IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

223 CRA-AS-40-2022 (O&M)

Date of decision: 07.04.2026.

SANJEEV KUMAR ... Appellant(s)

VERSUS RAMESH KUMAR AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Sumeet, Advocate, for the appellant.

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment dated

20.03.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, in case CIS No.217 of 2014 after a delay of 627 days. The reason given therein is that due to Covid – 2019, the delay occurred whereas it is evident that the judgment was passed in March, 2018, hence, the limitation had come to an end in June/July 2018 whereas Covid – 19 came in March 2020. The plea is thus invalid and false. Nonetheless the merits have been examined.

2 Further, the appeal had been filed in August 2021 and was listed in July 2022. Despite the appeal being listed, the counsel chose not to appear. The position remained the same even on the next date of hearing. The adjourned date remained fruitless as counsel sought time. Counsel chose not to appear on the adjourned date or the one thereafter on 23.09.2025. Registry was directed to inform counsel for the appellant about the next date. It is reported by Registry that counsel has been informed, yet, the junior counsel prays for an adjournment.

3 It seems arguing counsel is not interested in arguing the appeal and is seeking multiple adjournments. The junior counsel appearing has thus been asked to advance arguments on merits so that the appeal is finally decided, noticing that arguing counsel could not spare time for over 04 years to prepare the case.

4 The instant appeal has been preferred by the complainant against the judgment dated 20.03.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, in RBT Sessions case No.34 dated 21.10.2014/07.10.2016, CIS No.SC/217/2014 arising out of FIR bearing No.61 dated 24.05.2014, under Sections 308, 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur, whereby respondent No.1 to 3 had been acquitted of the charges framed against them under Sections 308, 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

5 Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on the statement of complainant Sanjeev Kumar, son of Bachittar Ram, resident of village Abdulapur, Police Station Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur, who was working as a Sewadar in the Godra Co-operative Society, village Godra. As per the prosecution version, on 08.05.2014 at about 8:15 A.M., the complainant was proceeding towards his place of duty on his Activa scooter. When he reached near Dera Gujjarn , a little ahead of village Godra, he noticed his brother Ramesh Kumar approaching from the opposite direction after dropping his niece at Mukerian School on his LML Vespa scooter bearing registration No. PB-07-AK-4303. As the complainant attempted to stop near his brother, a white Gypsy bearing registration No. PB-7Y-9966 allegedly arrived from their village side and stopped in front of the scooter of Ramesh Kumar, thereby obstructing his movement. It is alleged that several persons alighted from the said vehicle, including Ramesh Kumar son of Babu Ram, Jyoti son of Babu Ram and Varinder Kumar son of Dharam Pal, along with three unknown persons. The accused persons were armed with deadly weapons, including datar and baseball bats. It is further alleged that Jyoti raised a lalkara exhorting the others to catch hold of Ramesh Kumar and kill him, on account of a previous dispute relating to parking of a truck. Thereafter, Ramesh Kumar son of Babu Ram inflicted a blow with a datar on the complainant s brother, which struck him on the right cheek. Varinder Kumar delivered another datar blow from the reverse side, hitting near the right ear, followed by another blow on the right shoulder. Jyoti struck the complainant s brother with a baseball bat on the shoulder, while the unidentified persons also