DEV RAJ Vs. LAL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a composite petition under Section 401 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Two orders of Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat dated 1.2.1982 and 18,.8.1982 have been challenged herein. These came to be passed in following circumstances.

(2.) THE broad allegations of the prosecution were that at Sonepat there were two grounds (groups) of truck operators warring with each other to capture the elected offices of the truck union, On 28.3.1981 a fight took place between the two rival groups at Ganaur in which Rajbir and Raj Kumar and a few others persons led by Jaga Ram, were injured. The said Rajbir and Raj Kumar were brought to civil Hospital, Sonepat, the same day for treatment. The news of the same caught fire. Quite a few truck operators arrived at the hospital at about 7.00 p.m. Amongst those who arrived were Lal Chand and his son Satinder Kumar, the present respondents. 'Along with them allegedly there were Shamsher, the nephew of Lal Chand. Lal Chand and Satinder Kumar respondents entered the emergency room where Rajbir and Raj Kumar were lying admitted or treatment. It is then that Lal Chand respondent is alleged to have fired a gun shot at Rajbir, P.W. who was saved but the pellets hit Dharam Pal P.W. Similarly Satinder Kumar respondent is alleged to but he have fired a gun shot at Raj Kumar who too was saved pellets hit Smt. Nirmala P.W. In the meantime Dev Raj petitioner came out of emergency ward due to fear and he was dealt with by Shamsher accused who was standing cut side the emergency ward, by firing a gunshot at him. He too was saved as he had hidden himself behind a tree, but pellets hit Amit Chand and Kewal Singh P.Ws. These all intended victims got themselves saved, but the pellet injuries are alleged to have been received by others. All the three accused then ran away from there in a car.

(3.) SHAMSHER accused alone had to face charge under section 307 of the Code of Criminal procedure and under section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. It has now been stated at the bar before me that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, after due trial, ultimately, acquitted the said accused.