Sunny v. State Of Haryana
2023:PHHC:055995
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH CRR-2002-2012 Date of Decision: 11.04.2023 SUNNY
...Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present :
Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ram Kumar Singla, D.A.G., Haryana.
HARSH BUNGER, J.
!
" #
$ %&' # $ % ! ( )!* +& $ %'&, # $ %
! ( -
.!(/0 ( $ $ %%1%2 " ,%
$
" #
#
# $
'3 # 4 $ 4 #
5 +(1 4#
$ %2 "
6 #
7 # 5
# 7
$ -
0 $ $ 4 #
8 7$
$ -
0 9
)!* #
#
#
#
Upon finding a prima facie case, the trial Court framed charges against accused under Sections 454 and 379 read with Section 511 of the IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined HC Tirlok Chand (Investigating Officer) as PW1, SI Jagdish Chand (Investigating Officer) as PW2, Constable Vijay Pal (recovery witness) as PW3 and Tejvir Singh Tomar (complainant) as PW4. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., to which he pleaded innocence and false implication. In defence, no evidence was produced. 8 :
"
$ % &' # $ % !( 4 $
" ,%
:
!
"
# ;
;
5 #
!
)!*
#
:
:
!
7 !
&
#
#
7
# # !
,& -# 7
&0
-< 0 '
!
9
1$ 5
# #
7
5#
1$ 5
#
!
#
# ;
It is well settled that scope of revisional jurisdiction of this Court is quite limited and the Court is to interfere only if there is an illegality or infirmity apparent on the face of the judgment under challenge. (
#
#
#
$ %$ &' # $ %!( ;
4
# # #
7
= #
> > 4
;
>
"
31
% ! ( 4
* :1 !
&' # $ % ! ( 4
, * :1 !
!
#
?
>
5/ ;
<
!
<
#
31
!
" !
" !" # $ %& '( ) *$ (
# $
# #
4
@
4
4
#
7
4
#
!+,"-. ## / )
$ *(
#
#
#
@ #
#
#
)!* > # A
:
:
A
#
,& -
0 '
$
3
#
#
;
#4
5#
"
$
"
,% <
#
3#
7 $ * :1
+,' -
!
" 0
&,
# >
4
(
:
# April 11th, 2023 (HARSH BUNGER) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No