RAM NIVAS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order of mine will dispose of Criminal Revision Nos. 380 and 478 of 1980 filed by Ram Nivas complainant and the State of Haryana respectively since common question of law and fact have arisen.

(2.) THE relevant facts as disclosed in the First Information Report are these : That on the fateful day of about 1 pm Hira Lal and his son Sube Singh were constructing a small parda wall in their own plot at village Supatheri with a view to make it a secured place for ladies to take bath. Makhan accused came there and stopped them from doing so. Hira Lal told him that they were constructing the wall on their own land which led to an exchange of hot words between them and in the meanwhile, Suraj Bhan, Parkash and Bir Singh accused also came there. It is said that Murli Dhar PW reached there and during the course of altercation Makhan got enraged, lifted a brick bat and struck it on the chest of Hira Lal and that thereafter Suraj Bhan caught hold of Hira Lal and Parkash and Bir Singh gave him fist and slap blows. Immediately thereafter Hira Lal succumbed to his injury. After necessary investigation, the accused were challaned and committed.

(3.) I have heard the parties and given my due consideration to all the circumstance. At the stage of framing of charge the court has not to minutely and meticulously go into the merits of the evidence collected by the prosecution and consider in details and weigh in a sensitive balance whether the facts if proved, would be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or not. The standard of test and judgement which is to be finally applied before recording a finding regarding the guilt or otherwise of the accused is not exactly to be applied at the stage of deciding the mater under section 227 or 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. At that stage, the Court is not to see whether there is sufficient ground for conviction of the accused or the trial is sure to end in his conviction.