Ram Rakha Singh v. Resham Singh & Anr.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal, J. The present revision is filed against the acquittal of respondent no. 1 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, on 18.11.2008 in FIR No. 14 dated 21.3.2006 registered under Sections 307, 34 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Kotfatta. The brief facts of the case are that one Ram Rakha Singh got recorded his statement with the police to the effect that on 20.3.2006 at about 6.00 p.m. when he along with his nephew Balbir Singh was sitting inside the shop of his nephew Jagsir Singh son of Gurditta Singh, a Maruti car being driven by a clean shaved person stopped in front of the shop. Accused Jassa Singh was sitting on the back seat of the car. The person sitting on the front seat of the car raised lalkara that Jagsir Singh be no allowed to escape. The driver of the car also came out of the car and exhorted Jassa Singh to open fire.

Jassa Singh opened fire at Jagsir Singh with an intention to kill him and the pellets hit on the left side of the abdomen of Jagsir Singh. On hearing the noise, the accused fled away along with weapon of offence in the car. The case was registered by the police and after completion of investigation challan against the accused was presented. Respondent no.1, whose name was put in column no. 2, was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. He was charged for the aforesaid offences and tried along with other accused. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined ten witnesses. In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused-respondent stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case as on the day of occurrence he was present on duty as Security Guard at Central Warehouse Corporation, Bathinda. Criminal Revision No. 1260 of 2009 (2) Considering the evidence brought on record in the form of statements of witnesses and documents, learned trial Court, acquitted the accused-respondent of the charges framed against him and convicted other accused, namely, Jassa Singh alias Jaskaran Singh, Jagsir Singh son of Gurtej Singh and Kheta Singh.

Feeling aggrieved, against the order of acquittal of respondent Resham Singh, the petitioner filed the instant revision petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper-book. The only evidence which has been relied upon by the prosecution against the accused-respondent is the statement of PW10 Kuldip Singh. He had deposed that he had overheard the conversation between the other accused and Resham Singh regarding the conspiracy which the accused party planned at a tea stall. It has been rightly opined by the court below that such type of conspiracy is always hatched at a secret place and not at a public place. Moreover, this witness is in relation of the injured and such type of statement cannot be accepted in proving the offence without any corroboration. The trial court has convicted three persons named above in the present occurrence, whose appeal is pending for consideration. On the basis of the material placed on record, the court below cannot be said to have gone wrong in acquitting the accused-respondent. In view of the above discussion, finding no merit in the revision, the same is dismissed.

3.9.2009 vs. ( Rajesh Bindal) Judge