MAHABIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to the prosecution case it was Raj (SIC) who had threatened to set on fire the shop of Rajesh Kumar complainant. P.W.7 Bhopal Singh has stated in his statem that on 8.1.2000 at about 11/12 midnight, he had seen Mahabir, Kuka and Raj Pal standing near the shop to Raj situated in the area of village Didwara. The door of the shop was open. He further stated that Raj Pal accused (SIC) having a Canny containing petrol while Kuka accused was with a lathi. Mahabir accused was having a match box in hand, he further stated that Raj Pal accused sprinkled petrol in the shop while Mahabir lit the fire. Thus, no has been attributed to Kukar and it is only stated that h present there armed with a lathi. Therefore, keeping in the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence (SIC) fine is suspended qua Kuka appellant. Let he be admitted bail to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Jind.