Criminal Revision No.2012 of 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2012 of 2002 Date of Decision 27.08.2010 Satwant Kaur ...... Petitioner VERSUS Hakam Singh and others ...... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Hardeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): Assailed in this petition is the judgment of acquittal dated 11.07.2002, passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Patiala, acquitting the accused-respondents (herein referred as 'the accused') of the charges under Sections 148, 49, 323 and 324 IPC. Six accused were prosecuted for allegedly causing seven injuries to Satwant Kaur complainant (herein referred as 'the complainant'). Story put-forth by the complainant is that on 21.07.1995 at about 2:45 a.m. she alongwith her husband Gurcharan Singh and brother in law Bhagwant Singh was sleeping at their farm house and when she came out of the house, the accused came armed with Kirpan and fire arms respectively and caused injuries to her. The present case is an offshoot of the case registered against Dial Singh, Satwant Kaur, Gurcharan Singh, Jit Singh and Bhagwant Singh under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC. Case was registered and investigated. Ultimately challan was presented against all the accused. The accused were charged under Section 148, 149, 323 and 324 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined Dr.Karam Singh (PW1), Dr.T.C.Gupta (PW2), Harbans Singh (PW3), Criminal Revision No.2012 of 2002 2 Satwant Kaur (PW4), Gurcharan Singh (PW5) and Sub Inspector Harpreet Singh (PW6). When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied all the allegations and pleaded their false implication. In defence, it was submitted as under:- “On 20.07.1995 Sukhdev Singh and Surjit Singh had come to the house of Hakam Singh for the purchase of an engine at the price of Rs.3500/-. They stayed for the night and on 21.07.1995 at about 4:30/35 a.m., Hakam Singh alongwith Sukhdev Singh, Surjit Singh and Gurdev Singh went to the field owned by Ishar Kaur and in the possession of Hakam Singh, to lift the engine where it was lying. As soon as the accused alighted from the tractor, they saw Gurcharan Singh armed with 12 bore gun, Satwant Kaur wife of Gurcharan Singh, Bhagwant Singh son of Niranjan Singh armed with Kirpan, Dial Singh son of Gurbachan Singh armed with 12 bore gun and Jit Singh son of Babu Singh armed with 12 bore gun, standing outside the kotha and on seeing them, Satwant Kaur raised a lalkara that they should be taught a lesson for trying to lift the engine. Upon this Gurcharan Singh fired from his 12 bore gun towards Hakam Singh with an intention to kill him but it did not hit him. Then Dial Singh fired a shot from his 12 bore gun towards Sukhdev Singh which hit on the right thigh of Hakam Singh. Jit Singh fired a shot towards Surjit Singh which also hit on the right side of Hakam Singh. On raising hue and cry, the aforesaid persons ran away with weapons while firing in the air and giving abuses. Hakam Singh had some dispute with Gurcharan Singh over the land and Gurcharan singh etc., wanted to take forcible possession of land from Hakam Singh. The present case has been falsely foisted in connivance with the police so as to save the PWs from the punishment with regard to the injuries caused to them. They are innocent.” Criminal Revision No.2012 of 2002 3 In defence, the accused examined Harbans Singh Saini (DW1), who had medically examined Surjit Singh and Sukhdev Singh. The trial ended in acquittal. Arguments heard. Record perused. The trial Court has acquitted the accused on the grounds of delay in lodging the FIR, non- explanation of the injuries and previous enmity for implicating the accused. On scrutiny, it transpires that the impugned judgment is well reasoned. Besides the delay of nine hours in lodging the FIR, there appears to be motive for implicating the accused in this case of simple injuries. There was a civil litigation between the parties over the land. Hakam Singh was in possession over the land whereas Gurcharan Singh had made a statement that he would not interfere in the possession of Ishar Kaur wife of Hakam Singh without due process of law. Sukhdev Singh and Surjit Singh had been allegedly fired shots by Gurcharan Singh etc. for which Gurcharan Singh, Bhagwant Singh, Dial Singh, Jeet Singh and Satwant Kaur complainant of this case had been facing trial. Complainant has not explained the injuries on the person of accused. It is also highly unnatural that if seven persons having equipped with the sharp edged weapons as well as guns, would not return by causing simple injuries that too to a lady. The weapon of offence i.e. guns were not taken into possession. Thus, in these circumstances of the case, it would not unsafe to hold that the simple injuries might have been suffered by Satwant Kaur in order to make a plausible defence. Resultantly, finding no merit in the revision petition, the same is dismissed. 27.08.2010 (A.N.Jindal) mamta-II Judge