CRR No. 61 of 2016

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRR No. 61 of 2016

Date of decision : October 17, 2022

Braham Dutt

...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...... Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

***

Present :-

Mr. Gaurav Singla, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G. Haryana.

Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate for

Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate

for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

***

PANKAJ JAIN,

J. (ORAL)

The complainant is in revision. The challenge is to the

judgment passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal whereby appeals

filed by the convicts/respondents have been allowed and they have been

acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 323, 342, 379 IPC. It

needs to be noticed that respondent No.3 namely Vijender Kumar has died

during the pendency of the present revision petition, thus proceedings qua

him stand abated.

The complainant filed complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C.

against the respondents. They were summoned to face trial for the

offences punishable under Sectin 323, 342, 379 read with Sectin 34 IPC.

After trial they were sentenced as under:-

ARCHANA ARORA

2022.10.18 15:28

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CRR No. 61 of 2016

2

!

"

!

#$

%

&

!

In appeal they were acquitted. As per complaint filed by the

petitioner it was alleged that on 21.2.2006 when complainant went to his

clinic, he found the shutter open in half. His motor cycle along with the

bag was also missing. The complaint was made to police station,

Hassanpur at about 5.00/6.00 a.m. The police came on the spot when the

complainant gave his written complaint. When the complainant visited

the police station, accused Vijender Kumar abused him alleging that the

complainant has tried to lodge a false case. It was claimed that the

accused Vijender Kumar tore off the written complaint filed by the

complainant. He further claims that as a sequal of the aforesaid incident

the accused Vijender Kumar along with co-accused Ram Kumar came to

his shop on 12.3.2006 and dragged him outside the shop and forcibly

took him in the police jeep. There was an amount of Rs.4209/- in his

pocket which was taken by them and he was given beatings. The trial

court found that the accused were guilty of taking Rs.4209/- on the

ARCHANA ARORA

2022.10.18 15:28

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CRR No. 61 of 2016

3

pretext of jamatalashi. No jamatalashi could have been effected in a

criminal trial and thus, held that taking away an amount of Rs.4209/- on

the pretext of wrong jamatalashi amounted to offence punishable under

Section 379 IPC. The trial court further found that there was no

requirement for any medical evidence to prove offence punishable under

Section 323 IPC and thus, from the oral testimonies of the complainant,

Section 323 was proved against the accused-respondents. While holding

the respondents guilty of offence punishable under Sections 323, 379 IPC

the trial court also found them guilty of offence punishable under Section

342 IPC, though no reasoning has been accorded for doing so.

In appeal, the appellate court found that there was no prior

sanction as contemplated under Section 197 (3) Cr.P.C. prior to lodging

prosecution against the accused. The ingredients of Section 379 IPC

were missing. In a regular enquiry held against Ram Kumar, he has been

exonerated and consequently ordered acquittal of both the accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioner sub