Puneet Gupta vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 15413 P&H

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB




CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M)                          -1-             2023:PHHC:120018-DB


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                          CHANDIGARH

                                        CRA-AD No.482 of 2019 (O&M)
                                        Date of Decision:11.09.2023


Puneet Gupta                                                        ... Appellant

                                      Versus


State of Haryana and others                                         ... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:     Mr. Nitin Thatai, Advocate
             for the appellant.

                   ***

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated

15.05.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram

acquitting the accused-respondents No.2 to 16 in case bearing FIR No.273 dated

20.06.2015 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 436, 307, 341, 332,

353, 427, 109, 506 IPC at Police Station Khaidki Daula, Gurugram.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 20.06.2015, a telephonic

message was received at Police Station Khaidki Daula whereby it was informed

that a large number of workers had gathered at Orient Craft Company, Plot No.9,

Khandsa and they were causing damage to the property of the company. On

receipt of the said information, ASI Braham Parkash along with Constables

Kamaljit, Ajit and HC Jagmal reached at the spot. The SHO along with his staff

also reached at the spot. On seeing that the workers were setting ablaze and

damaging the property of the company, ASI Braham Prakash along with other

1 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

police officials tried to make them understand for not causing damage to the

property but they found it difficult to control them. Thereafter, more police force

was called for at the spot. As more police force reached at the spot from nearby

police stations, the agitated workers ran away from the spot. In the aforesaid

incident, some of the police officials got injuries. One Punit Gupta, who was

working as General Manager in the Orient Craft Limited submitted an application

to the police authority that the said company had three plants in Khandsa wherein

7000-8000 workers were employed. On 20.06.2015 at about 9:30 AM, he

received information that Pawan Kumar son of Prem Singh was electrocuted in

goods lift of Plant No.9. Immediately, an ambulance was arranged and the said

Pawan Kumar was admitted to Sunrise Hospital. After some time, a large

number of workers including Brijesh, Shankar, Ajay, Kashi, Brahma Nand,

Chander Pal and Ravinder had gathered in front of the canteen of the company

and spread a rumour of death of Pawan Kumar. The officials of the company

tried to make them understand but they were not ready to listen to any one. In the

meanwhile, the workers were told that officials of the company would not admit

that Pawan Kumar had died and therefore, the factory should be set on fire. The

workers armed with lathis and dandas had started causing damage to the property

of the company. Some of the workers had entered the premises of the company

and set on fire the vehicles parked there. Another group of workers set ablaze the

fabric store. The officials of the company took shelter in one of the rooms, which

was also set on fire with an intention to kill them. They also caused damage to the

furniture of the company. Police control room and fire brigade were informed and

particulars of vehicles, which were set on fire, were given to the police. It was

stated that the accused persons, who caused damage to the assets of the company,

2 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

may be identified with the help of CCTV cameras installed in the premises of the

company and an appropriate legal action may be taken against them.

3. On receipt of said application, an FIR was registered and investigation was

commenced. During the course of investigation, accused persons were arrested

and on completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was

submitted before the Court.

4. Copies of final report under section 173 Cr. PC and documents attached

thereto were supplied to the accused persons free of costs, as per the mandate of

Section 207 Cr. PC.

5. On finding a prima facie case to have been made out against the accused

persons, charges under Sections 147, 148, 149 IPC and 452, 436, 307, 341, 332,

427, 506 IPC read with Sections 149, 109 IPC were framed against them. Charge

under Section 25 of the Arms Act was framed against accused Deepak son of

Preet. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against them

and claimed trial.

6. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as 27 witnesses.

After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the prosecution evidence, the

trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has not been able to

establish the prosecution case beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt, which

resulted in acquittal of the respondents No.2 to 16/accused. Thus, the present

appeal is filed.

CONTENTIONS

7. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned trial Court has

not appreciated the evidence led by the prosecution properly and has erred in

ignoring the sufficient and cogent evidence in the shape of testimonies of material

witnesses, who had witnessed the alleged incident. PW-1 Puneet Gupta, who was

3 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -4- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

working as General Manager in the Orient Craft Limited at the time of

occurrence, has categorically named accused-respondents No.2 to 16 in his

application submitted to the police authority and duly identified them at the time

of his deposition. Similarly, PW-5 Virender Pal Singh, PW-7 Vikram Saluja,

PW-8 Anil Kumar and PW-9 Rattan Lal, who were employees of the Orient Craft

Limited, have also supported the case of prosecution and made their categorical

statements that their vehicles were set on fire by respondents No.2 to 16/accused.

The learned trial Court ignored the testimony of PW-4 Pratyush Kumar Patnaik,

who was working as Assistant Manager IT in the Orient Craft Limited and he had

duly provided the CCTV footage of the entire incident, which took place on

20.06.2015 as Ex.PW4/A. The learned trial Court has also brushed aside

testimonies of PW-14 Sanjay Arya and PW-21 Jagdish Bains. PW-22 SI

Braham Parkash, who had conducted the investigation, has proved that the CCTV

footage and the CD made of videography of the incident were taken into

possession by him. As such, the ocular version was duly corroborated by the

CCTV footage, however, this evidence was completely ignored by the trial Court.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned judgment of

acquittal on the ground that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court is

against the settled proposition of law and the evidence brought on record. The

prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt

and there is no reason for the complainant to falsely inculpate his own employees.

ANALYSIS AND OBSERVATION

9. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and after having gone

through the records of the case, we find that the finding of acquittal recorded by

the trial Court is reasonable and logical. It is settled proposition of law that the

finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court cannot be disturbed merely

4 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -5- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

because another view is possible. If two views are possible, the one which

favours the accused would invariably prevail over the other.

10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has articulated the above principle in the

following decisions:

a) A three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kali Ram v.

State of H.P., 1973 (2) SCC 808, speaking through Justice H.R. Khanna,

held as under:

"25. Another golden thread which runs through the web of the administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted..."

b) A two Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chandrappa and

others v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 has laid down the

parameters with regard to the power of appellate Court while dealing with

an appeal against an order of acquittal. Speaking through Justice C.K.

Thakker, the following was held:

"35. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge; (1) An appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded;

(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law;

(3) Various expressions, such as, 'substantial and compelling reasons', 'good and sufficient grounds', 'very strong circumstances', 'distorted conclusions', 'glaring mistakes', etc. are not intended to

5 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -6- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

curtail extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language' to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate Court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the Court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion. (4) An appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court. (5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court."

11. The perusal of the records indicates that PW-1 Puneet Gupta could not

identify all the accused persons, who were responsible for the incident which

took place on 20.06.2015 in the premises of the company. He made material

improvements while appearing as a witness and was duly confronted with the

initial application Ex.PA where he has not named respondent No.14/accused

Saddam Hussain. He has not been able to pin point specific name of the person,

who allegedly set on fire the property of the company and vehicles parked in its

premises. The learned trial Court on the basis of his testimony has recorded a

finding that PW1 Puneet Gupta has not been able to establish that the accused

persons present in Court had committed the alleged offence or it were their co-

workers, who had committed said illegal acts at the behest of the respondents-

accused herein.

12. Similarly PW-2 Ravi Arora has not disclosed the name of any of the

respondents-accused for causing damage to his car, which was parked in the

6 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -7- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

premises of the company. PW-3 Daya Nand Gupta had clicked the photographs

and did videography of the alleged incident. He also could not disclose names of

persons, who sabotaged the property of the company. PW-4 Pratyush Kumar

Patnaik admitted in his cross-examination that the CD containing the CCTV

footage did not indicate as to by whom said sabotage was committed and the CD

is not correct regarding identification of any of the accused. However, PW-5

Virender Pal Singh has deposed that the car provided to him by the company was

set ablazed by the mob consisting of labourers of the company. It is the

consistent case of the prosecution that on 20.06.2015, workers of the company

had committed riots and sabotage in the company premises because one of their

co-worker namely Pawan got electrocuted and they were under the impression

that he had died due to negligence of officials of the company. A mob consisting

of 7000-8000 employees of the company had gathered and caused damage to the

property of the company and vehicles belonging to some of the employees of the

company. There are several discrepancies and inconsistencies in the evidence led

by the prosecution, which do not inculpate any of the accused specifically.

Moreover, there is no material on record to indicate the exact role played by each

of the accused-respondents and the manner in which they had participated in the

alleged incident.

CONCLUSION

13. In view of the discussion made in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the

considered opinion that the finding rendered by the trial Court is based upon the

correct appreciation of evidence and there is no perversity in the view taken by it.

It is trite law that presumption of innocence further gets entrenched and fortified

on his acquittal by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the appellant has failed to

point out any perversity or illegality in the findings recorded by the learned trial

7 of 8

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

CRA-AD-482-2019 (O&M) -8- 2023:PHHC:120018-DB

Court and therefore, we are unable to arrive at a different view than the one taken

by the learned trial Court. We do not find any substantial and compelling reason

or glaring mistake to unsettle the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial

Court. As such, there is no merit in the present appeal and consequently, the

same is dismissed.

      (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)                        (HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
           JUDGE                                   JUDGE

September 11, 2023
Pankaj*
                          Whether speaking/reasoned             Yes

                          Whether reportable                    Yes




                                                       Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:120018-DB

                                     8 of 8