MUKHTIAR SINGH AND ANR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The contour of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition on the basis of compromise and emanating from the record, is that, as soon as, on 10.11.1998, complainant Kunal (PW8) was working in his field, in the meantime, accused Mukhtiar Singh (since deceased) and his son Bijender Singh came there armed with lathis. Having raised a lalkara, accused Mukhtiar Singh gave a lathi blow, which landed on his head, whereas Bijender Singh gave a lathi blow on his right side of his head. Accused Iqbal & Karambir also came there armed with lathis. Thereafter, Mukhtiar Singh gave a lathi blow on the right leg of the complainant. He felled on the ground, but still, he was assaulted by accused Karambir on his back with lathi. He raised noise, which attracted Pirthi Singh (PW7). Subsequently, all the accused decamped from the place of occurrence with their respective weapons. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint of the complainant, the present case was registered against the accused, vide FIR No.444 dated 1.12.1998, for the commission of offences punishable under sections 323 and 325 read with section 34 IPC by the police of Police Station Meham, District Rohtak.

(2.) At the same time, the complainant has also filed a private complaint against the accused u/ss 308 and 323 read with section 34 IPC. Both the cases were consolidated and were tried together.

(3.) Having completed all the codal formalities, the trial Court acquitted accused Karambir and Iqbal. However, accused Mukhtiar Singh (since deceased) and his son Bijender Singh were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years each, to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each and in case of default of payment of fine, they were further ordered to undergo RI for one year for the commission of offence punishable u/s 308 read with section 34 IPC. They were also sentenced to undergo RI for a period of six months each, to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each or in case of default of payment of fine, they were further ordered to undergo RI for one month under section 323/34 IPC. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently by the trial Court, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.4.2003.