Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ram Saran vs . Om Parkash on 10 July, 2013
Author: T.P.S. Mann
Bench: T.P.S. Mann
Criminal Misc. Nos. 62077-78 of 2012 in
Criminal Misc. No.A-835-MA of 2012
***
Ram Saran Vs. Om Parkash
***
Present : Mr.D.S. Nain, Advocate.
***
Criminal Misc. No.62077 of 2012
Allowed, as prayed for.
Criminal Misc. No.62078 of 2012
Heard. Sufficient cause has been shown for condoning
the delay in applying for special leave to appeal. The application
is, accordingly, accepted and the delay of 134 days in filing of an
application for grant of special leave to appeal is condoned.
( T.P.S. MANN )
July 10, 2013 JUDGE
satish
Satish Kumar
2013.08.13 12:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.A-835-MA of 2012
Date of Decision : July 10, 2013
Ram Saran
....Applicant
Versus
Om Parkash
.....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN
Present : Mr. D.S. Nain, Advocate
T.P.S. Mann, J.
The complainant has filed the present application under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. for grant of special leave to appeal against the judgment dated 10.4.2012 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal whereby complaint filed by him under Sections 323, 325, 341 and 506 IPC was dismissed and the accused/respondent was acquitted.
Having heard counsel for the applicant, this Court finds that though the accused respondent was not armed with any weapon yet Mahender and Ishwar, who are also alleged to be present at the time of the occurrence in which the applicant was beaten, made no attempt to save him. Further, the complainant did not examine the said two persons in support of his case. Though it has come on the record that Mahender had died some time in the year 2011 as proved by his brother DW1 Dalel yet fact Satish Kumar 2013.08.13 12:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.A-835-MA of 2012 -2- remains that the complainant had led the preliminary evidence much earlier and the accused was summoned vide order dated 20.5.2009. From the medical evidence it can be inferred that the injuries found on the person of the complainant could be due to fall on hard surface while doing agriculture work. The complainant had claimed that his injuries were subjected to X-ray but no such report of the Radiologist was brought on record. The complainant was aged 63 years on the date of the occurrence and falling of teeth at that age due to natural process could not be ruled out.
In view of the above, no case is made out for any interference in the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court.
The application is without any merit and, therefore, dismissed.
( T.P.S. MANN )
July 10, 2013 JUDGE
satish
Satish Kumar
2013.08.13 12:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh