1. Heard.
2. The trial Court has acquitted the accused persons of the charges under Sections 333, 307, 332/34 and 224 of IPC, which was registered against
them on the allegation that at about 22:30 hours, on 16.6.2007, they have attempted on the life of PW-8 SS Raj and caused grievous injuries to Kushal
Prasad, Shivprasad & Jagmohan Panna and have deterred them in discharge of their official duties.
3. According to the prosecution, the concerned Police received information that accused Gaurav Rai. against whom the offence under Sections 279
and 337 of IPC has been registered at PS Marwahi, is available near Kanta Dhaba, therefore, PW-8 SS Raj, Incharge of the concerned Police Station
along with Constable Kushal Kaushik went near Kanta Dhaba to arrest Gaurav Rai and bring him to the Police Station. However, on the way, when
SS Raj and Kushal Kaushik were bringing accused Gaurav Rai to the Police Station, other accused persons intercepted them and starting beating the
police personnels. Soon thereafter, Shiv Prasad and Jagmohan, both Constables, also reached the spot but they too were assaulted by the accused
persons.
4. The trial Court has acquitted the accused persons on the finding that there was no warrant of arrest against Gaurav Rai, therefore, PW-8 S.S. Raj
was not under any legal obligation to arrest and bring him to the Police Station. It is also recorded by the trial Court that the accused persons have also
sustained injuries, which are more serious in nature than the injuries sustained by S.S. Raj and three other persons and further that the case of the
prosecution is not supported by any independent witnesses. 5. We have gone through the statements of PW-8 S.S. Raj and independent witnesses
PW-4 Lakhan Lal, PW-6 Lal Gopal Jaiswal and PW-10 Lalman Chandra. These three independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution.
6. PW-8 S.S. Raj has admitted that at the time of the incident neither he nor Kushal Kaushik were wearing police uniform meaning thereby that these
two injured police personnels were not on duty at the time of the incident. This is further fortified by the fact that SS Raj was not carrying the wireless
set or service revolver.
7. Even without the uniform also a police personnel can be on duty but usually in such cases, the police personnels carry the service revolver with
them. In addition to the above, It is also to be seen that Gaurav Rai was an accused for committing traffic violations as he was charged for committing
offence under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC only and was thus, not a dreaded criminal and otherwise also, Gaurav Rai is a bus operator.
8. The accused persons have proved the injuries sustained by them by producing the injury reports Ex.D/6 to D/12, which goes to substantiate that in
whatever manner the incident had taken place, the present accused persons have also sustained injuries, which are more or less of the same nature to
those sustained by the injured persons.
9. Upon studied scrutiny of the evidence, we are of the firm opinion that in the state of evidence on record, the finding recorded by the trial Court does
not suffer from any illegality or perversity or irrationality.
10. There is no substance in the acquittal appeal, it deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.
