Uttarakhand High Court
Bakshish Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 14 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No.225 of 2014
Bakshish Singh ........Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand .........Respondent
Present: Mr. M.K. Ray, Advocate for the revisionist/accused.
Mr. S.T. Bhardwaj, Dy. A.G. with Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, Brief Holder for
the State.
Hon'ble Lok Pal Singh, J.
This criminal revision is directed against the
judgment and order dated 06.09.2011 passed by the
learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, Udham
Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.342 of 2011 "Bakshish
Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand", whereby the revisionist
has been convicted under Sections 354, 504 and 427 of
IPC, and has been sentenced to undergo six months of
rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees
One Thousand Only) under the aforesaid sections, with
default stipulation. Against the order dated 06.09.2011,
the revisionist filed an appeal before the Additional
Sessions Judge, Khatima, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal
Appeal No.124 of 2011, which too has been dismissed vide
order dated 12.09.2014. Hence, the present criminal
revision before this Court.
2. Prosecution story in brief is that on
24.03.2009, the daughter of the complainant, (name
withheld) at about 8:15 was going to "Guru Nanak Balika
Inter College" for appearing in her Class 11th examination,
near Primary School, Khmariya, the accused/revisionist
Bakshish Singh misbehaved with victim and by holding
her with a wrong intention torn her clothes and used filthy
language against victim. When an alarm was raised by
victim, Gurmej Singh and Gurmeet Singh saved her from
the accused Bakshish Singh. The report of this incident, in
the form of First Information Report was given to the Police
Station Pratappur, Khatima, Udham Singh Nagar. After
investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the
charge-sheet against the accused/revisionist under
Sections 354, 504 and 427 of IPC before the court
concerned. Thereafter the statement of the
accused/revisionist was recorded under Section 313 of
CrPC, in which he denied the guilt.
3. On denial of guilt, the prosecution got examined
as many as five witnesses i.e. PW-1 (complainant), PW-2
(victim), PW-3 Gurmeet Singh S/o Bagh Singh, PW-4
Gurmej Singh and PW-5 S.I. Pooran Ram Angari.
4. The trial court after hearing the parties and on
perusal of evidence, vide impugned judgment and order,
convicted and sentenced the accused/revisionist, as
above. Feeling aggrieved, accused/revisionist has preferred
the appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Khatima,
Udham Singh Nagar, which too has been dismissed.
5. Learned Counsel for the accused/revisionist
submits that the revisionist has been falsely implicated in
the instant crime. He would further submit that there are
so many contradictions in the statements of the
prosecution witnesses. He also submits that most of the
prosecution witnesses are relatives of PW-1 Gurmeet
Singh, who is the informant of the case, and therefore,
they are interested witnesses.
6. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel
submits that the orders passed by the courts below are
just and proper, and therefore, the revision is liable to be
dismissed.
7. Having re-appreciated the entire evidence on
record, and after considering the submissions of learned
counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that no
ingredients of Sections 354, 504 and 427 of IPC are made
out against the revisionist/accused. The trial court as well
as the appellate court have committed gross illegality in
convicting and sentencing the revisionist under the
aforesaid sections.
8. Consequently, the criminal revision is allowed.
The impugned judgment and orders dated 06.09.2011 and
12.09.2014 passed by the courts below are hereby set
aside.
9. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to Court
concerned for onward compliance.
10. Lower court record, be also sent back, to the
court concerned.
(Lok Pal Singh, J.)
14.01.2021
Nitesh/
