KULDIP CHAND AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Arguments heard. There is no merit in this revision. Both the courts below have relied on the sworn testimony of Bakhshish Singh PW-1 and Darshan Lal PW-2. The lower appellate Court has rightly held that Bakhshish Singh was an eye witness of the occurrence; Darshan Lal PW2-is the complainant, who was beaten by the petitioners on the date of occurrence. He sustained injuries. He was examined by the doctor also, who found simple injuries on his person. Thus, the statements of these two prosecution witnesses are corroborated by medical evidence on record. The M.L.R. Exhibit PW-3/A is proved by Dr. Ashok Kumar Raikhi PW-3.

(2.) The learned Magistrate has disbelieved the statements of the defence witnesses. Petitioners examined three witnesses in their defence whose statements were read over during the arguments. They have simply stated that they were present at Musafirkhana at the relevant date throughout the day, but no such incident took place there. They are not even stating that at any point of time on that date the complainant, eye-witness Bakhshish Singh and the accused petitioners were present there. The position would have been different, if they had stated so. Further it is pertinent to mention that the presence of these defence witnesses is not put to Bakhsish Singh PW-1 and Darshan Singh PW-2 in cross-examination.

(3.) Thus, the consistent findings recorded by the courts below do not require any interference. Petitioners have already been awarded lenient sentence as they have been given the benefit of probation. No interference is called for in the orders of conviction. Revision, being meritless, is hereby dismissed. Conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners are maintained.