- (1.) Tersely, the facts and material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, are that, initially, in the wake of statement of complainant Ram Niwas son of Deena Ramrespondent No.2 (for brevity 'the complainant'), a criminal case was registered against the petitioners-accused Deepak son of Jai Pal, Bhim son of Vijender Singh and their other co-accused Mohit son of Ved Pal, vide FIR No.126 dated 28.03.2013, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 354-A, 450 and 212 IPC, by the police of Police Station Safidon, District Jind.
(2.) After completion of the investigation, the police has submitted the final police report (challan). The trial Court has accordingly framed the charges against accused Mohit, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 449, 302 and 323 IPC, whereas petitioners accused Deepak and Bhim were charged under Section 212 IPC, by virtue of order dated 29.07.2013 (Annexure P-1) and the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution.
(3.) The prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges framed against the accused, examined victim PW1 Meena, wife of Raj Kumar (deceased), by way of her statement (Annexure P-2) and complainant PW2, by means of his statement (Annexure P-3). They have, inter alia, stated that, on 27.03.2013, having heard the noise she went to roof of her house and found all the accused there. She has specifically maintained that petitioners accused Deepak and Bhim torn her clothes and also snatched ear rings, nose rings & golden chain from her. Meanwhile, her brother-in-law (complainant-PW2) came to the roof and witnessed the occurrence. Thereafter, on hearing noise, her husband Raj Kumar also came on the roof. Petitioners-accused Deepak and Bhim caught hold her husband Raj Kumar, gave beatings and thrown him in the compound. Subsequently, he succumbed to his injuries. As soon as, PW1 and PW2 have specifically named the petitioners as main accused in their respective statements, in the meantime, an application dated 06.01.2014 (Annexure P-4), for amendment of charges, was moved on behalf of the prosecution. The accused refuted the prayer of the prosecution and filed the reply (Annexure P-5).;