Crl. Revision No. 1495 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Revision No. 1495 of 2007 Date of decision:- 12.08.2011 Shakuntala ....Petitioner Vs. Maya and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present:- Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. N.K. Sanghi, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana, for respondent-State. ***** A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL) Complainant-Shakuntala Devi by way of this petition has challenged the legality of the judgment dated 18.05.2007 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kosli, acquitting the accused-respondent Nos.1 and 2 (hereinafter referred as respondent Nos. 1 and 2) of the charges under Sections 323, 324, 325 read with Section 34 IPC. On 08.12.1998 at about 9.00 A.M., when the complainant had gone to her plot for throwing the cow dung, then Savitri armed with an axe and Bhateri armed with a brick, met her. Savitri started quarreling with the complainant saying that they had Crl. Revision No. 1495 of 2007 2 been cultivating half acre more land than their share and she would teach them a lesson. Thereupon, Savitri inflicted an axe blow on her left leg. Bhateri inflicted a brick blow on her back. Maya and Subha Chand also inflicted injuries to her. On the basis of aforesaid statement, FIR No.195 dated 08.12.1998 was registered and the case was investigated. During investigation, Subha Chand and Raghubir were found innocent, whereas Maya, Savitri and Bhateri were challanned, but they were acquitted by the trial Court. Since Bhateri died during the trial, therefore, complainant has preferred the revision petition against Maya and Savitri. Having perused the records, it transpires that the impugned judgment is quite well reasoned and well founded. According to the complainant, Savitri inflicted an axe blow on her left leg, whereas the medical evidence does not indicate if any injury was suffered by her on the left leg. However, there is an injury on the right leg of Shakuntala, but the same is not attributed to Savitri. Similarly, the allegations against Maya are that she and Subha Chand caused slaps and fist blows. The statement made by the complainant is vague in this regard. She has not attributed any specific injury to Maya. Therefore, it would be difficult to hold that any injury was caused by Maya, whereas Subha Chand has not been arrayed as an accused. The accused, admittedly, are residing in different villages and it is not explained as to what was the cause for them to go there. Though, Dalip Singh is stated to be present with the complainant at the time of occurrence, yet the MLR indicates that it was Satya Parkash, who Crl. Revision No. 1495 of 2007 3 had accompanied the complainant at the time of occurrence. Therefore, the presence of Dalip Singh is doubtful at the time of occurrence. No grounds to interfere. Dismissed. (A.N.JINDAL) 12th of August, 2011 JUDGE ajp