Criminal Rev. No.1201 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CRR No. 1201 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:August 01,2011 Smt. Kitab Kaur ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Manoj K.Tanwar, Advocate for the petitioner. ** Sabina, J. Respondent-Kitab Kaur faced the trial under Sections 323/325 of the Indian Penal Code in FIR No. 137 dated 23.12.2008 registered at Police Station Satnali. Vide judgment dated 9.10.2010, the Judicial Magistrate first Class acquitted respondent-Santosh Devi of the charge framed against her. Hence, the present petition by the complainant. The case of the complainant, in brief, was that on 24.10.2008 complainant had gone to village-Barda to take care of her home. Near the water tank, Santosh-accused was found standing. It was about 10.00 a.m. Santosh approached the complainant and called her Budhiya (old lady). Santosh further asked the complainant as to why she was not residing with her elder son-Deep Chand. The complainant said to Santosh that, it was her sweet will to live wherever she liked. Santosh twisted the hand of the Criminal Rev. No.1201 of 2011 2 complainant, as a result of which, she fell on the ground. Santosh then sat on top of the complainant and started giving her fist blows. On hearing the alarm raised by the complainant, Ramesh came to the spot and rescued her. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. In the present case, Ramesh Kumar was, allegedly, an eye witness to the occurrence. Admittedly, he did not support the prosecution case during trial. It has been noticed by the trial Court that the complainant in her cross-examination admitted that she had suffered the injury as she had fallen over stones. The complainant admitted that there were civil cases between her son and husband of respondent No.2-Santosh Devi. The doctor who had medico legally examined the complainant found pain in her neck and on x-ray examination, prolapse of 13 and 14 inter verte-bral disc were seen. However, since the eye witness had not supported the prosecution case and there was civil litigation between the son of the complainant and husband of accused-Santosh Devi, the learned trial Court rightly came to the conclusion that the prosecution case appeared to be doubtful. There was possibility of false involvement of the accused on account of pendency of civil litigation between the parties. The reasons given by the trial Court while acquitting the accused are sound reasons and call for no interference. Dismissed. (Sabina) Judge August 01, 2011 arya Criminal Rev. No.1201 of 2011 3