Crl. Revn. No. 362 of 2001 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Revn. No. 362 of 2001 Date of Decision : March 19, 2009 Balbir Kaur .... Petitioner Vs. Baldev Singh and another .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHTAB SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Ms. Baljit K. Mann, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S. S. Gill, Addl. A. G., Punjab. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. : This is revision by Balbir Kaur assailing judgment dated 14.06.2000 of learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby Baldev Singh – respondent no.1 stands acquitted of the charge under Sections 452 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code (in short – the IPC) in cross case, arising out of FIR No.196 dated 24.10.1998, under Sections 458/452/324/294/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar. The aforesaid FIR was lodged by Narinder Kaur inter alia alleging that on 24.10.1998 at about 07:30 P.M., Lakha Singh, his son Gurbrinder Singh and one Ninder Singh caused injuries to Ajit Singh and Crl. Revn. No. 362 of 2001 2 Baldev Singh and resultantly, Ajit Singh died. During investigation of the aforesaid FIR, petitioner Balbir Kaur, who is wife of Lakha Singh, made statement to the Investigating Officer Inspector Salinder Singh, Station House Officer of Police Station Beas on 22.12.1998, relating to the same occurrence, which had taken place on 24.10.1998. It was alleged that the petitioner along with her husband Lakha Singh, son Gurbrinder Singh, daughter-in-law Gurvinder Kaur, daughter Jatinder Kaur and her children was present at their house, when at about 07:15 P.M., Ajit Singh (since deceased) and Baldev Singh came drunk in front of their house and started abusing them. The petitioner went to the roof of the house and requested them not to abuse them. Both of them went away, but came back after about half hour and knocked at the gate of the house and started abusing. They pushed the door and opened it and entered the house of the petitioner. Baldev Singh was armed with datar and Ajit Singh with iron rod. Baldev Singh inflicted datar blow to Gurbrinder Singh on the head. Lakha Singh and Ninder Singh, who had also come there, intervened and grappled with Baldev Singh, who was under influence of liquor and was running out of the house. Petitioner's family members confined Baldev Singh and Ajit Singh in a room and in order to deter them, Lakha Singh took out his gun and went to the roof of the house. Police came there and opened the door and found Ajit Singh dead in the room. Baldev Singh had also received injuries while grappling. It was alleged that the complainant party to save themselves had snatched weapons of the accused and inflicted them some injuries. During investigation, Baldev Singh was arrested and was sent for trial after completion of investigation. Charge under Sections 452 and 324 IPC was framed against Baldev Singh, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined four witnesses. Crl. Revn. No. 362 of 2001 3 Dr. Sahibjit Singh (PW-1) stated that on 26.10.1998 at 02:10 P.M., he medico-legally examined Gurbrinder Singh and found an incised wound 3 cm x 0.5 cm on the scalp. Clotted blood was present. Balbir Kaur – complainant/petitioner as PW-2 and Gurbrinder Singh as PW-3 broadly stated about the occurrence as per prosecution version narrated above. Inspector Salinder Singh (PW-4) stated about investigation of the case. The accused Baldev Singh in his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – the Cr.P.C.) denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence and claimed to be innocent. He pleaded the version as mentioned in the FIR lodged by Narinder Kaur. In defence, he examined Dr. Gurpal Singh Randhawa (DW-1), who stated that he medico-legally examined Baldev Singh accused on 24.10.1998 at 10:40 P.M. He found eight injuries on his person. Injury no.8 consisted of several minor abrasions. Injury no.1 was incised wound and injury no.2 was closed fracture of left forearm and was, therefore, grievous. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file with their assistance. In the instant revision petition, acquittal of Baldev Singh – respondent no.1 has been challenged by complainant – petitioner Balbir Kaur. However, Section 401(3) Cr.P.C. stipulates that nothing in this Section shall be deemed to be authorizing a High Court to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction. In view of this mandatory provision, prayer in the revision petition for convicting respondent no.1 – Baldev Singh cannot be allowed. Even otherwise, there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment of acquittal so as to warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Only a single simple injury was suffered by Gurbrinder Singh in contrast to large number of injuries suffered by Ajit Singh (since deceased) and Baldev Singh accused. On the other hand, Crl. Revn. No. 362 of 2001 4 Gurbrinder Singh and his father Lakha Singh and Ninder Singh stand convicted in the main case for various offences including murder of Ajit Singh and injuries to Baldev Singh. It is thus apparent that there is no merit in the instant revision petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. ( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE March 19, 2009 ( MEHTAB SINGH GILL ) monika JUDGE