Punjab-Haryana High Court
Aniket Saini And Anr vs State Of Haryana on 24 September, 2024
CRR-1879-2024 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.109
Case No. : CRR-1879-2024
Decided On : September 24, 2024
Aniket Saini and another .... Petitioners
vs.
State of Haryana .... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH.
* * *
Present : Mr.Arjun Sheoran, Advocate
with Ms. Tejasvi Sheokand, Advocate
and Mr. Rohan Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
* * *
GURBIR SINGH, J. :
1. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated
23.08.2024, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra (hereinafter
referred to as - Trial Court), vide which the petitioners have been ordered to
be charge-sheeted for the offence under Sections 323, 326-A read with
Section 34 IPC.
2. The case in question was registered on the statement of one
Santosh Devi, wherein she stated the she (complainant) was running a Tea
Stall and petitioner no.2 was also running Tea Pakora Stall near her Stall.
On 08.04.2024, at about 09:30 AM, the complainant and her relatives were
working on her Stall, when her nephew Sahil parked his motorcycle near the
Stall of petitioner Baljeet Saini. Both the petitioners started hurling filthy
abuses at Sahil. They also gave a blow with khauncha (shovel) to Sahil.
The complainant brought Sahil to her Stall and stopped both parties from
fighting. Then, petitioner Baljeet Saini came from behind with a jug of hot
oil and threw the same on all of them. They all suffered burn injuries. Sahil,
Deepak, Ravi, Sonia and minor child Surya received many burns and were
taken to CHC, Pehowa, from where Sahil was referred to L.N.J.P. Hospital,
Kurukshetra. Consequently, case under Sections 323, 326-A, 326-B, 34 IPC
was registered at Police Station City, Pehowa. After completion of
necessary formalities, challan was presented against the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that offence under
Section 326-A is not made out at all as it pertains to causing injury with acid
but learned Trial Court failed to take the note of the same.
4. Notice of motion.
5. Pursuant to advance notice, Mr. Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana is
present to assist the Court.
6. Learned State counsel has opposed the submissions of learned
counsel for the petitioner, submitting that keeping in view the gravity of
offence, alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, there is no
illegality in the impugned order passed by learned Trial Court. So, the
present petition deserves dismissal.
7. I have heard the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner
as well as learned State counsel and perused the case file.
8. In the case in hand, charge has been framed against the petitioner
under Sections 323 and 326-A read with Section 34 IPC, vide impugned
order dated 23.08.2024. Section 326-A IPC reads as under :-
"326-A : Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by
use of acid, etc. - Whoever causes permanent or partial
damage or deformity to, or burns or maims or
disfigures or disables, any part or parts of the body of
a person or causes grievous hurt by throwing acid on
or by administering acid to that person, or by using
any other means with the intention of causing or with
the knowledge that he is likely to cause such injury or
hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which shall not be less than ten
years but which may extend to imprisonment for life,
and with fine :
Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to
meet the medical expenses of the treatment of the
victim :
Provided further that any fine imposed under this
section shall be paid to the victim."
9. A perusal of the above quoted Section reveals that the same is
with regard to causing injuries with acid etc. the case of the prosecution is
that hot oil was poured to cause injuries. So, Section 326-A is not attracted
at all in this case. Therefore, the present revision petition is allowed and the
impugned order dated 23.08.2024 is hereby set aside. The learned Trial
Court is directed to hear the arguments and pass fresh speaking order on the
question of framing of charge and then proceed further in accordance with
law.
10. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of along with
this judgment.
September 24, 2024 (GURBIR SINGH)
monika JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No.
Whether reportable ? Yes/No.
