Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ompati vs Mahabir And Another on 5 April, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:046537
CRM-A-517-2019(O&M) #1# 2024:PHHC:046537
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRM-A-517-2019(O&M)
Date of Decision:-05.04.2024
Ompati.
......Petitioners.
Vs.
Mahabir & Anr.
......Respondents.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. V.P. Singh, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. Munish Kumar Garg, Advocate for the Respondents.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)
The present application has been filed under Section 378(4) Cr.PC
seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 12.04.2018
in a complaint filed under sections 427, 447, 323, 341, 294 and 506 IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant/complainant-Ompati
filed the instant complaint with the allegations that her husband was an old person
who remained ill. She (applicant/complainant) had 08 daughters 06 of whom
were married. She was the owner of 247 Kanals 09 marlas of land at village
Tosham on which many trees of "Janti" were standing. The accused were owners
of the adjoining agricultural land and were hell bent upon to take forcible
possession of her land. They had made indecent remarks against her daughters
and had tried to outrage their modesty. On 18.03.2014 the accused persons
entered into the land of the complainant and took away the trees of "Janti" after
cutting them. When she tried to refrain them they gave her kick and fist blows.
Meanwhile, her daughters reached the spot and rescued here from the clutches of
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:046537
CRM-A-517-2019(O&M) #2# 2024:PHHC:046537
the accused. On 19.03.20214 she moved an application to the SHO Police Station
Tosham but no action was taken. On 4.4.2014 she (complainant) also moved a
complaint to the SSP, Bhiwani but once again no action was taken. Subsequently,
the instant complaint was filed.
3. On the basis of the complaint and the preliminary evidence led, the
accused were summoned to face trial of having committed the offence under
Sections 323 and 294 IPC. Pre-charge evidence was recorded after which the
accused came to be chargesheeted. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. Based on the evidence led, SDJM, Tosham found that the
complainant had failed to prove her case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted
the accused/respondents vide judgment dated 12.04.2018.
5. The present application has been filed seeking grant of leave to
appeal against the aforementioned judgment.
6. The Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant had proved
her case beyond reasonable doubt. Merely because no independent witness had
been examined did not detract from the veracity of the case of the complainant.
The Trial Court had failed to consider that the applicant had given an application
to the SHO concerned on the very next day of the occurrence i.e. 19.03.2014. The
applicant had also filed a civil suit for injunction seeking to restrain the
defendants/accused from interfering in her possession. He, therefore, contends
that the present application ought to be allowed and leave to appeal be granted.
7. The Counsel for the respondents on the other hand contends that the
only one specific date of incident i.e. 18.03.2014 had been mentioned. It was
strange that the complainant was of the age of 62 years had been attacked by both
the accused of younger age, but no injury has been received by her. In fact there
was no MLR on the file proving the injuries received by the complainant. No
independent witness had been examined from the locality. The instant complaint
had been filed after about 05 months of the occurrence. He therefore contends that
no fault could be found with the judgment of acquittal sought to be impugned.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:046537
CRM-A-517-2019(O&M) #3# 2024:PHHC:046537
8. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
9. A perusal of the file would reveal that the complaint does not
disclose any specific date, time and place of incident as has been mentioned other
than the incident dated 18.03.2014. Even with respect to the said incident, there is
no corroborative evidence in the form of the MLR. It does not stand to reason that
the applicant/complainant who was of the age of 62 years and had been attacked
by male accused of younger age and had not suffered any substantial injury.
Despite the occurrence having taken place in public view, no independent witness
from the locality was examined to support the case of the applicant/complainant.
Further, the complaint had been filed after a delay of more than 05 months from
the date of the incident. This delay creates a doubt regarding the veracity of the
case of the complainant. In fact, the complaint dated 19.03.2014 does not even
mention any incident dated 18.03.2014. Further there is no evidence that any trees
were cut.
10. In view of the above, I find no merit in the application for the grant
of appeal and the same stands dismissed.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
JUDGE
April 05, 2024
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
