Crl. Revision No. 2745 of 2008(O&M) {1} In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 2745 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision:30-01-2009 Jasbir Singh ---Petitioner versus Gurnam Singh and others ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.RBS Chahal,Advocate, for the petitioner SABINA, J. Gurnam Singh and Gulshan kaur were convicted for offence punishable under Sections 324/323/34 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') vide judgment dated 16.1.2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala. Vide order of even date, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala sentenced the accused Gurnam Singh and Gulshan Kaur to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 324/34 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 323/34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 506 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, Gurnam Singh and Gulshan Kaur preferred an appeal and the same was allowed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala vide judgment dated 23.5.2008 acquitting them of the charge framed against them. Revision Petition filed by complainant Jasbir Singh for enhancement of sentence was consequently dismissed. Hence, the present revision petition has been Crl. Revision No. 2745 of 2008(O&M) {2} filed by the complainant. The prosecution case, as noticed by the Appellate court in para 2 of its judgment is as under:- 2. Facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of the Criminal Appeal and the Revision Petition are that on 5.5.1996 on receipt of telephone call from Emergency Department, Rajendra Hospital, Patiala regarding admission of Jasbir Singh, complainant, due to injuries, ASI Dharam Dev along with PHG Surja Ram reached Rajendra Hospital, Patiala and obtained the opinion of Doctor regarding the injured, who declared the injured unfit to make statement. ASI Dharam Dev along with other police officials again went to Rajendra Hospital, Patiala on 6.5.96 and after obtaining opinion of Doctor regarding fitness of injured to make statement, the statement of injured was recorded wherein he has stated that his younger sister Gurdeep Kaur is married to Gurnam Singh who is working as SDO, Pollution Control Board, Patiala. The other family members of Gurnam Singh are residing at village Mathiara. Gurnam Singh was maltreating and beating Gurdeep Kaur for a considerable time and on 23.2.96 Gurnam Singh gave beating to Gurdeep Kaur and thereafter, Gurnam Singh rang up the father of complainant at Nabha conveying that in case they enter his house, then they will face the consequences. Thereafter, none of the family members of complainant visited Gurdeep Kaur. On 4.5.96 the complainant along with his father visited village Mathiara and informed the family members of Gurnam Singh about him (Gurnam Singh). On 5.5.96 wife of brother of Gurnam Crl. Revision No. 2745 of 2008(O&M) {3} Singh, namely, Gulshan Kaur rang up the complainant that they have reached the house of Gurnam Singh, so they should also come. At about 1.30 p.m. the complainant, his father and brother Ravinder Singh reached the house of Gurnam Singh, where parents of Gurnam Singh, his sister- in-law Gulshan Kaur, Gurnam Singh and Gurdeep Kaur were present. The complainant party was enquiring regarding the reason for dispute from Gurnam Singh and Gurdeep Kaur. When Gurdeep Kaur tried to talk about the beatings given to her by Gurnam singh, then Gurnam Singh slapped her and also started abusing her. When Ravinder Singh, brother of complainant, tried to stop Gurnam Singh from doing so, Gurnam Singh caught hold of Ravinder Singh by his neck and Gulshan Kaur also felt enraged. The complainant and his father rescued Ravinder Sing from the grip of Gurnam Singh. Then three of them and Gurdeep Kaur came out side on the road. Then Gurnam Singh armed with a sword alongwith his sister-in- law Gulshan Kaur came outside on the road exhorting lalkaras. Gurnam Singh gave sword blow which hit the complainant on the left side of the neck. Gulshan Kaur kept on exhorting lalkaras that the complainant should not be spared today. The father, brother and sister of complainant raised raula 'Mar Ditta, Mar Ditta' which attracted the neighbours and on seeing them, accused Gurnam Singh and Gulshan Kaur ran away along with the weapon. Injured/complainant was taken to hospital by his brother Ravinder Singh. ASI Dharam Dev made his endorsement on the statement of complainant/injured and sent the ruqa Crl. Revision No. 2745 of 2008(O&M) {4} to the police station, on the basis of which formal FIR was recorded. ASI also prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence. Gurnam Singh accused was arrested and after completion of all other formalities of investigation, challan against him was put in court for trial, whereas name of accused Gulshan Kaur was kept in column No.2, but she was also summoned by the court on application U/S 319 Cr.P.C.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Appellate court had erred in acquitting respondents No. 1 and 2. The prosecution had been successful in proving its case. In the present case, as per the prosecution case, Gurnam Singh had given beatings to his sister Gurdeep Kaur on 23.2.1996. Reconciliation meeting was called on 5.5.1996 at the house of Gurnam Singh. During the said meeting, respondent No. 1 Gurnam Singh and Gurlshan Kaur-respondent No. 2 inflicted injuries on the person of Gurdeep Kaur and complainant-Jasbir Singh. It was noticed by the Appellate court that Gurdeep Kaur got her medical examination conducted on 7.5.2006 i.e. two days after the alleged occurrence. Dr. H.K.Sodhi appeared in the witness box as PW-1. The examination-in-chief of the said witness was conducted but the said witness was not produced for cross examination. Hence, statement of PW-1 could not be taken into consideration. In these circumstances, the medical evidence regarding injuries suffered by Gurdeep Kaur was not proved on record. Similarly, the doctor who had examined complainant-Jasbir Singh, was not examined as a witness. Since the medical evidence to corroborate the injuries allegedly suffered by the complainant-Jasbir Singh and injured-Gurdeep Kaur were not proved on record, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Crl. Revision No. 2745 of 2008(O&M) {5} Patiala has rightly acquitted respondents No. 1 and 2 of the charge framed against them vide impugned judgment dated 23.5.2008. Impugned judgment dated 23.5.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, does not call for any interference. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE January 30, 2009 PARAMJIT