OM PARKASH Vs. GURPREET SINGH
LAWS(P&H)-2014-6-79
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on June 30,2014

OM PARKASH Appellant
VERSUS
GURPREET SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J. - (1.) PRAYER in this application is for grant of special leave to appeal.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the applicant, Om Parkash, had filed a complaint against the respondents/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323, 452 and 506 read with Section 149, IPC, alleging that he was Ex -Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, village Badsui, and his wife Sinder Devi was the Sarpanch at the time of filing of the complaint. The respondents/accused and their family members got executed the sale deed of land measuring 110 acres which was reserved for grazing the cattle. In order to claim the ownership of the said land in favour of Gram Panchayat, civil suit titled as Magar Singh vs. Zile Singh etc. under Section 13 -A of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act was pending before the Collector, Kaithal, which was being pursued by the complainant and his wife. On that account, the respondent/accused were upset and were pressurizing the applicant/complainant not to pursue the case in favour of the Gram Panchayat. Since the applicant/complainant did not agree to the proposal made by the respondents/accused, therefore, they were nourishing a grudge against the applicant/complainant and his family members. It was further alleged that the applicant/complainant was witness against the respondents/accused in a case under Section 302, IPC, therefore, the respondents/accused had adopted revengeful attitude towards him (applicant). On 24.10.2007, when the applicant/complainant Om Parkash along with his wife Sinder Devi was proceeding towards Ambala to attend the court case and had reached near the Primary School of the village, then the respondents/accused in conspiracy with each other emerged there. The respondent/accused Gurpreet Singh was armed with bhala, Jagroop and Jagpal were armed with gandasi while Harbans Kaur and Ranbir Kaur were carrying sticks. On seeing the applicant/complainant Om Parkash and his wife Sinder Devi, Parson Kumar exhorted that the applicant and his wife be taught a lesson for pursuing the case against them and thereafter all the respondents/accused caused injuries to them with their respective weapons. On hearing the noise raised by the applicant/complainant and his wife Sinder Kaur, Amit Kumar and Mahinder reached at the place of occurrence and they tried to rescue the complainant side from the respondents/accused which further infuriated them (respondents) and Amit Kumar and Mahinder were also caused injuries. During the scuffle, the respondents/accused called them (applicant and his wife) by bad names. The villagers assembled at the spot and in order to save the applicant/complainant and his wife, caused injuries to the respondents/accused and thereafter, the respondents/accused fled from the spot along with their respective weapons.
(3.) APPLICANT -Om Parkash, Sinder Devi and Mahinder were medico -legally examined and the police was also informed with regard to the incident but the police colluded with the respondents/accused and registered a baseless FIR against the applicant side.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.