High CourtsDivision Bench

Randhir Singh @ Dhera and another vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 1 March 2012 · Citation: (2012) 03 P&H CK 0260

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.S. Saron, J · M. Jeyapaul, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRM No. 672 of 2012 in CRA No. 774-DB of 2010
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 624 words
1.

Learned State counsel has filed the affidavit of Sh. Resham Singh, Deputy Superintendent, District Prison, Karnal mentioning the period of imprisonment undergone by the applicant/appellant No. 1 Randhir Singh alias Dheera which is taken on record.

2.

Heard counsel for the parties.

3.

The Crl. Misc. application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of the applicant/appellant No. 1 Randhir Singh alias Dheera during the pendency of the appeal.

4.

The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Rajbir who is the father of the deceased Sonu. It is alleged by the complainant Rajbir that he had taken 13 killas (acres) of land of Ram Diya of village Kutana on theka (contract). On 28.12.2006, the complainant Rajbir along with his son Sonu (deceased) at about 8.00 p.m. had gone to irrigate the fields from village Moonak on a motorcycle. The son of the complainant had gone towards the road. At about 11.00 p.m. the complainant heard cries of his son and he rushed there and saw that his son was lying like a dead person in the house of Om Parkash (PW2). Blood was oozing out from his head. On seeing the complainant, Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) and Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) sons of Hawa Singh who were armed with iron rods ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons.

5.

Om Parkash (PW2) stated that at about 11.00 p.m. he and his wife were watching T.V. at their house while their children were sleeping. At that time they heard sound of commotion outside their house. Om Parkash (PW2) and his wife came out of their house and found Sonu (deceased) standing in front of the house. Sonu (deceased) asked him (Om Parkash - PW2) to save him from Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) and Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) as they were chasing him. In the meantime, Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) and Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) came there while Sonu (deceased) was already in the room. Om Parkash (PW2) asked Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) and Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) as to why they were chasing Sonu (deceased), but they pushed him and he fell down. Then Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) went inside the room along with Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1). Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) gave two blows with an iron pipe on the head of Sonu (deceased). Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) was empty handed and he was standing. Therefore, according to the complainant Rajbir (PW3), he had seen both the appellants i.e. Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) and Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) armed with an iron pipes whereas Om Parkash (PW2) an eye-witness states that Randhir Singh alias Dheera (applicant/appellant No. 1) was empty handed and Kaptan Singh (appellant No. 2) gave a blow to Sonu (deceased) with an iron pipe. The effect of the same is to be considered and gone into at the time of final hearing of the appeal.

6.

In terms of the affidavit of Sh. Resham Singh, Deputy Superintendent, District Prison, Karnal, the applicant/appellant No. 1 Randhir Singh alias Dheera has undergone imprisonment of five years, two months and one day as on 29.2.2012. The appeal is of the year 2010 and is not likely to mature for hearing in the near future.

7.

In the facts and circumstances, the Crl. Misc. application is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment of applicant Randhir Singh alias Dheera (appellant No. 1) shall, during the pendency of the appeal, remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal.