SURJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved against the impugned judgment dated 7.9.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, whereby appeal of the respondents -convicts against the judgment of conviction dated 2.3.2012, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patti, was allowed, complainant has approached this court by way of instant criminal revision petition.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as noticed by the learned Sessions Judge in para 2 of the impugned judgment, are that this case was registered on the statement Ex. PA given by the complainant Surjan Singh on 3.8.2008, who in his statement stated, that he is resident of village Bhaini Massa and he is putting the residence in the fields. They were five brothers and three have died. He and Jaga Singh are alive. He was having two sons and his son Harjit Singh has already expired. On 30.7.2008 at about 4.00 pm., he and his son Dilbagh Singh were coming from their relations to their house on motor cycle TVS Star, which was being driven by his son Dilbagh Singh and when they reached nearby the Behak of Baljit Singh Fauji son of Amar Singh Jatt, resident of bhaini, Baljit Singh armed with Dattar, his servant Dilbagh Singh son of Charan Singh Mazbi by caste resident of Bhikhiwind armed with Takua and son of Dilbagh Singh empty handed came from the opposite side and stopped the motor cycle of the complainant. Dilbagh Singh gave a Lalkara that they will take the possession of land from Surjan Singh. Baljit Singh gave a Dattar blow which hit him on the right side of his head. Dilbagh Singh gave a Takua blow which hit him on his left hand. Baljit Singh gave Dattar blow from the reverse side which hit him on the right elbow. His son came forward to rescue him upon which Dilbagh Singh gave a Takua blow from the reverse side which hit him on his left eye and second blow of Takua given by him, hit his back. Both of them raised raula Maar Ditta Maar Ditta, upon which the assailants ran away from the place of occurrence alongwith their respective weapons. Sukha Singh son of Sardool Singh, his cousin resident of Bhaini, also came at the place of occurrence, who saved the complainant and his son from the clutches of the accused. The motive behind the occurrence was that there was some dispute of land between the parties. The case was registered against the accused vide FIR Ex. PW4/F.

(3.) WITH a view to substantiate its allegations, prosecution examined as many as 4 PWs, besides producing on record the relevant documentary evidence. On closure of the prosecution evidence, statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. All the incriminating material brought on record was put to the accused. They denied the allegations, alleged false implication and pleaded complete innocence. However, they did not lead any defence evidence.