2023:PHHC:042090

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

110

CRR-623-2023 (O&M)

Date of decision: 20.03.2023

Rani and another

.....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present :

Mr. Nikhil Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

****

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

, J. (ORAL)

CRM-10639-2023

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is

allowed and delay of 84 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.

CRR-623-2023

1.

The instant revision petition has been filed to impugn the

order dated 06.09.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Karnal, vide which charges under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC were

framed against the petitioners (Annexure P-1).

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia has

contended that the Trial Court while passing the impugned order

gravely erred in ignoring the fact that even if the material on record is

taken to be a gospel truth, no offence under Section 302 of the IPC is

made out against the petitioners. While inviting the attention of this

Court to the allegations levelled in the FIR, learned counsel has argued

that as per allegations, on the fateful day, all the 03 accused including

the petitioners, who were neighbours of the complainant party,

VINAY

2023.03.27 17:30

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

2023:PHHC:042090

CRR-623-2023 (O&M)

-2-

physically assaulted the complainant's father (hereinafter referred to as

'the deceased') and petitioner No.1 hit him with her tiffin box.

Thereafter, petitioner No.2 pushed the deceased to the ground as a

result of which he received an injury on his head which subsequently

proved to be fatal. Learned counsel has still further drawn the attention

of this Court to the post mortem report (hereinafter referred to as

'PMR') (Annexure P-3) to contend that only two injuries were suffered

by the deceased out of which one was just an abrasion on his left fore

arm. Learned counsel has also further invited the attention of this Court

to the opinion of the doctor (Annexure P-5) wherein he had stated that

the dimensions of the tiffin box and the injuries mentioned in the PMR

“does not match & there is no/least possibility of sustaining the injury

mentioned in the PMR. The same tiffin duly signed by me on a white

tape stiked on the tiffin box and repacked in same pulanda &

sealed.XXXX” Learned counsel has thus argued with vehemence, that in

the absence of any direct or overt act much less any intention attributed

to the petitioners, the ingredients to invite the mischief of an offence

under Section 302 of the IPC were not attracted and hence the

impugned order vide which charges had been framed against the

petitioners under Section 302/34 of the IPC deserved to be set aside.

3.

I have heard learned counsel and perused the relevant

material on record.

4.

Before proceeding further, it would be relevant to

reproduce the allegations levelled in the FIR which reads as under:-

“To the SHO Sir, P.S Nissing, Karnal, respected Sir it is

submitted that I am Davinder son of Kashminder Singh

caste Chmaar resident of village Dachar today on dated :

VINAY

2023.03.27 17:30

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

2023:PHHC:042090

CRR-623-2023 (O&M)

-3-

22.03.2022 around 8:30 AM, Surender s/o Raghbir,

Arvind S/o Raghbir and Rani W/o Raghbir all resident of

Dachar P.S Nissing district Karnal who all are our

neighbours today they intentionally gave beatings to my

father during which Rani gave a blow with Tiffin to my

father, Surender s/o Raghbir, Arvind S/o Raghbir pushed

my father due to which my father fell down and got an

injury on his head. They gave beatings to my father and

killed my father. I brought my father to the civil hospital

where Doctor declared him dead. Please take strict legal

action against the aforesaid accused namely Surender s/o

Raghb