Rajbir vs State of Haryana - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2968

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2968

N. S. SHEKHAWAT
Rajbir – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate as Amicus Curiae; For the Appellant
Mr. R.K.Girdhwal, Advocate, for Appellants Nos. 2 and 3.
Appellant No. 1 dead.
For the Respondent: Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Nitish Yadav, Advocate, for Respondents Nos. 2 and

JUDGMENT

Mr. N.S.Shekhawat, J.

Feeling dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction dated 10.07.2004 and the order of sentence dated 12.07.2004 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar, whereby, the appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324 /34 and 307/34 IPC and were sentenced to under rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each under Section 307 /34 IPC along with default stipulation and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 324 /34 IPC, the appellants have preferred the present appeal before this Court.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution, as may be culled out from the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., are that the FIR in the instant case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Jagbir, injured on 27.07.2000, after obtaining the opinion regarding his fitness. The complainant stated that there was a plot of Suraj Bhan, Numberdar and Rajbir, Mehtab and Prem sons of Paras Ram in front of their house. Suraj Bhan, Numberdar, Mehtab and Prem had given their shares in the plot to him ten days earlier while Rajbir son of Paras Ram, accused refused to give his share in the plot