Criminal Revision No. 309 of 1993 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 309 of 1993 Date of Decision: 05.02.2008 Daler Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Daler Singh son of Santa Singh has preferred Criminal Revision No. 309 of 1993 being aggrieved against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Bathinda, whereby the respondents/accused were acquitted. Daler Singh complainant is said to be father-in-law of respondent No.2 Rajinder Kaur. It is alleged that Rajinder Kaur was having illicit relations with Darshan Singh, respondent No.3, and she in connivance with her brother Sahib Singh, respondent No.1, had caused death of Amarjit Singh. The case rest upon ocular evidence and to fortify the same, prosecution has examined three witnesses, namely Daler Singh as PW.2, Kulwant Singh, nine years old child witness and son of Rajinder Kaur as PW.3 and Kirpal Singh, brother of deceased Amarjit Singh as Criminal Revision No. 309 of 1993 2 PW.4. It is stated that occurrence took place on the night of 24.5.1991. Daler Singh stated in the FIR that he had come to visit the house of his son and in the night he witnessed respondents causing injuries to Amarjit Singh. Post-mortem examination was conducted on the next day i.e. 25.5.1991 at 4.30 P.M. by PW.1 Dr. Ramesh Kumar. In the present case, medical evidence belied ocular version regarding time of occurrence. Furthermore, presence of Daler Singh and Kirpal Singh at the spot is unnatural, improbable and unconvincing. Furthermore, in their presence, there was no occasion or justification for the respondents/accused to commit crime. Mr. Deol appearing for the complainant has stated that implicit reliance should be placed on PW.3 Kulwant Singh. Kulwant Singh, in his cross-examination, has admitted that he along with his mother was residing in the house of accused Sahib Singh and the deceased got another lady and has been residing with him. Having noticed this fact, Mr. Deol has taken me to the findings of the Court. Learned trial Court has recorded well reasoned findings from para 14 to para 19. In the present case, State has decided not to prefer leave to appeal under Section 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure. In appeal against acquittal also, the Court will not disturb the findings if one view is probable. In the present case, in a revisional Court, scope of this Court is limited. Taking totality of circumstances into account, no case is made out. Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 5, 2008 “DK”