STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAJENDAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal against acquittal arises out of the following facts.

(2.) On June 29, 1992, P.W.-1 Hari Singh, the complainant, alongwith his wife and children was sleeping in his house. At about midnight, his wife, Marri Devi, and daughter, P.W.-2 Mukesh, woke up to answer the call of nature and saw that accused Rajender Singh and Pnthivi Singh weresetting theirChhapers on fire. On an alarm raised by both the women, Han Singh and his son, P.W.-3 Lila Ram, also got up. The alarm also attracted Bhim Singh and Bansi sons of Mangtu Singh and Dharambir son of Siri Ram, to the spot. They tried to extinguish the fire but in vain. As a result of the arson, 50 maunds of onion's 2 Qtls. of Sarson and certain other articles alongwh the Chhapers were burnt to ashes. The motive for the incident was that earlier in the day, the two accused had gone to Han Singh's tube-well and had demanded some onions from his wife and daughter but as they had refused to oblige them, the accused threatened to teach them a lesson. The F.I.R. was accordingly registered against the accused under Section 436/34 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Mohindergarh. The accused were duly arrested and on the completion of the investigation, were charged for the aforesaid offence which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) In order to connect the accused with the crime, the prosecution examined in all seven witnesses; they being P.W.-1 Hari Singh, the complainant; P.W.-S-2 and 3 Mukesh and Lila Ram, the daughter and the son, respectively of the complainant; P.W.- Chander Singh, in whose presence the ashes of the burnt property had been taken into possession; P.W.-6 Shiv Dutt, Patwari; and P.W.-7 A.S.I. Mahender Singh, the Investigating officer. Bani Singh and Bhim Singh were, however, given up as having been won over by the accused.