HARI SINGH Vs. SURJAN RAM & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been directed against the judgement dated 12.8.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi in Criminal Revision Petition No. 40 of 2008, 05 of 2011 affirming the order dated 12.8.2008 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No. 2, Sundernagar in private complaint No. 2001/2007.

(2.) The facts in brief are that respondent No. 1 had filed complaint under sections 147, 148, 149, 355, 434, 441, 504 and 506 IPC against the petitioner and 12 others. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Sundernagar issued process. The pre -charge evidence was recorded and on 12.8.2008 framed the charge against the petitioner and others under sections 434, 323, 457, 506 read with section 34 IPC. This order was assailed by the petitioner and Prabh Dayal by separate revision petitions, which were dismissed by common judgement by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi on 12.8.2011. Petitioner Hari Singh has challenged the order dated 12.8.2011 under Article 227 of Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a case of no evidence and the courts below have not properly construed section 245 Cr.P.C. while considering the case at the charge stage. PW 1 Surjan Ram complainant in his statement has named Hari Singh and has stated that he and others have committed the offence. PW 2 Luria Ram has also named Hari Singh etc. Similarly PW 3 Arjun Ram has also named Hari Singh for the commission of offence.