Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 165 (PNJ)

Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana

2013-02-11

S.P.BANGARH, S.S.SARON

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. Learned State counsel has filed reply by way of affidavit of Sh.Atma Ram Bishnoi, Superintendent District Jail, Sirsa mentioning the period of imprisonment undergone by the applicant/appellant No.4 – Satya Parkash in Court. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The criminal miscellaneous application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment of applicant/appellant No-Satya Parkash during the pendency of the appeal. 4. In the incident that had occurred on 09.02.2009, it has been alleged by Mahinder Singh (complainant) that on 09.02.2009 at about 5.00 pm, he along with his uncle Krishan son of Manphool was sitting in the street in front of his (Krishan’s) house. Rohtash (PW11) who was residing with his brother-in-law Jagdish was also standing with him (complainant) in the street. At that time, a Maruti car No.DL-4CF-0825 with black colour window panes came from the west side. The occupants of the car fired with guns after opening the window panes of the front window of the car. One fire shot hit Mahinder Singh (complainant) on his left elbow and the second hit him on his leg. In the meantime, Jagdish son of Vijay Singh came at the spot and thereafter the assailants fired at Rohtash (PW-11) after getting down from the car. The fire shot hit Rohtash (PW-11) on his left shoulder and some pellets hit on his mouth also. In the meantime, Jagdish son of Vijay Singh came at the spot and thereafter the assailants fired at Rohtash (PW-11) after getting down from the car. There were six assailants including Ram Niwas (appellant No.2), Surya Parkash (acquitted) and Ashok (appellant No.1) who were already known to Mahinder Singh (complainant). The remaining could not be identified by him. Ashok (appellant No.1) fired on them while Ram Sarup (appellant No.3) was driving the car. They had attacked them owing to a previous murder. 5. According to Rohtash (PW-11), who is an injured eyewitness, Ram Niwas (appellant No.2), Satya Parkash (applicantappellant No.4), Amar Singh (since acquitted) and Ram Sarup (appellant No.3) were also sitting in the car and after getting down, Ram Niwas (appellant No.2) fired at him with a gun. He (Rohtash PW-11) took shelter in the heap of cotton sticks, which were lying on the west side of the street and he then ran away. He (Rohtash PW-11) took shelter in the heap of cotton sticks, which were lying on the west side of the street and he then ran away. Satya Parkash (applicant/appellant No.4), Ram Niwas (appellant No.2) and Ashok Kumar (appellant No.1) followed him and opened fire which hit on his left arm, forehead and face. Ashok Kumar (appellant No.1) and Surya Parkash (acquitted) were holding pistols. Ram Niwas (appellant No.2) was having a gun. The others were also armed with guns. It is further stated that Amar Singh (acquitted), Ram Sarup (appellant No.3), Satya Parkash (applicant/appellant No.4) were standing near the car. They remarked that the enemy had died and they should run away. Satya Parkash (applicant/appellant No.4), Ram Sarup (appellant No.3) and Amar Singh (acquitted) were firing while standing near the car. Roshni Devi, and Jagdish, sister and brother-in-law of Rohtash (PW-11) also came there after hearing the sound of firing. Mahinder (complainant) had also received fire arm injury in the incident. Roshni Devi and Jagdish raised alarm “mar diya, mar diya” and on hearing it, many people gathered at the spot. The assailants considering him (Rohtash-PW 11) as dead, fled away in their car. 6. Therefore, according to Rohtash (PW-11), the injured eye-witness, Ram Sarup (appellant No.3) along with Satya Parkash (applicant/appellant No.4) and Amar Singh (acquitted) were firing while standing near the car. No injury is attributed to anyone on account of the said firing. He further stated Satya Parkash (applicant/ appellant No.4), along with Ram Niwas (appellant No.2) and Ashok Kumar (appellant No.1) followed him (Rohtash PW-11) and fired at him which hit on his left arm, shoulder and face. However, it has not been explained as to which of the assailants had hit at him. 7. Ram Sarup (appellant No.3) and Satya Parkash (applicant/ appellant No.4), it is stated, were found innocent during investigation and they were summoned as additional accused in terms of Section 319 Cr.PC. Besides, sentence of imprisonment of Ashok Kumar (appellant No.1) and Ram Niwas (appellant No.3) has been suspended by this Court vide orders dated 22.11.2012 and 10.09.2012 respectively. The appeal is not likely to mature in the near future. 8. Besides, sentence of imprisonment of Ashok Kumar (appellant No.1) and Ram Niwas (appellant No.3) has been suspended by this Court vide orders dated 22.11.2012 and 10.09.2012 respectively. The appeal is not likely to mature in the near future. 8. In terms of the affidavit that has been filed today in Court, Satya Parkash (applicant/appellant No.4) has undergone actual imprisonment of 1 year and 25 days as on 07.01.2013 out of total sentence of 7 years that was imposed for committing an offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. The applicant/appellant No.4 is also involved in case FIR No.249 dated 20.12.2006 for the offence under Section 323 IPC registered at police Station Bhattu Kalan. However, he has been acquitted in the said case on 15.03.2012 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad. 9. Therefore, keeping in view the role attributed to the applicant/appellant No.4, the period of imprisonment undergone by him, the fact that the sentences of co-convicts namely Ashok Kumar (appellant No.1) and Ram Niwas (appellant No.2) have been suspended and that the appeal is not likely to mature for hearing in the near future, it would be just and expedient to suspend sentences of imprisonment of applicant/appellant No.4 during the pendency of the appeal. 10. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment of applicant/appellant No.4–Satya Parkash during the pendency of the appeal shall remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirsa.