IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

219

CRA-S-1202-2025 (O&M)

Reserved on: 21.11.2025 Date of decision: 17.12.2025. Uploaded on: 17.12.2025.

ROHIT AND ANOTHER

... Appellant(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

PRESENT Mr. Sunny Tyagi, Advocate,

for the appellants.

Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G. Haryana.

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment dated

10.03.2025 and the order of sentence dated 12.03.2025 by which the appellants Rohit and Akshay have been convicted for offence under Section 379-A (2) read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years each, along with a fine of Rs. 25,000/- each by the Sessions Judge, Panipat. The appellants were further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year in default of payment

of the fine.

2 Briefly summarized, the facts of the present case are that on 06.09.2022, a written complaint was submitted by the complainant Satyawan (son of Rameshwar), alleging therein that he had been running a grocery shop in his house. His mother Santro Devi also used to sit with him in his shop. On 06.09.2022, Satyawan had gone outside for some work. At noon, three boys came to the grocery shop of Ravinder (son of Jagdish) and demanded a cold drink. Ravinder gave them the cold drink whereupon one of the boys offered to pay by way of a currency note of Rs. 2000/-. The former told him that he did not have any change on which all the above three boys left the shop. They then went to the grocery shop of Satyanarayan (son of Hukmi) where his wife Reena was sitting and demanded a box of pure ghee. They first offered the currency note of Rs. 2000/- for the same and then told Reena (wife of Satyanarayan) that the ghee was overpriced. Thereafter, the boys came to the complainant Satyawan’s shop, where his mother Santro Devi was sitting. The boys demanded a cold drink and when Santro Devi was giving them the cold drink, two boys entered his shop, snatched away the gold earrings worn by her and fled on the motorcycle towards village Rairkalan. The complainant further averred that the said motorcycle was black and had a broken number plate with the initials ‘PB’.

3 On the basis of Satyawan’s complaint, a case under Section 379- A read with Section 34 of the IPC was registered and investigation proceedings were initiated. However, the accused persons could not be traced out. An untraced report was hence initially submitted on 10.11.2022. Thereafter, on 03.12.2022, accused Rohit and Akshay (the appellants herein)

were joined in the investigation and arrested in this case.

4 During interrogation, they suffered disclosure statements, admitting their involvement in the crime and also disclosed the involvement of co-accused Vikas. They also demarcated the place of occurrence. Co- accused Akshay later got recovered a motorcycle bearing registration no. PB- 26H-7226 of make Honda that had been used in the crime and it was taken in possession vide a separate seizure memo. On 06.12.2022, the accused Rohit and Akshay got recovered an amount of Rs. 2000/- each that they had received after selling the snatched gold earrings and the same were also taken in possession vide a separate seizure memo. Later on, co-accused Vikas was also arrested.

5 After completion of the investigation, a challan under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented before the Illaqa Magistrate for the trial of the accused. The Illaqa Magistrate, vide order dated 06.02.2023, committed the case against the accused to the Court of Sessions. After going through the final report and on hearing the parties, charges were framed by the Sessions Court against the accused under Section 379-A read with Section 34 of the IPC, vide order dated 27.02.2023. The accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed trial.

6 To substantiate its case, the prosecution examined the following eleven witnesses and closed it