RANBIR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 7.3.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Karnal, thereby upholding the conviction of the petitioners awarded to them, vide judgment of conviction dated 14.10.2010 and order of sentence dated 16.10.2010 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Assandh.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 5.6.2002 complaintant-Lichhmi Devi got her statement recorded to the effect that her first husband-Bharpur Singh expired about 20 years ago. A son namely Mukesh Kumar was born out from the wedlock between complainant and Bharpur Singh. Thereafter, the complainant performed a Kareva marriage with Suba Singh. However, no child was born from the wedlock between Suba Singh and the complainant. Suba Singh bequeathed his six acres of land to Mukesh Kumar through will as well as decree. The complainant and her family were cultivating the said land. The decree and will, suffered by Suba Singh were challenged by Jaipal Singh and others in the Court. On 5.6.2012 at about 2:00 p.m., the complainant Lichhmi Devi and Kanta Devi wife of Mukesh were working in their fields. Accused Krishan having lathi in his hand, arrived there and started abusing the complainant with regard to the possession over the land of Suba Singh. When complainant tried to make him understand, Krishan was not satisfied. He gave a lathi blow on the left leg, right thigh and left shoulder of the complainant. Accused Ranbir Singh, who was having gandasi in his hand, arrived there and gave gandasi blow on the upper part of the arm of left hand of the complainant and also gave another gandasi blow from its blunt side. Accused Manoj Kumar also arrived there, who gave slaps and fist blows to the complainant. When Kanta Devi wife of Mukesh Kumar tried to rescue the complainant, she was also beaten by the accused. In the meantime, Ishwar Singh and Ajmer Singh arrived at the spot and rescued the complainant from the accused persons. Accused also threatened to kill the complainant in future. On the statement made by the complainant, case under Sec. 323, 324 read with Sec. 34 and 506 Penal Code was registered. Offence under Sec. 326 Penal Code was added later on. The accused not pleaded guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as five PWs, besides producing documentary evidence. The accused persons were examined under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C., wherein they claimed false implication and pleaded complete innocence. However, no defence witness was examined by the accused. Only a copy of judgment dated 30.7.2001 as Ex. D1 and a copy of compromise as Mark X were tendered into defence evidence.