RAJESH @ SARKARI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against the common judgment dtd. 12/6/2012 and order dtd. 14/6/2012 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, in Sessions Case No. 35 of 2007/2010 and Sessions Case No. 36 of 2008/2010, whereby accused Rajesh @ Sarkari, Ajay Hooda and Pehlad Singh @ Harpal were charged with and tried for the offence punishable under Ss. 302/34 IPC and Sec. 25 of the Arms Act. They were convicted and sentenced under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000.00 each and in default of payment of fine, they were directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that PW4 Azad Singh had lodged the report, Ex.PB, to the effect that his elder son Sandeep was a student of LLB (Final Year), in M. D. University, Rohtak. He had to appear in the examination. He had gone to the Law Department to prepare for the examination. His son-in-law Naresh came to their house and he was in hurry to leave after meeting Sandeep. He tried to contact him on his mobile phone but his call did not mature. Thereafter, he and his younger son Sunil went to the University on the motorcycle. They reached near the parking sheds near Law Department. They saw 5-6 boys standing under the tin-sheds. They started firing at his son Sandeep. He was standing near them. Sandeep collapsed. He and his son Sunil rushed towards the spot. His son Sunil could identify the three assailants. Three boys fled away towards Delhi road on the silver colour Pulsar motorcycle. They could not notice the registration number of the motorcycle. Blood was oozing out from the abdomen, left arm, left temple and right thigh of Sandeep. Thereafter, Parveen son of Zile Singh and another boy brought Sandeep to PGIMS, Rohtak, in Santro car of Sandeep. However, Sandeep succumbed to the fire arm injuries. Statement was forwarded to the police station. Formal FIR was registered. On completion of necessary investigation, initially challan was put up against two accused, namely, Rajesh @ Sarkari and Ajay Hooda. Subsequently, accused Pehlad @ Harpal was also challaned. Vide order dtd. 12/4/2008, the learned Additional Sessions Judge directed for consolidation of the supplementary challan with the main challan.

(3.) The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of the case. The statements of the accused were also recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution. The accused examined five witnesses in defence. They were convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, the present appeal.