DHARAMBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of two cases i.e. CRA-S-971-SB-2005 and CRR-2373-2005, as both have arisen out of the same judgment.

(2.) The prosecution case was set in motion on the statement of PW-5 - Vijay Singh s/o Ratbal (injured)-PW-6, to the effect that in the noon of 31st August, 2002, when he along with his wife and sister-in-law was working in their agricultural fields, accused - Ranbir, Dharambir, Sukhbir, Devender and Mohan Lal came to the spot armed with 'lathis'. The accused started calling them names and questioned the complainant party as to why they had drawn canal water from the drain. Thereupon, appellant - Sukhbir, thereafter, inflicted a lathi blow on the person of complainant Vijay Singh, which was however warded off by his sister-in-law and wife and he was made to run away from the spot by both of them. A little while later, the father of the complainant Ratbal, his mother and a relative came to the spot followed by the complainant himself. Ratbal questioned the accused about the altercation which had occurred a while earlier with his son Vijay. On being questioned, appellant - Dharambir inflicted a lathi blow on the head of PW-6/Ratbal, as a result of which, he fell down on the ground. Thereafter, the appellant - Sukhbir also inflicted a lathi blow on Ratbal. The mother of the complainant, his wife and sister-in-law tried to come to the rescue of Ratbal, but they too were not spared and were inflicted lathi and fist blows. Several villagers were attracted to the spot on account of the hue and cry raised. The complainant was chased by the accused Devender and Ranbir (since acquitted) and he fled to the house of his relatives in village Balai. The injured Ratbal was shifted to the Govt. Hospital in Palwal for treatment and thereafter admitted in Safderjung Hospital, Delhi.

(3.) On receipt of ruqa, formal FIR was registered and the accused were arrested. Thereafter, on completion of investigation, challan was presented and committed to the court of session. The charges were framed under Sections 148/323/325/307/506/447 IPC read with Section 149 IPC, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.