MAHESH GROVER, J. - (1.) APPELLANT -Radhey Shyam has been convicted and sentenced by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad (hereinafter described as 'the trial Court') vide his judgment/order of sentence dated 22.3.1996/25.3.1996 as under :- (i) For offence punishable under Section 307 of the I.P.C. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months (ii) For offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten days. He has filed the appeal for setting aside his conviction and sentence, whereas complainant-Net Ram has filed the revision petition for enhancement of sentence.
(2.) ON 3.11.1990, at about 9.30 A.M., complainant-Net Ram son of Bed Ram was present at his residence when appellant-Radhey Shyam, having a gun in his hand, accompanied by his accomplices, namely, Sita Ram, Billoo, Raman, Radha Ballab, Daya Ram (since deceased) and Tulia alias Parmod Kumar having lathis and Ballams in their hands, came there raising a 'Lalkara' that they would go only after constructing the boundary wall on the disputed plot. Appellant- Radhey Shyam is alleged to have fired two shots from his gun, the pallets of which struck Mahabir, Ram Rattan and Babloo on various parts of their bodies, while other persons gave injuries to Rambati and Chander Parbha. On hearing the alarm being raised by the injured persons, Om Parkash and Nihal Chand were attracted to the spot, who intervened and rescued them from the clutches of the assailants. The complainant reported the matter to the police, who, after completion of investigation, submitted a challan against the appellant and others named in the F.I.R.
(3.) THE trial Court charged the appellant and his accomplices for having committed offences punishable under Sections 148, 307 and 323 read with Section 149 of the I.P.C. Besides, the appellant was also charged under Section 27 of the Arms Act. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.;