BANEY SINGH & ORS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal the appellants Baney Singh, Amar Singh, Harpyari, Hirdaya Ram and Bishan Swaroop challenged the impugned judgment dated 22nd May, 2001 convicting them for the offences punishable under Sections 323/354 read with Section 34 IPC in FIR No. 268/1998 registered at PS Okhla Industrial Area and the order on sentence dated 23rd May, 2001 directing them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 for the offence punishable under Sections 323 IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC. Since appellant no. 1 Baney Singh passed away on 15th October, 2006 and appellant no. 3 Harpyari passed away on 24th September, 2013, the appeal qua them stands abated and this Court is now concerned with appellant no. 2 Amar Singh, appellant no. 4 Hirdaya Ram and appellant no. 5 Bishan Swaroop.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellants contends that since no specific role was assigned to the abovementioned three appellants, the case under Sections 323/354 is not made out against them. It is also contended that there were glaring contradictions in the statement of PW-1, Phool Singh and his wife PW-2 Basanti.

(3.) Per contra learned APP for the State contends that even though no specific allegation was made against the appellants, however they have been named in the FIR and the statement of the witnesses. The three appellants were involved with Baney Singh and Harpyari in the commission of offence, thus Section 34 IPC is attracted.