NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The compendium of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and oozing out, from the record, is that on the basis of statement of complainant Jai Bhagwan injured (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against accused Som Nath, Satpal sons of Ram Nath, Rajesh son of Som Nath, Sanjeev Kumar & Munish Kumar sons of Satpal and Naresh son of Jagat Ram (petitioner), vide FIR No. 104 dated 6.6.2004, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323, 324& 325 read with Section 149 IPC, by the police of Police Station Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra.

(2.) Although there are direct allegations contained in the FIR that the present petitioner-accused gave fist blow on the mouth of the complainant, due to which, his one tooth was broken, but still, the police declared innocent and did not challan him. However, police submitted the final police report, in terms of Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the remaining accused.

(3.) During the course of trial, the complainant appeared as PW3 and categorically stated that the petitioner inflicted fist blow on his mouth, on account of which, his one tooth was broken. The ocular version of PW3 finds further corroboration from the statement of PW1 Dr. Surender Mehta. Thereafter, in the wake of application filed by the prosecution under section 319 Cr.P.C. the petitioner was ordered to be summoned to face trial by the Magistrate for the commission of indicated offences alongwith his other co-accused, by way of impugned summoning order dated 23.5.2009 (Annexure P1).