GARG, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 9. 6. 1993 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/st Cases, Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No. 8/92 by which he acquitted the accused respondent of the charges for the offence under Sections 458 and 307 IPC and under Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled. Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as `the SC/st Act' ).
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows:- On 14. 10. 1991 at about 3. 30 AM, PW1 Tej Kaur lodged a report before PW10 Prem Nath, S. H. O. , Police Station Gajsinghpur District Sri Ganganagar stating inter-alia that her son Brijlal, PW8 went to field for irrigating the crops and in the mid-night, PW2 Kala Singh came to her house and told her that at about 11. 00 PM in the night, accused respondent caused injuries on the person of PW8 Brijlal with sword with an intention to murder him and he was about to die. It was further stated in the report that this incident was witnessed by PW2 Kala Singh and Dhanna Singh. It was further stated in the report that thereafter, she went on the spot and found PW8 Brijlal lying on the cot and she further found many injuries on the person of PW8 Brijlal and blood was oozing and his condition was serious one and, thereafter, PW8 Brijlal was taken to the hospital in Tractor and then the report was lodged. On this report, police chalked out regular FIR Ex. P/1 and started investigation. During investigation, medical examination of PW8 Brijlal was got conducted by PW6 Dr. Kailash Nath and his injury report is Ex. P/13, which shows that he received as many as 24 injuries and out of these injuries, injuries No. 3 and 5 were grievous in nature. THE X-ray report is Ex. P/14. THE accused respondent was arrested on 22. 10. 1991 through arrest memo Ex. P/16 and during investigation, on the information of the accused respondent, police recovered clothes of the accused respondent, which were stained with blood and also recovered one sword etc. After usual investigation, police submitted challan for the offence under Section 458 and 307 IPC and under Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/st Act against the accused respondent in the Court of Magistrate from where the case was committed to the Court of Session. On 14. 2. 1992, the learned Special Judge, SC/st Cases, Sri Ganganagar framed charges for the offence under Sections 458 and 307 IPC and under Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/st Act. THE charges were read over and explained to the accused respondent, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 11 witnesses and got exhibited some documents. THEreafter, statement of the accused respondent under Section 313 Cr. P. C. was recorded. In defence, no evidence was led by the accused respondent. After conclusion of trial, the learned Special Judge, SC/st Cases, Sri Ganganagar through his judgment and order dated 9. 6. 1993 acquitted the accused respondent of all the charges framed against him holding inter-alia:- 1. That PW2 Kala Singh and PW3 Jogendra Singh when they were to give statement before the Court they were shown police statements just before their statement and thus, their statements, which were recorded thereafter by the Court, had no value as they were hit by Section 162 Cr. P. C. 2. That for the sake of argument if point No. 1 may not be found to be true, there are material contradictions between the statements of these two witnesses. 3. That so far as statement of PW3 Jogendra Singh is concerned, he has not been shown as eye witness in the FIR Ex. P/1 and apart from this, he is a Sadu of PW2 Kala Singh and thus, his statement was not found reliable by the learned trial Judge. 4. That how and in what manner the accused respondent abused PW8 Brijlal, it is not clear and on this point, there are material contradictions among the statements of prosecution witnesses. 5. That since PW8 Brijlal was in the state of intoxication when injuries were caused to him, therefore, it was not possible for him to identify, who caused injuries to him. 6. That so far as the recovery is concerned, motbirs have not supported the prosecution case. 7. That there is evidence in the statements of the prosecution witnesses that on the date of occurrence, night was dark one and in the room, there was light of Diya of kerosene oil, but that Diya has not been produced and from this point of view also, there is no question of seeing the person, injuries to PW8 Brijlal. In the above circumstances, the learned Special Judge came to the conclusion that no case for the offence under Sections 458 and 307 IPC and under Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/st Act is made out against the accused respondent and thus, he acquitted accused respondent of the said offences. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 9. 6. 1993 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/st Cases, Sri Ganganagar, this appeal has been filed by the State of Rajasthan. In this appeal, it has been argued by the learned Public Prosecutor for the State that the learned trial Judge has wrongly disbelieved the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on minor contradictions etc. and especially when there is statement of PW8 Brijlal, injured himself, which is supported by the medical evidence, therefore, impugned judgment is perverse and erroneous and findings of acquittal for the offence under Sections 307 and 458 IPC recorded by the learned trial Judge be set aside. However, the learned Public Prosecutor has not challenged the findings of acquittal for the offence under Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/st Act. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the accused respondents has submitted that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned trial Judge are based on correct appreciation of evidence and thus, they in call for interference by this Court and this appeal filed by the State of Raj. be dismissed. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused respondent and perused the record of the case. In this case, the alleged incident took place at about 11. 00 PM on 13. 10. 91 and report was lodged by PW1 Tej Kaur, mother of injured PW8 Brijlal, at about 3. 30 AM on 14. 10. 91, meaning thereby just after few hours of the occurrence. In the report Ex. P/1, there is clear mention of the fact that PW8 Brijlal was beaten with sword by accused respondent and PW1 Tej Kaur was informed about this beating by PW2 Kala Singh.
(3.) BEFORE proceeding further, medical evidence of this case has to be seen, which is found in the statement of PW6 Dr. Kailash Nath. Pw-6 Dr. Kailash Nath states that on 14. 10. 1991 he was Medical Jurist and on that day he examined Pw8 Brijlal and found the following 24 injuries on his person:- 1. Incised would 4" x 3/4 x bone deep on left side face. By sharp edged weapon. 2. Incised would 2" x 1/3" x bone deep on chin. By sharp edged weapon. 3. Incised wound 3" x 1/2 x bone cut & brain deep on forehead. Grievous in nature and caused by sharp edged weapon. 4. Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x bone deep. One end on injury No. 3 forehead. By sharp edged weapon. 5. Incised wound 2 1/4" x 1/4" x bone deep on right parietal region by sharp edged weapon. 6. Incised wound 1/2 x 1/5" muscles deep on upper leg. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 7. Incised wound (2) 2 x 1/5" x muscles deep on left side hand. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 8. Incised wound 2" x 1/2" x muscles deep on left shoulder medially. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 9. Incised wound 1 1/2" x 1/4 x bone deep left shin above ankle. By sharp edged weapon. 10. Incised wound 2" x 1" x muscles deep on upper 1/3 Rt. Thigh lateral side. By sharp edged weapon. 11. Incised would 2 1/4" x 1/4 x bone deep on right knee. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 12. Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x muscles deep on right palm medially. By sharp edged weapon. 13. Incised wound 2 1/2" x 1/2" x bone deep on right forearm upper 1/3rd posteriorly. By sharp edged weapon. 14. Incised wound 2" x 1/2" x muscles deep on right arm medially. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 15. Incised wound 2 1/4" x 1/4" x bone deep on back of left middle and ring finger. By sharp edged weapon. 16. Incised wound 1 1/2" x 1/4 x muscles deep on left wrist. By sharp edged weapon. 17. Incised wound 1" x 1/4" x muscles deep on back of first meta corpal bone (left ). By sharp edged weapon. 18. Incised wound 3/4" x 1/4 x muscles deep on left palm. By sharp edged weapon. 19. Incised wound 3" x 1/5" x muscles deep on left arm laterally. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 20. Incised wound 4" x 1/3" x muscles deep near medial border and left scapula. By sharp edged weapon. 21. Incised wound 2" x 1/5 x muscles deep on left palm middle. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 22. Incised wound (3) 1" x 1/4" x thickness + Pina in left ear. Simple by sharp edged weapon. 23. Incised wound (3) 3" x 1/4 x bone deep 1" on left parietal region. By sharp edged weapon. 24. Incised wound 3" x 1/4 x bone deep on left side neck and mastoid. By sharp edged weapon. He has further stated that out of these 24 injuries, injuries No. 3 and 15 were grievous in nature. He has further stated that in case proper treatment would not have been given to Pw8 Brijlal, these two injuries might have been fatal. He has further admitted in cross examination that when he examined Pw8 Brijlal, he was not conscious, but this fact has not been mentioned by him in his report Ex. P/13, but he has mentioned in report Ex. P/13 that his nerves were not in movement nor his blood pressure could be recorded and his general condition was poor. The fact that these two injuries were grievous one was further confirmed by Pw11 Dr. Shankar Dev, who was Radiologist and make X-ray report Ex. P/14. ;