- (1.) Impugned in the present appeal is the judgment dated 2.9.2013, passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana, vide which in the complaint filed by the father of the applicant, namely, Jagdish Kumar (now dead) against the accused/respondents under Sections 452, 323, 325 read with Section 34 IPC and under Section 3(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short SC/ST Act, 1989), the respondents/accused were acquitted of the charges framed against them. Now, Ravi Kumar (appellant) son of Jagdish Kumar (complainant before the trial Court) has filed the present appeal.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that according to the appellant, he belongs to Ramdasiya caste, which is a scheduled caste and it was within the knowledge of the accused/respondents. After the death of Tara Chand, father of Jagdish Kumar (complainant before the trial Court), Jagdish Kumar was in possession of shop forming part of property bearing No. B-VII/24, Rangi Ram Street as a tenant for the last 40 years. Previously, rent was paid to Moti Ram and his brother Prem Chand. Thereafter, accused/respondents No. 1 and 2, namely, Jagmohan Chopra and Parmod Chopra purchased the said shop. Both the said accused/respondents wanted to get the shop vacated from the father of the appellant illegally and forcibly. The father of the appellant filed a civil suit for injunction against the accused/respondents for restraining them from forcibly evicting him (father of the appellant) from the said shop. The stay order was passed in favour of the father of the appellant Jagdish Kumar by the learned Civil Judge, Ludhiana. The accused/respondents had also filed a suit against the father of the appellant for his eviction from the said shop. The accused/respondents started using illegal means to evict the father of the appellant. On 29.11.2003, at about 2:00 PM, accused/respondents No. 1 and 2 Jagmohan Chopra and Parmod Chopra alongwith their employee Som Nath Dhall accompanied by 8/9 other employees came to the demised shop. Som Nath Dhall and other employees started taking the measurements for fixing the board on the front part of the said shop. Som Nath Dhall was carrying a small Chhaini and a Hammer for making holes in the wall of the said shop. The father of the appellant when objected to the fixing of the board on his shop area, then accused/respondent No. 1 Jagmohan Chopra, armed with a Kirpan (sword), accused/respondent No. 2 Parmod Chopra, came at the shop of the father of the appellant and started calling the father of the appellant 'Kuttya Chamara, Teri Chammar Di Dukan Ethe Nahin Rehan Deni. Tu Chammar Sade Hotel Di Tor Kharab Karda Hai'. Accused/respondent No. 3 Som Nath Dhall cynically laughed and joined them in humiliating and insulting the father of the appellant. All the accused/respondents forcibly entered the shop of the father of the appellant. Accused/respondent Jagmohan Chopra aimed a kirpan blow at the father of the applicant. The father of the appellant tried to ward off the blow by raising his right hand.
(3.) Accused/respondent Som Nath Dhall started aiming his Chhaini blow on the father of the appellant. The father of the appellant saved himself by raising his hands. The said blow hit his hand. Accused/respondent Som Nath Dhalla again gave a Chhaini blow on the left side of chest of the father of the appellant. Accused/respondent Jagmohan Chopra gave several fist blows on the face of the father of the appellant. As a result of the same, the tooth of the father of the appellant became shaky. In this scuffle, accused/respondent Parmod Chopra fell on the racks fitted with iron patti. Two boys working in the shop of the father of the appellant and Swarn Singh son of Jagir Singh (neighbour) had come there and witnessed the entire occurrence. They raised hue and cry, on which all the accused ran away. The father of the appellant approached the police, where the police official asked the father of the appellant to get his medical check up done. After the medical check up, the father of the appellant handed over the MLR to the police. The police instead suggested for a compromise and thereafter registered a false case against the father of the appellant and his sons, who had nothing to do with the occurrence. After recording the preliminary evidence, accused/respondents were summoned for offences under Sections 452, 323 read with 34 IPC read with Section 3(x) of the SC/ST Act, 1989. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana. The learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana, chargesheeted the accused/respondents under Section 3 (i) (x) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 and under Sections 452 and 323 IPC. To support its case, the father of the appellant Jagdish Kumar examined himself as PW1, Swarn Singh as PW2, Dr. U.S. Sooch as PW3 and Amar Nath, Recordkeeper, Judicial Record Room, Ludhiana, as PW4.;