SANJAY Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present order shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No.S -3315 -SB of 2013 (Sanjay & Ors. vs. State of Haryana) and Criminal Appeal No.S -3186 -SB of 2013 (Anil and Anr. vs. State of Haryana) since both the appeals are emanating from one and the same judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 30.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal. Both the appeals are being disposed of with the consent of all the concerns in view of the compromise effected between the appellants and the only injured, Ram Niwas, at the time of hearing of the Criminal Misc. applications for suspension of sentence of the convicts. Brief facts

(2.) THE appellants, Anil, Rajesh, Sanjay, Rama and Govinda as well as Ram Niwas (injured) are collateral who were working at the Saw Mill in District Sonepat. On 10.09.2010, there arose a dispute with regard to the share of the amount which they had earned from their labour and the appellants allegedly caused injuries by means of sticks on Ram Niwas at their village Kalayat The matter was reported to the police, on the basis of which, FIR No.141 dated 28.09.2010, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323 and 325, IPC, was registered at Police Station, Kalayat, District Kaithal. The appellants were arrested. After completion of the investigation, the charge -sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) was presented before the learned Area Judicial Magistrate. Since the offence punishable under Section 307, IPC, was triable by the Court of Session, therefore, the case was committed to the said court. The charges were framed. The prosecution witnesses were examined. The statements of the appellants were recorded and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, the learned trial court held that the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34, IPC, and ordered each of the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years besides the payment of fine of Rs. 3,000/ - each; and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three  months.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record. To satisfy the conscience of this Court, the material available on record has been re -scanned. The depositions of Ram Niwas, the doctor and the Investigating Officer clearly establish that the appellants did cause the injuries to Ram Niwas attracting the mischief of Section 307, IPC, therefore, the learned trial court had rightly held the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34, IPC and as such, no interference is called for so far as the conviction of the appellants is concerned. However, there is substance in the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants that both the private factions are collateral and due to intervention of the respectable and the elderly people of the society, they have sorted out their grievances and effected a compromise. Each of the appellant has undergone more than five months of the substantive sentence.