IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CRR-1215-2020 (O&M).

Decided on: January 14, 2026.

DEVENDER THAKUR AND OTHERS ...Petitioner Versus SMT. SAPNA THAKUR …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ PRESENT Mr. A.K. Kanwar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Dheerja, Advocate, (Legal-aid-counsel)

for the respondent.

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ. J. (ORAL)

The instant revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dated 09.09.2020 passed in CRA-1063 of 2018, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby the judgment dated 12.11.2018 passed in CIS No.CHI/26095/2014, bearing Case No.133 acquitting the petitioners-accused has been set aside and the case was remanded to the trial Court with a direction to re-examine the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and to pass a fresh judgment.

2 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner(s) contends that the proceedings in the present case emanate from FIR bearing No.112 dated 07.05.2014, under Sections 323, 354, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station, SGM Nagar, Faridabad.

3 The above case had been registered on the complaint moved by one Smt. Sapna Thakur wherein it was alleged that on 8.12.2013 at about 5.30/5.45 p.m., Devender Thakur (one of the petitioners herein) had called a plumber for installation of a water pump. The complainant objected to the said installation on the ground that, if water motors were to be installed, there ought to be two separate water pumps and further requested that the work be undertaken only on her husband’s return. She thus stopped the plumber from installing the water motor till his return. A few minutes thereafter, the accused persons, after hatching a criminal conspiracy entered into the house of complainant forcibly and illegally. Devender Thakur caught hold of her by her hair and dragged her out of house, whereupon Vipul Thakur, Abhinav Thakur and Anjana Thakur inflicted fists and punch blows upon her. Due to dragging, her hair was uprooted. The neighbors namely Vivek Singh Dhillon and his mother Smt. Omwati were stated to be witnesses of the incident. Her son Saurab Thakur rescued her from the clutches of the accused persons. Her husband Kuldev Singh Thakur also reached the house and all the facts were narrated to him whereupon a complaint was submitted.

4 A formal FIR was registered upon the aforesaid complaint and investigation was undertaken. The site plan was prepared and accused persons were arrested and produced in the Court.

5 On completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted to the Court. A copy of the challan along with all the necessary documents was also handed over to the accused persons free of costs as envisaged under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Charge was later framed against the accused persons for commission of offence under Sections 323, 354 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 to which they pleaded not guilty and clamed trial.

6 In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 08 witnesses whereafter prosecution evidence was closed by order and statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Accused persons denied the allegations as well as the evidence and pleaded false implication in the case.

7 Upon consideration of the evidence led by the respective parties, the trial Court held as under vide its judgment dated 12.1.2018: -

“19. After hearing Ld. counsel for parties and going through the case file very carefully and minutely, this court is of view that complainant has suppressed material fact from the court. She has not disclosed about compromise taken place between parties before police. Both parties given complaints in local police station regarding incident of 08.12.2013. But the matter was compromised and that's why complaints were canceled by police. The eye witness Omwati PW-3 has not supported the prosecution case and she was declared hostile. PW-4 Vivek Dhillon eye witness of incident has given clean chit t