IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA D-631-DBA-2004 Reserved on:-10.02.2026 Date of Decision:23.02.2026 Uploaded on:07.03.2026 State of Punjab …Appellant Vs.

Ravi and others …Respondents CRA S-83-SB-2004 Ravi and another …Appellants Vs.

State of Punjab …Respondents CRR-1922-2004 Parmodh Kumar …Appellant Vs.

State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill, Sr.DAG, Punjab.

Ms. Gurneet Sagoo, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) for respondents in CRA-D-631-DBA-2004 and for the appellants in CRA-S-83-SB-2004.

Mr. Nayandeep Rana, Advocate (Amicus Curiae)

for the petitioner and Mr. Partap Singh Gill, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) for respondents No.2 and 3 in CRR-1922-2004.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J.

1. This judgment shall dispose of three petitions, i.e. CRA D-631- DBA-2004, titled as “State of Punjab Vs. Ravi and others”, CRA S-83-SB- 2004 titled as “Ravi and another Vs. State of Punjab” and CRR-1922-2004 titled as “Parmodh Kumar Vs. State of Punjab and others” whereby the correctness of legality of the impugned judgment and order 17.12.2003 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, was challenged.

2. Vide the impugned judgment and order dated 17.12.2003 passed by the court of Court of Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, both the accused were held guilty and were sentenced as under:-

3. By filing CRA S-83-SB-2004 titled as “Ravi and another Vs.

State of Punjab” both the accused have prayed for their acquittal, whereas, CRA D-631-DBA of 2004 titled as “State of Punjab Vs. Ravi and others”, and Criminal Revision No.1922 of 2004 titled as “Parmodh Kumar Vs. State of Punjab and others” have been filed by the State of Punjab as well as by the complainant for convicting the respondents/accused under Sections 302/34 IPC and sentenced them accordingly. Since all the three petitions arise out of the common impugned judgment and order, the cases are being taken up simultaneously for disposal.

4. The FIR Exhibit PJ/2 in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Parmodh Kumar alias Lucky and the same has been reproduced below:-

“Statement of Parmodh Kumar @ Lucky s/o Sudarshan Kumar, caste Khatri r/o 22, Aman Nagar Sodal Road, Jalandhar.

Age is about 29 years. I am dealing in a dairy business. Vijay Kumar s/o Kuldip Kumar r/o DA-2497. Mathura Nagar, Sodal Road is the son of my uncle and he is running a Video Audio cassettes shop in Sodal Chowk. Vijay Kumar came to my house and told me that we have to bring back the cassettes from Prince Video hall at Gadaipur. I and Vijay Kumar duly boarded on the scooter and reached at Prince Video Hall Gadaipur. It was about 11 a.m. Vijay Kumar tried to pick-up the cassettes, which were given by him, from a bench near Prince Video Hall, then Ravi, son of Vijay Kumar r/o Chotta Saipur, who was employed as a servant by Prince Video Hall restrained him from doing so and told him that he should wait for the arrival of his employer and they exchanged hot words among them. Meanwhile Kamal @ Prince s/o Ram Rattan resident of House No. B-144 Subhash Nagar, Jalandhar also reached at the spot. On the arrival of his employer, Ravi servant became courageous and he lifted the Chhura and just in my presence Kamal @ Prince had caught hold of Vijay from his back and his servant Ravi gave Chhura blow to Vijay Kumar in his chest, which he was holding in his hand. Vijay Kumar was drenched with blood. I, after parking the scooter, stepped ahead to rescue him, then Ravi gave a Chhura blow to me which hit me on the upper part of my right arm. I raised raula ‘Mar Ditta Mar Ditta.’ Then Prince and his servant Ravi ran away from the spot with his weapon. I called up Lovely, the younger brother of Vijay Kumar. Then after some time, he also he also reached at the spot and then after arranging the mode of conveyance, we shifted Vijay Kumar to Civil Hospital Jalandhar in an injured condition. Then the doctor opined that Vijay Kumar