STATE OF HP Vs. BIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Appeal has come up for adjudication after the grant of leave to appeal under Section 378 (3) of the Code of criminal Procedure has been granted in reference to judgment dated 2.11.1998, passed by Learned Sessions Judge, Shimla,H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 33S/7 of 1997, for the offence under Sections 148, 307, read with Section 149 and Section 336 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, acquitting the alleged accused / respondents.

(2.) The prosecution story is that on 27.3.1996, at 12.30 P.M., one Murtu Devi wife of Hira Singh, resident of village, Kood, Pargana Jais, Thana Theog, went to police station, Theog, and lodged a report that her husband, namely, Hira Singh and his two brothers owned only 22 Bighas of land in village Kood, and because of only very small holding, they were granted three Bighas of land, under Nautor Rules, to each of them. However, on 27.3.1996, in the morning, her husband Hira Singh and his two brothers went to the said land to graze the cattle, where accusedrespondent Kedar Singh, accompanied by other accused persons, went to the land allotted to Hira Singh under Nautor Rules and started digging a portion of it. When Hira Singh objected to it, all the six accused persons pounced upon him and on cries of Hira Singh for help, his wife Smt. Murtu Devi and his two brothers came to the spot and observed that accused Rajesh alias Bittu was armed with an iron pipe, accused Chhote Lal was armed with a Khukri, accused Kedar Singh was wielding a Lathi and accused Bir Singh was carrying a Gainti and all the six accused were giving beatings to Hira Singh. On intervention, the accused persons threw stones upon them, Hira Singh suffered multiple injuries. However, victim / injured taken to hospital, Theog, for treatment. Accordingly FIR No.22 of 1996 was registered. On medical examination of Hira Singh (victim / injured) the doctor has observed 10 cm x skull bone deep in antero posterior direction lateral and left to suggital suture, 2 cm from mid line on fronto parietal region. In addition to that he had suffered fracture on left leg. Two simple injuries, one on the left eye and another on the left leg, were also noticed.

(3.) After investigation, all the six accused were charged for the above offences. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 prosecution witnesses, whereas, the accused / respondents through their statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., have denied the prosecution case.