VIDHYA RATTAN Vs. PAVITTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vidya Rattan complainant has preferred this revision petition against the order dated 27.5.1992 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala whereby accepting the revision petition of Pavitar Singh petitioner, he was ordered to be discharged.

(2.) In brief, facts of the complainants case are that Vidya Rattan complainant is a contractor and he had made complaints to the Executive Engineer, Punjab Mandi Board, Patiala for certain irregularities committed and favours shown by the subordinate staff of the Mandi Board in connection with the construction of P.C. Daberpur. With this background on 12.10.1989 at about noon-time, Vidya Rattan complainant was way laid by Pavitar Singh respondent along with his cc- accused Tara Singh, Ved Bhushan and Surinder Kumar. Pavitar Singh had given a blow with an iron rod on the left side of his chest. Tara Singh co-accused of the respondent also gave him a blow with an iron rod at that place while Ved Bhushan gave him kick and fists blows and Surinder Kumar hit a brick on his head. Vidya Rattan was admitted in Civil Hospital, Nabha at 1.30 PM and medically examined at 1.35 PM by Dr. Purshotam Goel P.W. 2. This doctor found a contusion measuring 12 cms. x 10 cms. on the right side of the abdomen and left part of the chest. It was reddish in colour. He also found another injury on the back side of the head. Injury No.1 after Xray examination on 16.10.1989 was declared grievous in nature due to the fracture of 4th, 9th and 10th ribs by Dr. N.K. Singla P.W. 3. Vidya Rattan complainant was arrested in the cross-case got registered against him at the instance of Pavitar Singh accused-respondent. After his release, the complainant filed complaint on 23.10.1989 for offences under sections 307/325/323/506 read with 5. 34 IPC against all the accused. The trial Court after recording the preliminary evidence of the complainant besides Chhaju Singh P.W. 4 and Deep Singh P.W. 5 eye-witnesses as well as the evidence of the above-referred doctors besides considering the report of the police under section 210 Cr. P.C. summoned the accused for offences under sections 325/323/506 read with 5. 34 IPC vide order dated 3.8.1990. Feeling aggrieved against that order, only Pavitar Singh accused respondent went in revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Patiala which was ultimately accepted by the learned AddI. Sessions Judge, Patiala vide the impugned order dated 27.5.1992. Feeling aggrieved against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, the complainant has come up in revision before this Court.

(3.) This revision petition was resisted by Pavitar Singh respondent contending that he was not involved in any of these complaints preferred by the petitioner and thus has no motive to assault him. He also maintained that he had got registered a case under sections 353/323/186 -IPC against Vidya Rattan vide F.I.R. NO.81 at Police Station Kotwali Nabha on 12.10.1989 and this complaint has been filed as a counter blast to the said case. It was also averred that the complainant had admitted during the investigation of this case before the police that he had suffered injuries in an accident a day prior to the occurrence and that he had falsely attributed the injuries to the accused. The respondent had also annexed documents Annexure RI to R9 of different complaints and other documents in support of his version.