RUMAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 1/8/2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, whererby accused respondent No.2 has been acquitted of the charges under Sec. 307 and 506 IPC by extending him the benefit of doubt.

(2.) Vide order dtd. 31/10/2023, the Lower Court records was called for. The scanned copy of the same was received on 6/3/2024.

(3.) As per the case of the prosecution, complainant Sandeep made statement before the police on 21/9/2012 that when on 20/9/2012 at about 11:00 AM he had gone to Sandeep (Chhilai Wala) to give some rings for putting into them some stones, then accused Sohan Lal along with one another boy was standing there and authenticity of this order/judgment. he (Sohal Lal), took out his pistol and pointed it upon the complainant and due to fear, the complainant immediately tried to run back. It was further stated that the accused fired a bullet, but fortunately it missed the target. The accused had fired upon him with the intention to kill. After the incident, when people gathered at the spot, the accused along with his associate ran away from there. The accused was having enmity with the complainant due to some land dispute and he wanted to kill the complainant in order to grab his land. Based on the aforesaid complainant, the FIR was registered under Ss. 285 and 506 IPC at Police Station City Jind. After investigation the charge sheet was submitted and cognizance was taken. Initially the charges under Ss. 285 and 506 IPC and Sec. 30 of the Arms Act were framed against the accused, but subsequently vide order dtd. 16/3/2021 charges under Sec. 307 and 506 IPC were framed against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.