- (1.) The present application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), has been filed by the applicant, seeking leave to file appeal against the judgement dated 28.2.2012, passed by the learned trial court, whereby respondents no.2,6,11,12 and 16 were convicted, whereas respondents no.1,3,4,5,7,8,9,10,13,14,15,17 and 18 were acquitted of the charges framed against them.
(2.) The criminal law was set into motion by the applicant-complainant with the allegations that the accused-respondents broke open the gate of his factory, took him forcibly out of his office and caused multiple injuries to him. However, with a view to avoid repetition and for the sake of brevity also, it would be appropriate to refer to the facts, as noticed by the learned trial court, in para 1 of the impugned judgement and the same read as under :- " The present case was registered on the compliant of Sunit Khurana son of Charanjiv Khurana, resident of B-3/1268, Seeta Sadan, near Durga Mandir, Rajpur Town. The allegations as made in the compliant are that the complainant runs a factory in the name and style of M/s Khurana Packagers, C-27, Focal Point, Rajpura and on 16.3.2004 at about 4.45/5 PM complainant was present in his factory alongwith Daljit Singh son of Chet Singh, who is his customer and other 7 workers of the factory. The gate of the factory was open at that time a Esteem Car bearing no.LD- 3C-C-7457, two Tata Sumo's vehicles out of one was having registration No.PB-11T-8892 and a Zen car bearing registration no.HR-01-E-4225 stopped in front of the gate out of which Raju Chhabra, Jaswant Akuat and Jatinder Kumar alias Ashu along with 25/30 persons came out from the vehicles. An other person who was being called Akaut was having revolver and Raju Chhabra was also armed with revolver. The watch man of the factory put the lock of the gate and complainant went inside in his office with Daljit Singh. All the above said persons broke open the gate of the factory and forcibly lifted the complainant from his office and took him outside. Raju Chhabra pointed his revolver towards the complainant and declared that as the complainant is committing theft of Octroi fees, he shall not be left alive. At the instance of Raju Chhabra all the assailants opened attack with their respective lathies and sword and a result of which the complainant fell on the ground and accused kept giving lathies and sword blows whereas Raju Chhabra kept exhorting them not to leave the complainant alive. The accused caused injuries on the head, arms, back, chest and legs of the complainant. The complainant and workers of the factory raised hue and cry which also attracted the workers of nearby factory namely Satnam Singh, Sucha Singh, Amrik Singh and some other. The accused also broke the car of the complainant bearing registration No.PB-10L-5036 and removed a bag containing Rs.66,000/- from the car. They also broke the office articles and upon seeing the people gathering on the spot all the accused fled away with their respective weapons and while going they threatened that in case the matter is reported the complainant would be killed. The complainant was removed to A.P. Jain Hospital, Rajpura by Aman Saggi and Satnam Singh. It is alleged that about two months prior to this incident Raju Chhabra has a dispute with the friend of the complainant namely Aman Saggi regarding the payment of Octroi fees and present complainant supported Aman Saggi. Hence, Raju Chhabra was nursing a grudge against the complainant and all the accused have caused injuries to him on account of the said grudge at the instance of Raju Chhabra. Upon this statement a case under Sections 307, 324, 452, 380, 148, 149, 427, 506 IPC was registered vide FIR No.50 dated 16.3.2004."
(3.) The Investigating Officer carried out the investigation. After completion of the investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., was presented to the learned court of competent jurisdiction. Having found that the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC was exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, the learned Illaqa Magistrate committed the case to the learned court of Sessions, for trial.;