Rajinder Singh v. State of Haryana

connectedomatter -1 INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoPUNJABoANDoHARYANA AToCHANDIGARHoo ooooo ooooo ooooooooo oooooooooDateoofoReserve:09.10.2025 oooooooooo ooooooo DateoofoDecision:o14.10.2025

(I)oCRA-D-264-DB-2004 RajinderoSingh o …Appellant Vs. StateoofoHaryana …Respondent

(II) CRA-D-616-DBA-2004 ooo StateoofoHaryana o …Appellant Vs. RanoSinghoandoAnr. …Respondents Coramo: Hon'bleoMr.oJusticeoN.S.Shekhawat Hon'bleoMs.oJusticeoSukhvinderoKaur Present: Mr.oR.SoMamli,oAdvocate forotheoappellant(s)oinoCRA-D-264-DB-2004. Mr.oRajinderoKumaroBanku,ooSr.DAG,Haryanaowith Mr.oRajivoSidhu,oSr.oDAG,oHaryana. Mr.oP.K.SoPhoolka,oAdvocate forotheorespondentsoinoCRA-D-616-DBA-2004. *** N.S.ShekhawatoJ.

¶1Byowayoofocommonojudgment,othisoCourtoshallodisposeoofotwo appealsoi.e. oCRA-D-264-DB-2004otitledoaso"��������������������������� ��������oandoCRA-D-616-DBA-2004otitledoaso"������������������������ ���������������o

¶2Since,obothotheoappealsoinvolveocommonoquestionsoofofactsoandolaw andoariseooutoofotheosameoFIR,obothotheoappealsoareobeingodisposedoof, connectedomatter -2 sim+ltaneo+sly.

¶6Rajinder o Singh, o appellant7acc+sed o in o criminal o appeal o 8o. CRA-D-264-DB-2004o hasochallengedotheoimp+gnedoj+dgmentoofoconviction andoorderoofosentenceodatedo%).)/.%))',opassedo2yotheo"o+rtoofoAdditional $istricto9oSessionso:+dgeo Adhoc!,o:hajjar,o.here2y,oheoo.asoconvictedoforothe offenceop+nisha2leo+nderoSectionso6)%76'oofo5P"oando.asosentecedotoo+ndergo imprisonmentoforolifeoandotoopayoaofineoofoRs.;)))7#,ooinodefa+ltoofopaymentoof fine,oheo.o+ldof+rthero+ndergoorigoro+soimprisonmentoforoaoperiodoofosi< months,o.hereas,oinocriminaloappealo8o."RA#$#&/&#$(A#%))',otheoStateoof Haryanaohasochallangedotheoac3+ittalooforespondentso8o./o9o%7acc+sedo2yothe sameo"o+rt. '. =heo45Ro><.P$7%oinotheopresentocaseo.asoregisteredoonotheo2asisoof theostatemento><.P$omadeo2yoRan2iroSinghosonoofoShishoRam,oresidentoof Villageo$ha,laoandotheostatemento><.P$oisoreprod+cedo2elo.:# 1Statement of Ranbir Singh s/o Shish Ram Jat r/o Dhakla aged 40 years and stated that I am the resident of above address and do agricultural work. We are two brother. Elder brother of mine is Ram Singh, who is residing separately for the last 20%21 years. My mother has already expired. My father was alive. My father's Sister(Buwa) Bhagwani had 16 Killas of land in her name. Who had quathed her land in half share i. e 8 killas each in the name of two brother but my father had 16 killas of land in his name. Whole of that land has been given to me. No share was left in this land for my brother Ran Singh. My father had suffered a decree of 16 killas of land in favour of my three sons. My brother Ran Singh and his family member had grudge for this. They used to threat him time and again that they would not let him deprive them from their right in ancestral land. Today previous night my father authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh connectedomatter -7 went to sleep in the garrage near the tractor as usual. I, my wife Ram Bateri and my daughter Krishna after having our meals slept at about 10.P.M.(night) on the roof. At about 11.30 P.M. we heard the noise of 'Bachao.%Bachao' from the garrage. I, my wife and my daughter came in the stair and saw that Krishna w/o my brother was catching hold my father and Rajender son of Chander Jat r/o chara brother%in%law of Ran singh was having a pharsa in his hand. Satbir son of my brother Ran Singh was having a pistol in his hand. They were giving injuries to my father. They were exclaiming that they are teaching lesson for suffering a decree of ancestral land in favour of one side. We gave a call that we are coming and raised alarm of BachaoBachao. Then they ran away with their respective weapons. Thereafter, Deep Chand s/o Daya Nand and Ranbir S/o Teka, Jat of the same village also reached at the spot. My father expired at the spot. Because of being fears stricken and raining at the night I could not come to make a report. Now I was going to police station to make a report that you have met me. Ranbir and Deep Chand are left at the spot with the dead body. I have got recorded my statement to you. Heard and correct. Legal action may be taken.= ;. Afterotheoregistrationoofotheo45Ro><.P$7%, S+meroSingh,oS.5oalong .ithootheropoliceoofficialso.entotootheospotoandoinspectedotheosite.oHeoprepared theoin3+estoreporto><.P8,o.hicho.asoidentifiedo2yoRan2iroSinghoando$eep "handoandoalsoosentotheodeado2odyotoo"iviloHospital,o:hajjaroforopostomortem e<amination.o=heo2loodostainedoeartho.asopic,edofromotheospotoando.asota,en intoopossessionovideotheorecoveryomemoo><.P*.o=heositeoplano><.PMoofothe placeoofoocc+rrenceo.asoalsooprepared.o=hereafter,oheoarrestedoRanoSinghoand *rishna, o respondents o 8o./ o and o % o in o criminal o appeal o 8o. "RA#$#&/&#$(A#%))'oonotheosameodayoando.ereointerrogatedo2yotheopolice authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh connectedomatter -4 team.ooRanoSingh,orespondentoNo.1omadeoaodisclosureostatementoEx.POoandogot recoveredoaophawrao(spade),ousedoinotheooccurrenceofromohisohouse,ovideothe recoveryomemooEx.PO/1.oOno05.06.2002,oSumeroSingh,oS.I,oarrestedoRajinder, appellant/accused o in o criminal o appeal o No.CRA-D-264-DB-2004 o and o in pursuanceoofohisodisclosureostatementoEx.PH,oheogotorecoveredoaopharsao(axe) withoaolongohandle,owhichowereotakenointoopossessionovideotheorecoveryomemo Ex.PH/1,oafteropreparingoitsoroughosketchoEx.PH/2.oTheositeoplanoEx.PH/3oofothe placeoofooccurrenceowasoalsooprepared.oOno25.06.2002,oSumeroSingh,oSIomoved anoapplicationobeforeotheodoctoroforoobtainingotheiroopinionoasotoowhetherothe injuriesofoundoonotheopersonoofotheodeceasedocouldobeocausedowithoaophawraoand pharsaoproducedobeforeothemoandotheodoctorohadoopinedothatotheoinjuriesoNo.1 too10oonotheopersonoofotheodeceasedocouldobeopossibleowithothoseoweapons.oAfter concludingotheoinvestigation,oRanoSingh,oKrishnaoandoRajinderowereochallaned. Theoco-accusedoSatbir,ocouldonotobeoarrestedoandosinceoheohadoabsconded,ohe wasodeclaredoasoaoproclaimedooffenderoinotheopresentocase.

¶6Afterotheopresentationoofotheochallan,oaoprimaofacieocaseounder Sectionso302/34oofoIPCowasomadeooutoagainstothreeoaccused,oforowhichothey wereocharge-sheeted,ohowever,oallotheoaccusedopleadedonotoguiltyoandoclaimed thatotheyomayobeotriedobyotheoTrialoCourt.

¶7Inosupportoofotheoprosecutionocase,otheoprosecutionohadoreliedoupon 14owitnesses.

¶8TheoprosecutionoexaminedoPW-1,oDr.oSurenderoKumar,owhoowas partoofoBoardoofotheodoctors,owhooconductedotheopostomortemoonotheodeadobody ofoShishoRam.oTheorelevantoextractoofohisostatementohasobeenoreproduced connectedomatter -) 2elo.:# 1On that day we conducted the post mortem on the above said body and found the following:% The length of the body was 5'6". There was no ligature mark on the neck. The dead body was moderately and nourished wearing white kurta, white baninyan, white doti, a black thread around waist, a white thread around the waist and a key tied to the white thread. A hole in the kurta corresponding to the left anterior abdominal wall was present blackening around the hole was present. Another hole was present in the kurta corresponding to the right lower chest posteriorly. A hole in the Baniyan was present corresponding to left anterior andominal wall blackening around the hole was present. Another tear was present over the back of Baniyan corresponding to right lower chest. Blood stains around this hole was the present. Rigor mortis was present in all the limbs. Bilateral black eyes were present. Post Mortem staining was present over the back.

¶1An abrasion of size 4x3cm. was present longitudinally over the superior aspect of right shoulder extending posteriorly. Clotted blood was present.

¶2A red contusion of size 12x1 cm. was present on superior aspect of left shoulder longitudinally extending anteriorly and posteriorly, on exploration fracture left scapula was present.

¶3An abrasion of size 2x5 cm. was present on superior aspect of left shoulder, 1cm.medial to injury no.2. Clotted blood was present.

¶4A lacerated wound of size 12x1.5cm. 75cm. on right side of longitudinally over scalp over vertex 3cm. on right side of midline. Clotted blood was present.

¶5A lacerated wound of size 1.5x.5cms. was present over forehead obliquely on left side of midline 1cm. above the nasion. Clotted blood was present.

¶6A transversly placed lacerated wound of size 2x. 5x.5cma. was present in left post auricular region. Clotted blood was present. authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh connectedomatter -6

¶7A lacerated wound of 3x.5x. 5cm. transversly placed in left occipital region of scalp. 5cm.posterior to the upper part of left pinna. Clotted blood was precent.

¶8At ranversly placed lacerated sound 4.5x. Sarx, an. 5 in left occipital region of scalp. 1.5cm below Injury no.7. Crocted blood was present.

¶9A lacerated wound transveraly placed 5.5.x.5cms. in left occipital region of scalp. 1.5cm below injury no.8. Clotted blood was present.

10.A red contusion of size 19×10cm. Obliquely placed in left hypochondrium, extending over left lower chest and an epigastrioum.

11.Megantry of small intestines was proturuding outside the left lumbar rigion anteriorly at the level of unblicus on reducing the mesentry into abdominal cavity alacerated would 3.5x2.5 cm wa present at the level of wablicus and 5cm. from umblicus and left lumbar region. Margins of the wound were contured and inverted. Blackening and tattooing was present. On exploration the wound was extending medially and upwards in the subcutaneous tissues, muscles, pertiticnium and entering the abdominal cavity in midline, 3cm. above the anblimus, Blackening was present in such cutaneous tissues from muscles and peritonius. On opening yhr abdominal cavity a through and through puferahar was present in the stomach and right lob of the liver. and diaphragm. Hemoperitonium was present(1000ml.) semi digested food was leaking out from the stomach in the abdominal cavity.

¶12A lacerated wound 2x1x2.5cm. in right infra%scapular regior

12.5cm. below and 6cm.medial to posterior right axillary fold. Margins were everted and blood was oozing out.On exploration fracture of 10th and 11th ribs on rignt side vere present posteriorly. This injury was communicating with the injury no. 11. authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh
 



   8 On exploration of the chest fracture of 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th ribs were present anteriorly on left side. On exploration of the skull depressed fracture of left occipital bone was present. A sub%dural hemetoma of 10x7.5 x3.5cm.was present in left partietal region. extending to left occipital region. Spleen, kidney, pleura, both lungs are organs of generation external and internal all healthy. The cause of death in our opinion was due to injury to the vital organs i.e. liver and brinl.leading on to hemorrhage shock and death. All the injuries were antemortem in nature and were insufficient to cause of death in the ordinary course of nature=. C   B#/ $ + *+   %;)&%))%

+  

5     2     +

        =      + 8/  /)     




+ 2 2 + . pharsa  phawra. >  + 8//  /% . + .     + 8//  + 2 +  +       arsa .   2+   2    .      + +   .+ B#% : "  "2

$        ><" .  B#6 D 

    +3            45
><$7%      B#'

+ 

     ,           2 ></  ><&     . < 2  ><@  ></% 4+   "2

+ 

. <   B#; .   ,                  ><> =     B#& ( 

"2  B#@  

 "2     +  +    + < 
2  




   B#A   authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh connectedomatter -8 reiteratedotheoversionoasomentionedoinotheoFIRoEx.PD/2.oSimilarly,oPW-9, DarshanaodaughteroofoRanbiroandoPW-10oBhateriowifeoofoRanbirohadoalso supportedotheotestimonyoofoPW-8,oRanbir.oTheoprosecutionofurtheroexamined PW-11,oDeepoChand,oneighbouroofotheodeceased,ohowever,oheodidonotosupport theocaseoofotheoprosecutionoandowasodeclaredohostile.oSimilarly,oPW-12, Rajender,oanotherowitnessorefuseotoosupportotheocaseoofotheoprosecution.oThe prosecutionofurtheroexaminedoSumeroSinghoasoPW-13,oSI,owhoohadoinitially investigatedotheomatter.oHeohadorecordedotheostatementoofoRanbiroSingh complainantoasoEx.PDoandohadomadeohisoendorsementoasoEx.PD/1.oHeoreached atospotoandotookointoopossessionotheoincriminatingoevidenceofromotheoplaceoof occurrence. oHeohadoalsooarrestedoRanoSingh oandoRajinder,oaccusedoand recoveriesomadeofromothem.oTheoprosecutionofurtheroexaminedoRaghubiroSingh PW-14,owhoowasopartoofotheopoliceopartyoandoremainedoassociated,oduringothe processooforecovery.oInohisopresence,ophawraowasorecoveredofromoRanoSingh andotheosameowasotakenointoopossessionobyotheopolice.

¶10Afterotheocompletionoofotheoprosecutionoevidence,otheostatementoof accusedoRanoSinghowasorecordedounderoSectiono313oCr.P.C,owherein,oheostated thatotheoinjuriesowereocausedotootheodeceasedobyoSatbiro@oKalaoandohisofriend, whoseonameoheodidonotoknow.oHisoco-accusedoKrishnaoandoRajinderohadocaused nooinjuriesotootheodeceased.

¶11Similarly, oRajinder, o appellant/accused o in o criminal o appeal o No. CRA-D-264-DB-2004oalsoopleadedohisofalseoimplicationoandoheosupportedothe statementomadeobyoRanoSingh,oaccused.oKrishna,orespondentoNo.2oalsoostated connectedomatter -9 thatosheohadobeenofalselyoimplicatedoandoinjuriesowereocausedobyoSatbiro@oKala andooneoofohisoco-accused. CRA-D-264-DB-2004

¶1Learnedocounselohasovehementlyoarguedothatotheoentireoprosecution caseowasobasedoonotheotestimoniesoofointerestedoandoofficialowitnesses.oThe wholeoprosecutionocaseowasobasedoonotheostatementsoofoPW-8oRanbir,oPW-9 DarshanaodaughteroofoRanbiroandoPW-10oBhateriowifeoofoRanbiroandothe testimoniesoofosuchoinimicalowitnessesoareoliableotoobeoscrutinizedowithocareoand caution.oHeofurtherosubmitsothatoevenotheoaboveostatedo03owitnessesohadonot witnessedotheooccurrenceoatoalloandotheiropresenceoatotheoplaceoofooccurrenceowas highlyodoubtful.oInofact,oitohasobeenostatedothatoallotheothreeowitnessesohadoheard theocriesoofotheodeceased,owhileoheowasobeingoattackedobyotheoaccused. Surprisingly,ononeoofothemohadoeitheroraisedotheonoiseotoosaveotheodeceasedonor triedotooapprehendoanyoofotheoaccused.oStillofurther,oRanbiroSinghoPW-8owas alreadyoinimicalotowardsoRanoSinghoandodueotootheosaidoenmity,oheohadonamed RanoSingh,ohisowifeoKrishna,oRajenderohisobrother-in-lawoandoSatbiro@oKalaohis son.oConsequently,oaofutileoattemptohasobeenomadeotooinvolveotheoentireofamily asowelloasotheirorelativeoinoaofalseocriminalocase.oLearnedocounselofurther contendsothatoinofact,otheoTrialoCourtohadorightlyodisbelievedotheoversionoofothe prosecutionoquaotwooaccusedonamelyoRanoSinghoandoKrishnaoandotheoappellant wasoalsooliableotoobeoacquittedobyothisoCourt.

¶2OnotheootherohandolearnedoStateocounselohasovehementlyoopposed theosubmissionsomadeobyotheoappellantoonotheogroundotheothreeowitnesses namelyoPW-8oRanbir,oPW-9oDarshanaoandoPW-10oBhateriowifeoofoRanbirohad connectedomatter -10 madeospecificoallegationsoagainstoRajinderoSingh,owhoohadocausedorepeated blowsoonotheopersonoofoShishoRamowithoaopharsa,owhereas,oSatbiro@oKalaoson ofoRanoSingh,oaccusedohadofiredoaoshotoatoShishoRamoandoShishoRamohad expiredoatotheospot.oHeofurtherocontendsothatotheoversionoofotheoeyeowitnesses hasobeenodulyosupportedobyotheostatementoofoPW-1,oDr.oSurenderoKumar,owho statedothatotheoinjuriesoNo.1otoo10ocouldobeocausedofromotheobluntosideoofopharsa, whereas,oinjuriesoNo.11oando12owereofirearmoinjuriesoandocouldohaveobeen causedowithoaofirearm.oStillofurther,otheostatementsoofosuchowitnessesohaveobeen furtherocorroboratedobyotheotestimonyoofoPW-13oSumeroSingh,oSI,owhoohad conductedotheoinvestigationoinotheopresentocase.oThus,otheoappellantohasobeen rightlyoconvictedobyotheoTrialoCourtoinotheopresentocase.

¶3Weohaveoheardolearnedocounseloforotheopartiesoandoperusedothe recordocarefully.

¶4Inotheopresentocase,oShishoRamowasotheofatheroofoRanoSingh, co-accusedoasowelloasoRanbiroSingh.oBhagwaniosisteroofoShishoRamoownedo16 killasoofoland,owhoohadotransferredo8okillasoeachoinotheonamesoofoRanoSingh, co-accusedoasowelloasoRanbiroSingh,ocomplainant,owhereas,oShishoRamohad sufferedoaodecreeoofo16okillasoofolandoinofavouroofothreeosonsoofoRanbiroSingh, complainantoandoRanoSingh,oco-accusedowasodeprivedoofotheoland.oItoisoalso apparentofromotheorecordothatotheoentireolandowasotransferredobyoShishoRamoin favouroofotheosonsoofotheoRanbiroSingh,ocomplainantobyowayoofociviloCourt decreeoinotheoyearo1991,owhen,oRanoSingh,oaccusedowasodeprivedoofohalfoshare inotheoland.oConsequently,otheoTrialoCourtohasorightlyoheldothatoforoalmosto11 years,oRanoSingh,oaccusedohadoneitheroraisedoanyoprotestoagainstohisofatheronor connectedomatter -11 hadopickedoanyofightowithohim.oThus,othisoclearlyoshowsoabsenceoofomotiveoon theopartoofoRanoSingh,oaccusedoinotheopresentocase.oHowever,oatothatotime,oSatbir wasoaoyoungoboyoandoafteroaogapoofoabouto11oyears,othereowasoescalationoinothe pricesoofotheolandoandoheomightohaveobeenoaggrievedoofotheoactoofoShishoRam, whereby,oheohadotransferredotheoentireoparceloofolandoinofavouroofothreeosonsoof complainant.oThus,oitoisoapparentothatoSatbirohadojoinedohandsowithoRajinderoand hadocausedoinjuriesotooShishoRam.oEven,oitoisoalsooapparentothatotheodeceased hadosufferedo10oinjuries,obesidesotheofireoarmoinjuryoandoasoperotheostatementoof PW-1,oDr.oSurenderoKumar,oallotheosaidoinjuriesocouldohaveobeenocausedofrom theobluntosideoofotheopharsa,owhichowasocarriedobyoRajinderoSingh.

¶5Apartofromothat,otheoprosecutionohasoexaminedothreeowitnesses namelyoPW-8oRanbir,oPW-9oDarshanaoandoPW-10oBhateriowifeoofoRanbir,owho hadobeenosubjectedotoolengthyocross-examinationobyolearnedodefenceocounsel beforeotheoTrialoCourt,ohowever,otheotestimoniesoofoallotheothreeowitnessesocould notobeoshatteredoinoanyomanner.

¶6Asoaoconsequence,oweohaveonoohesitationotooholdothatoRajinder SinghohasobeenorightlyoconvictedoandosentencedobyotheoTrialoCourt.

¶7Asoaoconsequenceoofotheoaboveodiscussion,otheopresentoappealofails andoisoaccordingly,oorderedotoobeodismissed.

¶8oTheoimpugnedojudgmentoofoconvictionoandoorderoofosentenceodated

20.01.2004,opassedobyotheoCourtoofoAdditionaloDistricto&oSessionsoJudge (Adhoc),oJhajjaroareoorderedotoobeoupheld.

¶9Theoappellantomayobeotakenoinocustodyoforthwith,oifonotoinocustody, tooserveotheoremainingosentence. connectedomatter -12

(II) CRA-D-616-DBA-2004

¶1Byowayoofotheopresentoappeal,otheoStateoofoHaryanaohasochallenged theoacquittaloofotheoRanoSinghoandoKrishna,orespondentsoNo.1o&2obyotheoTrial Court.

¶2LearnedoStateocounselohasovehementlyoarguedothatotheoTrialoCourt didonotoappreciateotheotestimoniesoofooPW-8oRanbir,oPW-9oDarshanaoandoPW-10 Bhateri,owhoohadocategoricallyodeposedothatobothotheorespondentsohadoalso participatedoalongowithoRajinder,oco-accused.oEven,oRanoSingh,orespondent No.1owasotheoprincipaloaccused,owhoowasohavingoenmityowithoShishoRam,osince deceasedoasoheohadonototransferredotheolandoinofavouroofotheorespondentoNo.1. Dueotoothis,obothotheorespondentsohadojoinedotheohandsowithotheirosonoSatbiro@ Kala o and o Rajender, o brother-in-law o of o respondent o No.1. o All o the o accused includingorespondentsoNo.1o&o2oohadogoneoatotheoplaceoofooccurrenceoandoafter reachingothere,oKrishnaohadocaughtoholdoofoShishoRam,owhereas,oRanoSingh, respondentoNo.1ohadocausedoinjuriesoonotheopersonoofoShishoRam,owithoa phawarao(spade).ooHisoco-accusedoRajenderocausedoinjuriesotooShishoRamowithoa pharsao(axe)owithoaolongohandle,owhereas,oSatbirosonoofoRanoSingh,ofiredoaoshot fromotheopistol,owhichohadohitoShishoRamoonohisostomach.oThus,oShishoRamohad expiredoatotheospotoonoaccountoofoinjuriesosustainedobyohim.oLearnedoState counselovehementlyoarguedothatotheotestimoniesoofoeyeowitnessesowereoduly supportedobyotheostatementoofoPW-1,oDr.oSurenderoKumar,owhooclearlyostated thatoinjuriesoNo.1otoo10oonotheopersonoofoShishoRamocouldopossiblyobeocaused withoaopharsaoandophawra.oThus,otheotrialoCourtohadocommittedograveoerroroin acquittingotheorespondentsoinotheopresentocase.o connectedomatter -13

¶3On o the o other o hand o learned o counsel o appearing o on o behalf o of respondents o has o supported o the o findings o recorded o by o the o Trial o Court o by submittingothatotheoTrialoCourtohadorecordedodetailedoreasonsowhileoacquitting bothotheorespondents.oHeofurtherocontendsothatoinofact,otheolandodisputeohad createdobackbloodobetweenotheocomplainantoandotheorespondentoNo.1,oi.eotwo realobrothers.oEven,otheomotiveoallegedoagainstorespondentoNo.1owasonon-transferoofolandoinofavourooforespondentoNo.1oandotransferoofoentireolandoofoShish Ramoinofavouroofosonsoofotheocomplainant.oShishoRamohadotransferredotheoland inofavouroofosonsoofotheocomplainant,obyowayoofoaociviloCourtodecreeoinotheoyear 1991oandobothotheorespondentsohadoneveroraisedoanyoobjectionotootheosame. Thus,otheoimpugnedojudgmentoisolegallyosustainable.

¶4Weohaveoheardolearnedocounseloforotheopartiesoandoperusedothe recordocarefully.

¶5o As o pero the o case o of o the o prosecution, o both o the o brothers o i.e. complainantoasowelloasorespondentoNo.1owereoresidingoseparatelyoandotheir fatheroShishoRam,osinceodeceasedowasoresidingowithocomplainant.oShishoRam hadotransferredohisoentireo16oacresoofolandoinofavouroofosonsoofocomplainantoby wayoofociviloCourtodecree,owhichowasosufferedobyohimoinotheoyearo1991, whereas,oinotheopresentocase,otheooccurrenceohadotakenoplaceoono29.05.2002oi.e almosto11oyears.oStillofurther,oevenoasoperotheoadmittedocaseoofotheoprosecution, theosaidotransferoofolandobyoShishoRamowasotheomotiveoforocausingoinjuriesoto ShishoRam.oHowever,otheoTrialoCourtohasorightlyoobservedothatoinotheopasto11 years,oRanoSingh,orespondentoNo.1ohadoneveroobjectedotootheosaidolandoasothe pricesoofotheosaidolandoinothoseodaysowasohighlyoinsignificant.oHowever,oaftero11 connectedomatter -14 yearsoSat2iroEo*allaosonooforespondento8o./ohadoattainedomajorityoand pro2a2ly,oheo.asoaggrievedoofotheotransferoofolandoinofavo+roofosonsoofothe complainantoaso2yothatotimeotheopricesoofolandohadoescalated.o &. Apartofromothat,otheocomplainanto.asoadmittedlyohighlyoinimical to.ardso2othotheorespondentsod+eotootheoongoingolandodisp+teo2et.eenothe parties.o=h+s,otheopossi2ilityoofofalseoimplicationooforespondentso8o./oando% co+ldonoto2eor+ledoo+t.oApartofromothat,o.eohaveoalsooper+sedotheodetailed findingsorecordedo2yotheo=rialo"o+rtoinofavo+roofotheorespondentsoandofindono reasonsotoodeviateofromotheosame. @. 5tohaso2eenoheldo2yotheoHonG2leoS+premeo"o+rtoinotheomatteroof :B3a$4arraooandoot3er$o;$(o2tateoo#otia3ara$3tra<=o2019oAIRo+21>reme Co1rt,o2222?o2019o+),oRCRo+Cr*m*na/,o229oasofollo.s:#o <14. As the trial court and High Court, having appreciated the evidence on record, has come to diametrically opposite conclusions, mandating herein to observe certain witness statements which may have an important bearing in this case. In the processes of appreciating the evidence at the appellate stage, we need to keep in mind the views of this court as expressed in ������������������������������������������� !"#��$��!$��%���&# '(�)���� �$��*+�� ,�- "The High Court has not found in its judgment that the reasons given by the learned Sessions Judge for discarding the testimony of PW2 and PW6 were either unreasonable or perverse. What the High Court has done is to make an independent reappraisal of the evidence on its own and to set aside the acquittal merely on the ground that as a result of such reappreciation, the High Court was inclined to reach a conclusion different from the one recorded by authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh connectedomatter -1) the learned Sessions Judge. This Court has repeatedly pointed out that the mere fact that the Appellate Court is inclined on a reappreciation of the evidence to reach a conclusion which is at variance with the one recorded in the order of acquittal passed by the Court below will not constitute a valid and sufficient ground for setting aside the acquittal. The jurisdiction of the Appellate Court in dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal is circumscribed by the limitation that no interference is to be made with the order of acquittal unless the approach made by the lower Court to the consideration of the evidence in the case is vitiated by some manifest illegality or the conclusion recorded by the Court below is such which could not have been possibly arrived at by any court acting reasonably and judiciously and is, therefore, liable to be characterized as perverse. Where two views are possible on an appraisal of the evidence adduced in the case and the court below has taken a view which is plausible one, the Appellate Court cannot legally interfere with an order of acquittal even if it is of the opinion that the view taken by the Court below on its consideration of the evidence is erroneous."o

¶8/;.o5noRame$3oBa.1/a/oDo$3*o%(o2tateoo#oG1@arat=o1''8+7,oRCR +Cr*m*na/,o62o&o1''6oCr*A!o2968=othiso"o+rtoo2served: "This Court has repeatedly laid down that the mere fact that a view other than the one taken by the trial Court can be legitimately arrived at by the appellate Court on reappraisal of the evidence cannot constitute a valid and sufficient ground to interfere with an order of acquittal unless it comes to the conclusion that the entire approach of the trial Court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal or the conclusions arrived at by it were wholly untenable. While sitting in judgment over an acquittal the appellate Court is first required to seek an answer to the question whether the findings of the trial Court are palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable. If the appellate court authenticity of this High Court, Chandigarh connectedomatter -16 answersotheoaboveoquestionoinotheonegativeotheoorderoofoacquittalois nototoobeodisturbed."o

¶9Asoanoupshotoofotheoaboveodiscussion,otheopresentoappealofailsoand isoaccordinglyoorderedotoobeodismissed. oooo(N.S.SHEKHAWAT) o ooooooo oo ooooooJUDGE oo ooooooooooooooooo ooooo oooooo(SUKHVINDERoKAUR) o ooooooo oo oooooooJUDGE

14.10.2025 hitesh Whetherospeaking/reasoned :o Yes/Noo Whetheroreportable :o Yes/No