Ram Singh concocted a false story of alcohol drinking of the complainant. It is also stated in the complaint that the complainant was falsely implicated in case FIR No.379 dated 5.11.2003 for the offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC and Section 185 of the Motor Vehicle Act at the instance of SI Ram and Piyush

¶26

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR Anand. 2014.10.18 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶27

Cr. Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013(O&M) [4]

¶28

From the record, I find that the complainant in pre-charge evidence examined Dr. Ripudaman Arora as CW-1, who brought the summoned record and stated that patient Karamjit Singh was brought by Police on 22.11.2003 and copy of the record is Ex.C1. CW-2 Karamjit Singh-complainant made statement in accordance with his case reiterating the contents of the complaint. CW-3 Dr. S.S. Buttar deposed that on 5.11.2003, Karamjit Singh was examined by him as he was referred for the complaint of difficulty of hearing with left ear. The charges against the accused were framed by the learned trial Court for the offences under Sections 323, 506 and 34 IPC. In after charge evidence, the complainant also appeared and further cross-examined and the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh vide judgment dated 22.2.2012 dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused.

¶29

The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, from the evidence on record found that the first complaint was filed by the complainant on 6.11.2003 Ex.C.6, which is addressed to SHO, Police Station, Sector 34, Chandigarh. In the said complaint, there is no mention of father of Piyush Anand having reached at the spot and having talk privately with SI Ram Singh and as a result thereof SI Ram Singh having extended favour to said Piyush Anand, with whom the complainant had met with an accident. In the subsequent complaint, which is dated 15.11.2003 Ex.C.7, reference of father of said Piyush Anand having reached at the spot and having met SI Ram Singh separately for some time is made. It is also mentioned in that complaint that during thrashing, he got fainted and the HARPAL SINGH PARMAR Police party removed his mobile phone and gold chain and that his mobile 2014.10.18 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶30

Cr. Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013(O&M) [5]

¶31

phone was returned by SI Ram Singh in the hospital on demand. The trial Court found the material improvements in the initial version of the complainant as made in complaint Ex.C.6 and as in the complaint Ex.C.7. The trial Court also found that there is no reference to number of persons having assembled at the spot including one Varinder Nagpal and SI Ram Singh having threatened them not to interfere in the matter. The Court also found that Varinder Nagpal appeared only in preliminary evidence as a witness and he has not been examined later on. The Court also found that in the given facts and circumstances that the complainant is accused in the accident case and FIR No.379 was registered against him on 5.11.2003 and there being material improvements in the first version given in complaint Ex.C.6 and in the complaint which was later on filed as Ex.C.7 and the present complaint and further more the uncorroborated version of the complainant, the story of the complainant of giving beating and fist blow etc. also not proved on record beyond reasonable doubt.

¶32

From the perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the Court below, I find that the findings have been given as per law and on the basis of evidence produced on record. There is nothing on the record to show that the judgment is perverse or any evidence has been misread or any material evidence has been left by the Court below.

¶33

Therefore, from the above, I find that the findings recorded by the Court below are correct and as per law, which do not require any interference from this Court and the same are upheld.

¶34

From the record, I do not find any ground to grant leave to file HARPAL SINGH PARMAR appeal. Therefore, finding no merit in the criminal miscellaneous 2014.10.18 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶35

Cr. Misc. No.A-374-MA of 2013(O&M) [6]

¶36

application filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. seeking leave to appeal, the

¶37

same is dismissed.

¶38

October 17, 2014.

¶39

(Inderjit Singh) Judge

¶40

hsp

¶41

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.10.18 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Karamjit Singh v. Ram Singh & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karamjit Singh v. Ram Singh & Anr.

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

Devinder Pal and Anr. Vs Devinder Dass Chela Kundal Dass

Narender Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Inderjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Daya Ram and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Naranjan Singh @ Kala Vs State of Punjab

Mohindo and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.