Dismissed

Pritam Kaur v. Charan Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Feb 2014CRR/2214/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition was dismissed by a single judge bench. The court held that the petitioner filed no valid grounds to challenge the appellate court's decision.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed.

What the court decided

Pritam Kaur Vs Charan Singh — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRR-2214-2003 Date of Decision: 05.02.2014

Pritam Kaur

...... Petitioner

Versus

Charan Singh & others

¶7

...... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶9

Present : Mrs. Baljit Kaur Mann, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶11

Mr. K.S.Dhillon, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4.

¶12

¶13

SURINDER GUPTA, J.

¶14

This revision petition has been filed by the complainant-Pritam Kaur against the judgment dated 28.11.2001 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, whereby the appeal filed by the respondents against their conviction for offence under Sections 326, 324, 323, 452, 147 read with Section 149 IPC was set aside.

¶15

The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 26.5.1995, the complainant along with her daughter-in-law were present in the Haveli, where Surjit Singh, Jaswinder Kaur and Hardeep Singh along with Mukhtiar Singh son of Charan Singh, Bachan Kaur wife of Charan Singh came and took her daughter-in-law to the fields, where the wheat crop was being harvested. The petitioner also followed them and reached the fields. In the fields, the petitioner Pritam Kaur was given a kirpan blow by Surjit Singh

¶16

and Mukhtiar Singh @ Gurdev Singh each, which hit on her left arm. Satyawan 2014.02.12 17:54 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CRR-2214-2003

¶18

¶19

Gurbachan Kaur gave a dattar blow on her arm. She became unconscious and many people gathered at the spot. The accused then fled away from there. The petitioner was taken to the hospital by her husband Dharam Singh and son Gurbachan Singh. Medical examination of the petitioner was conducted. The injuries on the person of petitioner were declared grievous in nature.

¶20

After completion of investigation the police presented the challan and the trial Court framed charge under Sections 326, 324, 323, 452, 354, 147, 149 IPC against the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

¶21

The prosecution examined Dr. Prem Dutt as PW-1, Dr. A.S. Saini as PW-4, Dr. R.N. Beri as PW-5, Dr. Jaspal Singh as PW-7, complainant Pritam Kaur as PW-2, Kulwant Kaur as PW-3, ASI Davinder Jit as PW-6.

¶22

After completion of trial, respondents were convicted and sentenced by the trial Court.

¶23

In appeal, against the order of their conviction, the respondents were given the benefit of doubt and acquitted.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and have gone through the file with their able assistance.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the scope of this revision is only to examine the correctness, legality and propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed by the lower Court.

¶26

Satyawan 2014.02.12 17:54 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh

¶27

CRR-2214-2003

¶28

¶29

I have perused the judgment of the first Appellate Court wherein the evidence of the prosecution has been discussed in detail. The Appellate Court found the version as improbable and unreliable and riddled with contradictions. The version of occurrence as put forth by the prosecution was not found to be true version. Even the medical evidence was not found worth reliance. Learned Appellate Court regarding the injuries on the person of Kulwant Kaur has observed as follows :-

¶30

“----the possibility of the injuries on the person of PW3 Smt. Kulwant Kaur being the result of fabrication cannot be ruled out and this goes a long way to doubt the genuineness of the medical evidence led by the prosecution.”

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that there is nothing to point out any legal infirmity in judgment, discrepancy or illegality in appreciation of evidence by the first Appellate Court.

¶32

This revision petition has no merits and the same is dismissed.

¶33

05.02.2014 ‘Satyawan’

¶34

( SURINDER GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶35

Satyawan 2014.02.12 17:54 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh

Pritam Kaur v. Charan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Pritam Kaur v. Charan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Court on Its Own Motion Vs Chandigarh Administration

Lawyers Initiative -Ph Vs State of Punjab

Jaswant Singh Raz Vs State of Punjab

M/S Jatin Ispat Private Limited Vs State Bank of Patiala & Ors.

Rishi Nagar F-Block Welfare Association & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Tejinder Singh @ Teji Vs State of Haryana and Ors.