The court affirmed that the appellants exceeded their right of private defence due to their superior strength and armed status, justifying the conviction.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.

The present appeal is directed against the impugned verdict, as made on 10.03.2022, upon case bearing CIS No.SC No.26 of 2016, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, where through in respect of charges drawn against the accused qua offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 325, 341, 427 of the IPC, thus the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to record a finding of conviction against the appellants-convicts. However, the other co-accused namely Gurmeet son of Karam Singh, Kuldeep Singh of Sukha Singh, and, Virender Singh @ Babbu son of Jagir Singh were acquitted from the charges drawn against them. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order drawn on 11.03.2022, the learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced the appellants-convicts in the hereinafter extracted manner.

2. All the above imposed sentences of imprisonment, were ordered to run concurrently but the period of detention undergone by the appellants-convicts, during the investigations, and, trial of the case, was, in terms of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., rather ordered to be set off from the above imposed sentence(s) of imprisonment.

3. All the accused-convicts become aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, become aggrieved from the consequent thereto sentence(s) of imprisonment, and, of fine as became imposed, upon them, by the learned convicting Court concerned, and, hence have chosen to institute there against the instant criminal appeal, before this Court.

4. Learned State counsel has intimated to this Court, that neither the State nor the complainant has constituted any appeal, before this Court, against the verdict of acquittal, as made by the learned trial Judge concerned, qua the acquitted persons (supra). Thus, the verdict of acquittal, as made in respect of the acquitted accused, does acquire a conclusive, and, binding effect.

Factual Background

5. The genesis of the prosecution case becomes embodied in the appeal FIR, to which Ex. P1 is assigned. The narrations carried in Ex. P1 are, that the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Baljeet Singh to the effect that he is an agriculturist and he along with Balwan Singh, Mahinder, Karamveer and Mukhtiar had taken the land of Panchayat on lease for six months and they had sown wheat on the same. On 5.11.2015, at ab