SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 2912

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
VISHAL ARORA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent
CRR 2505 / 2009



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 07.05.2025 VISHAL ARORA ......Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present:- Ms. Dheerja, Amicus Curiae for the petitioner.

Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The present revision petition has been filed impugning the judgment dated 05.09.2009 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar whereby the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.05.2009 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar Sahib has been dismissed.

2. The FIR in the present case came to be registered on 30.12.2001. The judgment of conviction was passed on 08.05.2009 by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. The appeal filed against the order of conviction was dismissed on 05.09.2009 by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar. The instant revision petition was filed on 16.09.2009 and has come up for final hearing now i.e. after a period of more than 23 years from the date of registration of the FIR.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the present case was registered on the basis of the statement of complainant Gurmej Singh son of Bawa Singh to the effect that he is resident of B-I/3, Janta Colony, Jalandhar. On 29.12.2001 at about 7.45 PM, Vishal Arora son of Dharam Pal resident of Nauhrian Mohalla, Jalandhar along with 5-6 other persons came to the spot and asked the complainant as to why he had constructed khurlis in their property. The complainant replied that he had constructed the khurlis in his own property and he had been residing on the said property for the last 23 years. Then, the persons who accompanied Vishal Arora raised lalkaras and Vishal Arora gave a sword blow which hit on the fingers of his left hand. He fell down on the ground but Vishal Arora kept on giving sword blows from its reverse side which hit on his forehead. Then, Vishal Arora gave kick blows in his stomach and chest. He raised alarms "Mar Ditta' 'Mar Ditta', which attracted his son Gurvinder Singh, his wife Mohinder Kaur and Tehal Singh son of Bawa Singh, who rescued him from the clutches of the accused. They also caught hold Vishal Arora at the spot. Thereafter, the above said persons got him admitted in Civil Hospital, Jalandhar for treatment.

4. On the basis of this statement, an FIR under Sections 323/324/148/149 of IPC was registered against the accused. During investigation, the Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence and prepared a rough site plan with its correct marginal notes. Statements of witnesses were also recorded. The accused was arrested formally. On completion of all the necessary formalities, the challan against the accused was presented before the court.

5. On perusal of statements of witnesses and the documents on the file, prima facie a case under Sections 326/323 of IPC was disclosed against the accused and he was charge-sheeted accordingly. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. The prosecution examined complainant Gurmej Singh as PW-1. He proved his statement Ex. PA on the basis of which FIR against the accused was registered and also supported the version of the prosecution.

PW-2 Mukesh Kumar, the alleged eye witness of the occurrence also supported the version of the prosecution.

PW-3 Amrik Singh also supported the version of the prosecution.

PW-4 Dr.Harjit Singh proved the medico-legal report of the injured/complainant as EX.PW4/A, pictorial diagram Ex.PW4/B and x-ray report Ex.PW4/C.

6. On the closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which the entire incriminating evidence was put to him. He denied the same and pleaded false implication. In defence evidence, the accused examined Rashpal Singh as DW-1.

7. Based on the evidence led, the accused/petitioner came to be convicted and sentenced by the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, 08.05.2009 vid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top