IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Rev. No.2117 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 19, 2010 MOHINDER SINGH & ANR. ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS HANS RAJ & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. BS Saroha, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). . AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This revision petition is directed against judgment dated 9.1.2008; whereby Additional Sessions Judge Karnal, has acquitted respondents No.1 to 6. Charge against the respondents was of committing an offence under Sections 306/34, Indian Penal Code. For recording the finding, the trial court has concluded that mere harassment or beating given to the deceased would not constitute abetment as defined under Section 107, Indian Penal Code, so as to bring it within the scope of Section 306, Indian Penal Code. The only allegation against the accused was that they harassed the deceased by not sending his wife-Usha to the matrimonial home. Beatings were given to the deceased when he visited Karnal to bring back his wife-Usha, who is one of the Criminal Rev. No.2117 of 2008 2 accused. The statement of Mohinder Singh, PW-4, to the effect that Sultan Singh had died due to the beatings given by all the accused for not sending his wife-Usha with him to Jind, has not been considered as sufficient evidence so as to indicate abetment to commit suicide. This fact has been read in conjunction with the fact that the deceased consumed poison at Jind, whereas the allegation of giving beatings is at Karnal. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to draw the attention of the court towards any relevant piece of evidence, which has not been considered. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not draw the attention of the court towards any evidence or material that has been perversely interpreted. In view of the above, I find no reason to interfere with the findings recorded in the judgment of acquittal. The petition is dismissed. February 19, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?