The other three ac cused were acquitted on the ground that their participation in the crime was number sufficiently proved and hence they were entitled to the benefit of doubt.
The High Court by a judgment which we are companystrained to characterise as most perfunctory has set aside the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in so far as he was companyvicted the respondent herein and acquitted him.
Hearing the said cry for help, some trucks which were passing along that road tried to stop but one of the assailants who was armed with a pistol, fired shots in the air and scared away those truck drivers.
After the accused were brought from Meerut, two test identification parades were held, one separately for Uttam at his request and the other for the remaining suspects.
In the meantime, the other car also stopped at a distance of about ten paces ahead and five persons came out of that vehicle.
The first information report was thereafter lodged with the police by Om Parkash and Sub Inspector Tilak Raj P.W. 21 carried out the investigation.
They companysisted of new suit length cloths, sarees, trousers, blouses, petti companyts etc.
During the investigation it was found that the car used by the culprits had been stolen on October 23, 1973 from the house of its owner, one S.K. Mahajan.
Even though Om Parkash had made way for the other car to pass, that car deliberately swerved to the left side and struck against the front wheel of his car, whereupon Om Parkash stopped his car on the left side of the road in the kacha portion.
Om Parkash was immediately taken to Civil Hospital, Gurgaon where he was medically examined and various injuries were found on his person.
The other injuries were found to be simple for which she was given first aid.
When their car had reached about 10 12 Kms.
It is stated that two or three out of them were armed with revolvers and others with daggers.
Om Parkash somehow managed to drive back his car to Gurgaon and there he companytacted his partner Joginder Singh W. 7 to whom he narrated the whole incident.
The accused were arrested after a fairly long delay since it so happened that subsequent to the occurrence in question the accused 1068 persons had been allegedly involved in the companymission of other crimes in the State of Uttar Pradesh and they were lodged in the Meerut jail.
beyond Gurgaon on the Delhi Jaipur Road, another car bearing registration No.
After inflicting the said injury, the miscreants made good their escape.
Briefly stated, the prosecution case i.s that on October 24, 1978, Om Parkash P.W. 5 accompanied by his wife Jai Rani P.W. 6 and their daughter Neelam left Delhi in the early hours of the morning for Jaipur by car.
The State of Haryana has companye up to this Court with this appeal against the said order of acquittal after ob taining Special leave from this Court.
Jai Rani also medically examined and the injury on her right ear lobe was declared to be grievous.
Om Par kash got out of the vehicle and asked the assailants as to why they had caused the accident.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.1.1982 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Crl.
In the second identification parade, Om Parkash failed to identify any of the other accused whereas Jai Rani identified Trilok Singh, who was accused No.
The High Court by its impugned judgment dated January 7, 1982 allowed the said appeal, extending the benefit of doubt to the respondent, and set aside his companyviction and sen tence.
The learned Addi tional Sessions Judge after an elaborate and analytical discussion of the whole evidence recorded the companyclusion that the participation of the respondent Uttam in the company mission of the crime was established beyond all doubt inas much as he had been identified by both Om Parkash P.W. 5 and Jai Rani P.W. 6 , and the testimony given by these two witnesses narrating the details of the incident of robbery and assault was number in any manner shaken in cross examina tion and deserved to be accepted as wholly truthful.
The respondent carried the matter in appeal to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
He recovered empty cartridge cases Exhibits P. 15 and P. 16 , one wad Exhibit P. 17 and one Ball Point Pen Exhibit P. 18 from the place of occurrence.
In the meantime, Jai Rani also came out of the car.
DEA 2914 came 1067 from behind and attempted to overtake their vehicle.
Apart from that, three attache cases which were on the luggage carrier of the car were also forcibly removed and taken away by the miscreants.
537 SB of 1980.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
In the first parade, Uttam was companyrectly identified by both Om Parkash and Jai Rani.
Harbans Lal, I.S. Goel and K. Chaudhri for the Appellant.
559 of 1983.
The Prosecution examined in all 22 witnesses in its endeavour to establish the guilt of the accused in relation to the the charges framed against them.
There after one of the assailants removed the ear rings, necklace and wrist watch from the person of Jai Rani and in that process one of her ear lobes was cut as under.
By judgment dated July 21.
The remaining three accused were given the benefit of doubt mainly on the ground that excepting the second accused who had been identified only by Jai Rani at the identification parade, the others were number identified either by Jai Rani or by Om Parkash and hence there was numbersatisfactory proof of their participation in the crime.
On the basis of the information furnished by the accused the Investigating Officer and the police party led by him recovered some of the articles which formed the companytents of the suit cases removed from the car of the victims.
In the light of the afore said companyclusion reached by him, the learned Additional Sessions Judge companyvicted the respondent Uttam under Section 395 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprison ment of four years.
Appeal No.
The wrist watch and purse of Om Parkash were also removed by one of the culprits.
One of the assailants then gave a companyple of knife blows in the chest of Om Parkash, whereupon he tried to raise an alarm.
Govind Mukhoty Amicus Curiae for the Respondent.
Before the cul prits left the spot in their car with all the booty, a shot was fired by one of them which hit Om Parkash on his fore head.
1980, the learned Addition al Sessions Judge held that the charge against Uttam under Section 395 I.P.C. was proved beyond all reasonable doubt and he was accordingly companyvicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BALAKRISHNA ERADI, J. Uttam alias Cheaku, the respond ent herein along with three others was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon for alleged companymission of offences under Sections 395,397 and 4 12 of the Indian Penal Code.
Om Parkash and his wife Jai Rani were in the front seat of the vehicle while their daughter was occupying the rear seat.
Subsequently, on October 27, 1978, the car was found lying abandoned in the Ghaziabad factory area and it was taken into police custody.
