K.S.GAREWAL,J. - (1.) THE State of Haryana has filed the present application seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of the seven respondents by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar on May 21, 2008.
(2.) THE respondents alongwith Karambir @ Polia were tried under Sections 302/148/149 IPC for committing murder of Partap, brother of Om Parkash-complainant. It was on August 20, 2003 that three brothers Om Parkash, Partap and Raj Kumar alongwith their niece Lilawati were walking to the shop Om Parkash. Partap was about 10 paces ahead of of them. At 5 p.m. when Partap was at a few paces from the house of Parkash son of Chanan Mal, Karambir alias Polia alongwith the seven respondents came to him. They were all armed with various weapons. Karambir accused Partap of demanding gift/cash (neonda) at the time of marriage from them. Karambir hit Partap on the face with a gandasi, the respondents also attacked Partap with their respective weapons. The occurrence was witnessed by Om Parkash and Raj Kumar. The respondents are Ram Kishan and his four sons as well as Karambir's mother and sister. Karambir was found guilty and convicted of the murder but the learned trial Judge found that the respondents had not participated in the occurrence. The learned trial Judge influenced by the fact that the respondents had not been originally sent up for trial but had been summoned by the trial court under the provision of Section 319 Cr.P.C. There are many factors which convinced the learned trial Judge that the respondents had not participated in the occurrence. The medical evidence shows presence of only four incised wounds on the dead body. Therefore, it was hard to believe that eight accused had participated in the occurrence. Furthermore, Ram Kishan-respondent 1 was at the relevant time present on duty in the office of Chief Development Project Officer, Adampur where he was working as an Assistant. Ram Kishan appears to have been falsely implicated.
(3.) WE have gone through the judgment of the trial court and find that acquittal was on just and valid ground. Only Karambir had been found guilty and convicted of the murder. The seven respondents who had not participated in the crime were acquitted. The finding of the learned trial court is neither perverse nor unreasonable. We find no reason to interfere with the finding of the learned trial court. Consequently, leave to appeal is declined.;