In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 424 of 2002 Date of decision: March 04, 2009 Roshni Devi ... Petitioner Vs. Umed Singh and others ... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Sunil Panwar, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents No.1 to 11. Mr. Praduman Yadav, DAG, Haryana for the respondent No.12. A.N. Jindal, J Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 2.8.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gohana, whereby the accused- respondents (herein referred as “the respondents”) were acquitted of the charges framed against them. The factual matrix of the case is that on 21.4.1998, at about 8.00 p.m., when Roshni Devi complainant (herein referred as “the complainant”) along with her husband and daughter Pinki was harvesting, the respondents came into their fields and stopped the combine. They dragged the complainant, her husband so as her daughter and started abusing them. Yashpal gave sickle blow on the left hand of the complainant, Veerpal inflicted lathi blow on the shin of her left leg, Raj gave jelly blow lathiwise on her right knee, as a sequel of which she fell down. Bharat Singh and Chand Ram caught hold of her husband. Complainant's daughter Pinki fell on her, but the respondents pushed her Crl. Revision No. 424 of 2002 -2- *** aside and thereafter Umed gave fist blow in the waist of the complainant, Jasbir inflicted jelly blow lathiwise on both her legs and Yashpal gave sickle blow on her head near the ear. Thereafter the complainant party was confined and the respondents harvested disputed land. Injured was admitted in the hospital and then on the basis of her statement, a case was registered, investigated and completion of the investigation was followed by a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The respondents were charged for the offence under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 382, 506 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and opted to contest. Evidence was led. Statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded. Ultimately the trial ended in acquittal. Heard. Having examined the records of the case, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. The trial court in its detailed judgment has dealt with all the material aspects of the case. No irregularity, much less illegality has been detected or pointed out resulting into miscarriage of justice. Even otherwise, it is well settled by now that if two views are possible then the view favouring the accused should be accepted. Consequently, finding no merit in the petition the same is dismissed. (A.N. Jindal) Judge March 04, 2009 deepak