MOHANLAL BHAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present appeal, a challenge has been made to the judgment dated 29th October, 2001 and order of sentence dated 2nd November, 2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in S.C.No.16/98 arising out of FIR no.221/94 u/s 308/323/34 IPC Police station Lajpat Nagar whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 308/34 IPC and vide aforesaid order of sentence, have been sentenced to undergo RI for three years with fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for three months each.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is based on statement Ex.PW 4/A wherein complainant Kewal Krishan, (PW-4) had alleged that two shops at E-II/4, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi in the name and style of Behl Electronics and Bhagat Emporium were occupied by the appellants. The appellants, namely, Mohan Lal Bahl and Jeewan Parkash Behl were his tenants in respect of aforesaid shops and had been harassing him along with appellant Virender Kumar Behl. The complainant had alleged that on 8th July, 1994 at 11.30 am, he was in the process of parking his vehicle on roadside in front of his shop which is also at E-II/4, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, he had asked the appellant Mohan Lal Behl to remove the goods of their shops in the place of intended parking. However, they started abusing him in the presence of his servant Manoj. When he had asked them not to abuse, appellant Jeewan Prakash Behl caught hold of him and appellant Mohan Lal Behl attacked him with an iron rod. He had avoided the attack by holding on to the iron rod. Thereupon, appellant Virender Kumar Behl assaulted him with an iron rod which hit him on his head resulting in bleeding injury.

(3.) TO prove its case, prosecution in all had examined eight witnesses i.e.,Inspector Parwati (PW-1), Constable Anil Kumar (PW-2), Dr.Arjun Dev Sehgal (PW-3), Injured Kewal Kishan (PW-4), Constable Lokender Singh (PW-5), Dr.Umachandra Mauli (PW-6), Satish Kumar (PW-7) and SI Satpal Singh (PW-8). After conclusion of prosecution case, the entire incriminating evidence was put to the appellants in their statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. They had denied the same and stated that they were innocent persons and were falsely implicated. After hearing arguments of both the sides, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge convicted the appellants u/s 308/34 IPC and imposed sentence which has already been stated above.