Prafulla C. Pant, J. -
(1.) THIS appeal, preferred under section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.11.2000, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi, in Session Trial No. 12 of 1997, whereby said court has convicted accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal under section 307 IPC, and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ -. In default of payment of which the convict was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Heard learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant, and learned counsel for the State and perused the lower court record.
(2.) PROSECUTION story, in brief, is that P.W.1 K.L. Arora, was Executive Engineer with Irrigation Construction Division, Purola, District Uttarkashi. Accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal was Assistant Engineer of the same department. On 09.07.1996, at about 11:30 a.m., accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal entered in the office of the Executive Engineer, and assaulted him with LATHI (stick) on his head due to which the injured started bleeding. P.W.2 Nilamber Dutt (cashier of the same office) witnessed the incident. P.W.3 Khajan Singh (Chawkidar) said to have rushed inside the office on hearing the noise in the room of the Executive Engineer, and saw P.W.1 K.L. Arora in the injured condition. The witnesses (P.W.2 Nilamber Dutt, P.W.3 Khajan Singh and some other employees) immediately dragged accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal out from the office room of the Executive Engineer. P.W.1 K.L. Arora, telephonically informed the Station House Officer of Purola, and also gave information to the Sub Divisional Magistrate on phone. After sometime, the Sub Divisional Magistrate reached at the spot, and the injured officer was taken to hospital where his injuries were examined by P.W.6 Dr. S.P. Agarwal in Primary Health Center, Purola, who prepared injury report (Ex. A6). The injury was simple in nature. First Information -Report (Ex. A1) of the incident was got lodged by injured K.L. Arora, the Executive Engineer, on the very day at about 12:15 p.m., i.e., within 45 minutes of the incident. On the basis of said report crime No. 33 of 1996, was registered at Police Station Purola in respect of offences punishable under section 307, 332, 506 IPC. The investigation was conducted by P.W.8 S.I. Harbeer Singh Rathi who interrogated the witnesses, inspected the spot, collected the blood stained clothes, and after completion of investigation submitted charge sheet (Ex. A9) against accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal for his trial in respect of offences punishable under section 307, 332 and 506 IPC. The Judicial Magistrate, on receipt of the charge sheet, after giving necessary copies to the accused as required under section 207 Cr.P.C., appears to have committed the case to the court of Sessions for their trial. On 06.11.1996, learned Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi, after hearing the parties, framed charge of offences punishable under section 307 and 506 IPC only, against the accused Narendra Kumar Bansal who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P.W.1 K.L. Arora (injured Executive Engineer), P.W.2 Nilamber Dutt (eye witness and cashier in the office of the injured), P.W.3 Khajan Singh (Chawkidar), P.W.4 V.P. Dangwal [who is witness of recovery memo (Ex. A2) of the recovery of blood stained clothes], P.W.5 Head Constable Banmali Singh, P.W.6 Dr. S.P. Agarwal (who medically examined the injured), P.W.7 Sub -Inspector Sarv Chand and P.W.8 Sub Inspector Harbeer Singh Rathi (who inspected the crime).
(3.) THE oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which he (Narendra Kumar Bansal) admitted that injured K.L. Arora (P.W, 1) Executive Engineer, was present in the office on 09.07.1996. He further admitted that he (Narendra Kumar Bansal) was Assistant Engineer working under the injured, and rest of the evidence was denied by him as false. However, he admitted that P.W.2 Nilamber Dutt was Cashier, and P.W.3 Khajan Singh was Chawkidar in the office. He pleaded that he has been falsely implicated due to enmity. In defence accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal got himself examined as D.W. 1 with permission under section 315 Cr.P.C. He further got examined D.W.2 Naresh Thakur and D.W.3 Vishal Singh, a contractor. After hearing the parties, the trial court found that prosecution has successfully proved charge of offence punishable under section 307 IPC, against accused/appellant Narendra Kumar Bansal and convicted him accordingly. After hearing on sentence, the trial court sentenced the convict to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ -, in default of payment of which the convict was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for further period of six months. However, the accused Narendra Kumar Bansal was acquitted from the charge of offence punishable under section 506 IPC. Aggrieved by said judgment and order dated 14.11.2000, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi, in Sessions Trial No. 12 of 1997, this appeal is filed by the convict.;