Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana vs Ravinder Kumar Gupta on 12 December, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:159219
1
CRM-M No.35104 of 2013 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:159219
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
245 CRM-M No.35104 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 12.12.2023
STATE OF HARYANA ......Petitioner
Vs
RAVINDER KUMAR GUPTA ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Viney Phogat, D.A.G., Haryana for the petitioner.
Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondent.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)
[1]. By way of present petition, challenge has been laid to the order dated
07.02.2013 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby
respondent was discharged in case arising out of FIR No.481 dated 13.09.2009
registered under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC at P.S. City Thanesar,
District Kurukshetra.
[2]. Briefly stating, in the present case respondent besides other accused
was implicated in the aforementioned FIR wherein the chargesheet was filed
against them on 26.09.2011. The respondent was discharged by the First
Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra-cum-Revisional Court, vide order dated
07.02.2013.
[3]. Impugning the aforesaid order dated 07.02.2013, learned State
counsel submits that the order passed by the Revisional Court was against the
evidence available on record, as regards the respondent. He further submits that
there was sufficient material available so as to establish the involvement of
respondent in the incident in question.
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:159219
CRM-M No.35104 of 2013 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:159219
[4]. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that
respondent was discharged by the Revisional Court upon proper appreciation of
evidence and the material collected by the Investigating Agency. He also points out
that even remaining five accused in the FIR in question were acquitted of charges
leveled against them by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurkushetra vide
judgment dated 24.03.2015 which was never assailed thereafter.
[5]. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the
paper book. I am unable to find substance in the submissions made by learned
State counsel.
[6]. In the present case, perusal of order dated 07.02.2023 passed by the
Revisional Court shows that only evidence available against the respondent was
disclosure statement made by co-accused and that too without any corroboration
thereof with recovery made in pursuance thereof and thus, there being no material
to connect the respondent with the offence alleged in the FIR besides acquittal of
all other accused related to same incident, vide judgment dated 24.03.2015 passed
by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra and the same having become final. I
do not see any reason to interfere in the impugned order passed by the Revisional
Court.
[7]. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the present petition is
accordingly dismissed.
[8]. All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(HARKESH MANUJA)
December 12, 2023 JUDGE
Atik
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:159219
2 of 2
