PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision is directed against the judgments of the Courts below. The juvenile accused Pawan Kumar was convicted by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to render social service for three years. The appellate Court however, modified the sentence to the effect that the appellant shall do community service at General Hospital, Jind, for two years.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 04.04.2009 about 03:00 P.M. Amardeep (since deceased) son of Jiya Lal, who was examined as PW7 proceeded to the market for purchasing household articles. There was a scuffle between Pawan, Bhupender, Dinesh and Pritam on one side and Amardeep on the other side. Amardeep returned to his house and narrated the incident to PW7. PW7 proceeded along with his son to the house of accused Pawan and complained to his mother, who assured that she would make her son understand. At about 08:30 P.M. on the said day, Amardeep was roaming in an open space near his house. PW7 heard the noise and he alongwith his daughter PW5 Soni came out of the house and saw accused Pawan catching hold of Amardeep, Pritam beating Amardeep with his fist and hand and Bhupender giving kicks to Amardeep. PW7 ran towards the ground to save his son. But, in the meantime, Dinesh gave a knife blow on the left side chest of Amardeep. Thereafter, all the accused ran away from the spot. Sonu and Vinod neighbourers, who came to the spot, took injured Amardeep to hospital for treatment. The doctor declared Amardeep as brought dead.

(3.) On completion of investigation, final report was filed against the accused. PW5 the sister and PW7 the father of the deceased Amardeep examined the eye-witnesses. The trial Court as well as the appellate Court having relied upon the ocular testimony in the background of the medical evidence on record passed order of conviction and sentence as stated supra. The revisional Court under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot re-appreciate and reappraise the evidence and the findings of fact recorded by the Court below. Ofcourse, in a case where perverse findings have been recorded based on no evidence, the revisional Court can very well interfere with the concurrent decision of the Courts below. The Revisional Court cannot embark upon a detailed discussion on the merits or demerits of the case like a trial Court or appellate Court.