CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -1- 214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-A-394-MA-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.07.2026 State of Haryana ..... Applicant Versus Pawan and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Ms. Shaveta Sanghi, DAG, Haryana for the applicant. Mr. Shreesh Kakkar, Advocate for Ms. Hema Kakkar, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 3. Ms. Shivani Mishra, Advocate for Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate for respondent No.2. None for respondent No.4. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. 1. The applicant-State has filed the application under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to file an appeal against the impugned order dated 04.03.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind acquitting the accused-respondents of the charges framed against them. 2. Succinctly facts of the case are that FIR No.93, dated 30.06.2012, under Sections 302/34/216/120-B IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, at Police Station Julana was registered on the statement of Manju (wife of deceased Raman Lather) against the accused-respondents. It was alleged that a telephonic message was received at Police Station Julana that Raman (since deceased) had been shot by some unknown persons, who fled from MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -2- the spot on their motorcycle. Finding the information reliable, the police party laid nakabandi on Karsola Road. When the police officials reached at the spot in Village Karsola, they came to know that the injured has been shifted to CHC Julana. When they reached CHC Julana, they were informed that the injured had been taken to PGIMS, Rohtak. Thereafter, the police officials reached PGIMS, Rohtak where Rajesh (brother of deceased) and others, being in a state of shock, expressed their inability to make a statement. Thereafter, on 30.06.2012 the statement of Manju (wife of the deceased) was recorded. The complainant stated that her husband was engaged in the business of property dealing having office situated at Julana Bus Stand. About 3-4 days prior to the alleged incident, her husband had purchased a Swift VDI Car and had been using the same to commute. She further submitted that as the street leading to their house was not wide enough, her husband used to park the car at the house of Satish son of Sube. She alleged that on 29.06.2012 at about 08:30 PM, she and her mother-in-law had gone to answer the call of nature and while they were proceeding towards the Phirni, they saw her husband approaching. In the meantime, two boys on a motorcycle came from the side of Phirni and started continuously fired at him, as a result of which, he fell on the spot. She has alleged that the behaviour of Satish was also not good with them. She suspected that her husband had been murdered by the persons connected with the land dispute. Hence, request was made to take legal action against the culprits. On the basis of the statement made, FIR was registered and the investigation commenced. The scene of crime team, dog squad etc. were called at the spot. Blood stained earth, one empty cartridge MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -3- of 12 bore and one empty cartridge of 9 mm were recovered from the spot. Site plan was prepared. Proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were conducted. Postmortem of the dead body was conducted. During the investigation, statement of the witnesses were recorded. On 17.07.2012, accused Pawan @ Billu @ Badsha and Shamsher @ Michkindu suffered their separate disclosure statements to the effect that the murder was planned at the instance of Sonu and that they along with Pali @ Shishpal, fired at Raman. During investigation, accused namely, Satish and Suresh were found innocent. On completion of the investigation, challan was presented and on consideration of the material collected by the Investigating Agency, the respondents-accused were charge-sheeted for the offence under Sections 302/34/216/120-B IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act and trial commenced. On the conclusion of the trial, finding nothing incriminating, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, acquitted the respondents-accused from the charges framed against them, vide impugned order dated 04.03.2015. Hence, aggrieved by the same, the applicant-State has approached this Court by way of filing the present application for grant of leave to file appeal. 3. It has been vehemently contended by learned State counsel for the applicant that the learned trial Court has miserably failed in appreciating the evidence on record. She submits that as per the case set up by the prosecution, a telephonic message regarding Raman son of Ram Kumar being shot by some unknown criminals, who fled from the spot on their motorcycle, was received, thereafter, injured-Raman subsequently died during treatment. The Investigating Agency collected the medico-legal MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -4- report, inspected the dead body, and recorded the statement of Manju, wife of the deceased, on the basis of which the FIR was registered. She submits that there were two star witnesses at the time of occurrence i.e. complainant- Manju, wife of deceased Raman and Satwanti, mother of the deceased and both these witnesses have corroborated their version with each other. Moreover, the complainant identified the accused persons as assailants in the Court. She submits that deceased Raman was a property dealer and he had been murdered due to property dispute with the respondents-accused. She has argued that after joining of investigation, accused Pawan and Shishpal @ Pali suffered their disclosure statements regarding their involvement in the murder of deceased Raman and they also got recovered 12 bore country made pistol along with cartridges and 9 mm country made pistol along with magazine. She submits that the prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses and led both oral and documentary evidence to establish the complete chain of circumstances. It is, thus, submitted that learned trial Court in hyper-technical manner, misread evidence on record, resulting in grave miscarriage of justice. He, thus, submits that the present application for grant of leave to file appeal be allowed and the accused- respondents be convicted and sentenced for the charges framed against them. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused- respondents argued that the accused persons have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the prosecution evidence suffers from material discrepancies and inconsistencies. It is submitted that the no Test Identification Parade of the accused was conducted. It is further submitted MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -5- that the complainant neither named the accused nor gave any description of the assailants in the initial complaint and had instead suspected some other persons, who were never associated with the investigation. Learned counsel also pointed out material discrepancies regarding the recording of the statements of the prosecution witnesses and the recovery of the alleged weapon, thereby rendering the prosecution case doubtful. It is thus, submitted that the learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and the judgment passed by it suffers from no illegality and perversity. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as well as the record with their able assistance. 6. The case of the prosecution is primarily rests upon the testimonies of PW-1 Manju and PW-2 Satwanti. However, PW2 did not identify any of the accused, whereas PW-1 identified the accused for the first time in Court despite the fact that no Test Identification Parade was ever conducted. It has also come on record that the accused were not named in the initial complaint and the complainant had initially expressed suspicion against some other persons, who were not associated with the investigation. Besides this, the prosecution evidence suffers from material contradictions regarding the identification of the accused, the recording of statements of the witnesses, the alleged recoveries and the investigation conducted by the police. In these circumstances, the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 7. The scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal is limited. Unless the findings recorded by the learned trial Court are shown to MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -6- be perverse, wholly unreasonable, or based on misreading or non- appreciation of material evidence, this Court would be slow to grant leave to appeal. If two views are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the view favouring the accused must ordinarily be preferred. 8. In the present case, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, after appreciating the entire oral as well as documentary evidence, has recorded a categorical finding that the prosecution has failed to establish the essential ingredients of the offence are beyond reasonable doubt. 9. As per the law settled, the appeal against conviction and that against acquittal rests entirely on different pedestal. As per the criminal jurisprudence, every accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. As per the law settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court, once the accused is acquitted by the Court of law, there lies double presumption of innocence in his favour. Hence, an Appellate Court should not disturb the findings of acquittal arrived at by the trial Court in a cavalier manner and it is only in case of perversity of the findings, the Appellate Court should interfere in the acquittal order passed by the trial Court. 10. In Sadhu Saran Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, AIR 2026 Supreme Court 1160, learned Appellate Court has held as under:- 18. Generally, an appeal against acquittal has always been altogether on a different pedestal from that of an appeal against conviction. In an appeal against acquittal where the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is reinforced, the appellate Court would interfere with the order of acquittal only when there is perversity of fact and law. However, we believe that the paramount consideration of the Court is to do substantial justice and avoid miscarriage of justice which can arise by acquitting the accused who is guilty of an MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -7- offence. A miscarriage of justice that may occur by the acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. This Court, while enunciating the principles with regard to the scope of powers of the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal, in the case of Sambasivan and Others V. State of Kerala, (1998) 5 SCC 412, has held : “The principles with regard to the scope of the powers of the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal are well settled. The powers of the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal are no less than in an appeal against conviction. But where on the basis of evidence on record two views are reasonably possible the appellate Court cannot substitute its view in the place of that of the trial Court. It is only when the approach of the trial Court in acquitting an accused is found to be clearly erroneous in its consideration of evidence on record and in deducing conclusions therefrom that the appellate Court can interfere with the order of acquittal”. 11. In Jafarudheen and others vs State of Kerala 2022 SCC Online SC 495, it has been held that Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing order of trial Court rendering acquittal, relevant para of the same reads as under: “25. While dealing with an appeal against acquittal by invoking Section 378 of the Cr.P.C., the appellate Court has to consider whether the trial Court's view can be termed as a possible one, particularly when evidence on record has been analyzed. The reason is that an order of acquittal adds up to the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused. Thus, the Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the Trial Court rendering acquittal. Therefore, the presumption in favour of the accused does not get weakened but only strengthened. Such a double presumption that enures MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-394-MA-2016 -8- in favour of the accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters.” 12 . In view of the above, this Court finding no perversity in the conclusion arrived by the learned trial Court is of the opinion that no case for grant of leave to appeal is made out. Consequently, the present application filed by the State under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. seeking leave to file appeal stands dismissed. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 07.07.2026 m.sharma Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No MAMTA 2026.07.10 15:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document