State Of Himachal Pradesh vs And
2021 Latest Caselaw 3909 HP

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
                      SHIMLA

                ON THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021




                                                         .

                              BEFORE
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA





                CRIMINAL APPEAL No.121 of 2009

    Between:-

    STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
                     r        to
    (BY SH. NAND LAL THAKUR, ADDITIONAL
                                           .....APPELLANT

    ADVOCATE GENERAL, WITH SH. RAM LAL
    THAKUR AND SH. SUNNY DHATWALIA,
    ASSISTANT ADVOCATES GENERAL.)



    AND
    RAMESH THAKUR,




    SON OF SH. RUP LAL,
    R/O VILLAGE NER CHOWK,





    TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P..





                                         .....RESPONDENT

    (BY SH. MALAY KAUSHAL, ADVOCATE)
    _________________________________________________

                This appeal coming on for orders this day, the

    Court passed the following:




                                        ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:52:41 :::CIS
                                     2


                          JUDGMENT

FIR 638 dated 29.12.1995 Registered in Police Number Station Sadar Mandi, H.P. under Sections

.

                   419, 451, 353 and 171 of IPC





    Trial    Court 61-1/96 Decided on 10.03.2003 by CJM,
    Case No.       Mandi, H.P.





    Cr.     Appeal 19/2003, 17/2003 decided by Fast Tract
    No.            Court, Mandi, on 30.09.2008.

Challenging the acceptance of appeal against

r to conviction, for impersonation, criminal force to deter public

servant to discharge his duties and criminal trespass, by

Presiding Officer, FTC Mandi, overturning the conviction

imposed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi, the

State has come up before this Court.

2. On 25.12.21995, District Election Officer-cum-

Deputy Commissioner, Mandi, gave a written complaint,

Ex.PW-5/A, to Superintendent of Police, Mandi, which reads

as under:-

"The counting of votes for the elections to Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad for Mandi Sadar Block took place on 24th December, 1995 i.e. yesterday at Beas Sadan, Mandi. The counting

staff and polling agents of the various candidates were also present in the hall. One Shri Ramesh Thakur, resident of Nerchowk had been denied

.

entry since he came to the venue late i.e. when the counting process had already started and he also

did not have any authorization from the candidate appointing him as counting agent.

However, it was noticed by the S.D.M. in

the evening that this person was loitering in the counting hall and on being questioned it was

found that he was impersonating as Bhagat Ram

wearing the badge of counting agent in the name of Sh. Bhagat Ram. He was asked to leave the

counting hall which he resisted and tried to create a scene there. Thereafter, he was physically

removed with the assistance of police personnel

on duty.

I would request you to take appropriate

legal action in the matter."

3. Based on this information, the police registered the

FIR mentioned above. After completion of the investigation,

officer-in-charge of the police station launched prosecution

against respondent, Ramesh Kumar (A-1), as well as one

Bhagat Ram (A-2) for the commission of offences captioned

above.

.

4. Vide order dated 10.07.1997, learned CJM Mandi,

framed charges against accused Ramesh Kumar, for the

commission of offences punishable under Sections 451, 419,

353 and 171 of IPC. Learned trial Court also framed charges

against A-2, Bhagat Ram, since he has been acquitted, as

such, its reference is irrelevant. The accused Ramesh Kumar,

did not plead guilty and claimed trial.

5. Learned CJM, Mandi, vide judgment, captioned

above, acquitted A-2, Bhagat Ram. However, convicted A-1,

Ramesh Kumar, for the commission of offences punishable

under Sections 451 and 353 of IPC. The learned trial Court

instead of sentencing, extended the benefit of Probation of

Offences Act to the convict.

6. Aggrieved by the conviction, convict Ramesh

Kumar, challenged the same by filing an appeal before the

Sessions Court Mandi. Vide judgment, captioned above,

learned Presiding Officer, Fast Tract Court, Mandi, allowed

the appeal and set aside the judgment of conviction of the

trial Court and acquitted the accused of all offences.

.

7. Challenging the said acquittal, the State has come

up before this Court by way of present appeal.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties

and have gone through the record of the case with utmost

care.

    ANALYSIS AND REASONS
                     r          to

9. Shri Jeet Ram Katwal, SDM, Sadar Mandi, who

first detected the impersonation, testified as PW-1. He has

stated that on 24th December, 1995, when counting of votes

of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad was going on in Beas

Sadan, then he noticed one person loitering in the counting

hall. He asked him the reasons for unnecessarily walking in

the area and also asked him to show his identify card, but he

refused. Subsequently, SDM read the identity card, which

was bearing the name of Bhagat Ram (A-2). On inquiry, he

revealed his name as Ramesh Thakur (A-1). Thereafter, SDM

asked him to handover the identity card, but he started

scuffling. Due to intervention of the security, he was handed

over to DSP Probationer (HPS), who was present at the spot.

.

In the meantime, Deputy Commissioner had also arrived and

he made a written complaint regarding the incident. In cross-

examination, PW-1, Mr. Jeet Ram Katwal, strangely stated

that he knew the accused from earlier and even he knew his

name. Given this admission in the cross-examination, his

initial allegation stand contradicted, wherein he had stated

that a person was loitering and he inquired his name. If the

SDM already knew Ramesh Thakur by name and face, then

there was no reason to inquire his name again. The allegation

that the person had started scuffling with SDM creates a

doubt about the truthfulness of the allegations. He further

admitted that he did not try to verify that of which candidate,

the accused was a counting agent.

10. PW-2 ,Shri M.L. Damalu, AC to DC stated that

the card and badge, Ex.PW-1/B, issued to Bhagat Ram, and

were signed by him. PW-3 Chuni Lal, testified that he had

scribed the name of Bhagat Ram on the badge, Ex.PW-1/B.

11. PW-4, Constable Narender Pal, corroborated the

statement of PW-1, SDM, and further explained that SDM

.

asked the accused to leave, but he denied. He further stated

that the person started scuffling with SDM, on which, SDM

gave ordered to take him out. However, in the meantime,

Deputy Commissioner came and SDM lodged a complaint

with him regarding Ramesh Kumar (A-1). Subsequently, at

the intervention of Deputy Commissioner, the badge was

handed over to DSP Probationer.

12. Deputy Commissioner, Tarun Shridhar, testified

as PW-5 and corroborated the statement of PW-1. The

prosecution also examined other witnesses, which are formal

in nature.

13. Thus, even if the allegations of the prosecution are

taken on the face value, still there is no allegation that

accused Ramesh Kumar or Bhagat Ram had caused any kind

of interference in the election process. The prosecution case

loses credibility because Ramesh Kumar had entered into

scuffle with SDM and apart from that, despite being so many

known persons and independent persons present in the

counting hall, none of them was examined to corroborate the

.

genesis of the occurrence. Thus, the judgment of acquittal

passed by learned Presiding Officer, FTC, Mandi, is well

reasoned and does not call for any interference by this Court.

Given above, there is no merit in the present

appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(Anoop Chitkara), Judge August, 13, 2021 (R.Atal)