In a criminal trial, the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; if reasonable doubts arise, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt, leading to their acquittal.

H.S. Grewal, J.

Mr. Rohit Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.1, 3 to 6 in CRA-D-426-DBA-2005 and has filed his power of attorney in the Court, which is taken on record.

2. Since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner/complainant in CRR-879-2005, Mr. Amit Rana, Advocate (Enrolment No.P/765/2002), Mobile No.9417151117, is appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist this Court on behalf of the petitioner/complainant in CRR-879-2005.

3. This order shall dispose of CRA-D-426-DBA-2005 and CRR-879-2005 as these are arising out of the same FIR as well as against the same judgment of acquittal. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being taken from CRA-D-426-DBA-2005.

4. CRA-D-426-DBA-2005 has been preferred by the State of Haryana while CRR-879-2005 has been preferred by the eye-witness against the judgment passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ambala dated 09.09.2004 in case FIR No.87 dated 16.04.2001, under Sections 148 /149/379/447/384/395/506/120-B IPC , at Police Station Mullana, whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the charges levelled against them by giving them the benefit of doubt.

5. The case of the prosecution is based upon a complaint (Ex.PEE) given by Mahaveer s/o Ram Saroop dated 12.04.2001, wherein he had stated that his aunt (chachi), namely, Leelawati wd/o Duli Chand was the owner of the land in dispute measuring 4½ acres situated in village Bihta. She was childless and therefore, she had transferred the land in his favour (Mahaveer) by way of an affidavit and left the village Bihta. Since then, he was in possession of the land in dispute but in the year 1998, Surjeet Singh s/o Shamsher Singh and two sons of Gurmail Singh, namely, Kulwinder and Sukhwinder, impersonated some other lady as Leelawati and got registered the fake sale deed of the land in dispute in their favour. Mahaveer(complainant) came to know about the said fictitious sale deed, then his aunt Leelawati got the case registered against Surjeet Singh and others under Section 420 IPC . In those proceedings, Kamal Singh, Har Chand and Chandgiri helped the complainant-Mahaveer.

6. Due to having grudges against Mahaveer, Surjeet Singh along with other co-accused (respondents) had given beatings and attacked the complainant as well as others upon which a case under Section 307 IPC was also lodged against them. The complainant also alleged that he had been cultivating the land in dispute since 1979. In the year 2000, the fake sale deed executed in favour of the respondents had been cancelled by the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala and a case under Section 420 was registered against them which was pending before the trial Court. Thereafter, Leelawati got registered the sale deed in favour of the complainant. The mutation was also entered and sanctioned in the name of the complainant. Khasra girdawari of the disputed land has been continuously coming in the name of Leelawati. The complainant further alleged that on 12.04.2001 at about 05:00 p.m. he learnt that the wheat crop standing in his field was being harvested with the help of the combine belonging to Kala Singh resident of Jainpur. Thereupon, he went to the spot and found that the respondents were present in the field with sticks and gandasis in their hands. The wheat crop was being loaded on the tractor bearing No.HR01C-6037. The complainant resisted the respondents and tried to stop them but they came to beat him. While leaving the place, the respondents also threatened to kill him and committed the theft of the wheat crop weighing about 60 quintal worth about R