1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1057 OF 2014
ANIL KUMAR APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HARYANA RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1058 OF 2014
O R D E R
1. The impugned order is challenged on the ground that the version of the prosecution is doubtful.
2. We are not inclined to accept such submission on this sole ground as there are many eye-witnesses. Merely because some of the witnesses are from the police party, their evidence cannot be rejected. There is no motive for those witnesses to implicate the accused persons. Apart from this, they are also the injured witnesses. We further note that, at the time of issuing notice in the present matter, it was restricted only to the question of sentence.

3. In such view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the conviction.
4. However, taking note of the fact that the occurrence was of the year 1997 and it has happened out of outburst, when the police party went to the place of the occurrence to secure the accused in some other case, coupled with the fact that the appellants are villagers, we are inclined to modify the sentence to the one already undergone. Additionally, the appellants are directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- each within six weeks to the High Court Legal Aid Centre.
5. We further make it clear that in the event of amount not being deposited, the impugned order will get restored.

6. The appeals are allowed in part. Bail bonds, if any, shall stand discharged.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
[M.M. SUNDRESH]
[S.V.N. BHATTI]
NEW DELHI;
6 th MARCH, 2024

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1057 OF 2014
ANIL KUMAR APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HARYANA RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1058 OF 2014
O R D E R
8. The impugned order is challenged on the ground that the very version of the prosecution is doubtful.

9. We are not inclined to accept such submission on the sole ground as there are very many eye-witnesses, merely, because some of the witnesses are the police party, their evidence cannot be regarded. There is no need for those witnesses to implicate the accused persons. Apart from the same they are also the injured witnesses.

10. In such view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the conviction.

11. However, taking note of the fact that the occurrence was of the year 1997 and it has happened out of outburst when the police party went to the place of the occurrence to secure the accused in some other case, coupled with the fact that the appellants are villagers, we are inclined to modify the sentence to the one undergone already.
Additionally, the appellants are directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- each within six weeks to the High Court Legal Aid Centre.

12. We further note that at the time of issuing notice in the present matter, it was restricted only to the question of sentence alone. We further make it clear that in the event of amount not being deposited, the impugned judgment will get restored.
13. The appeals are allowed in part. Bail bonds, if any, shall stands discharged.
14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
J.
[M.M. SUNDRESH]
J.
[S.V.N. BHATTI]
NEW DELHI;
6 th MARCH, 2024

ITEM NO.104 COURT NO.14 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1057/2014
ANIL KUMAR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HARYANA Respondent(s)
WITH
Crl.A. No. 1058/2014 (II-B)
Date : 06-03-2024 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI
For Appellant(s) Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Jain, AOR
Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Grover, Adv.

Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR
Mr. Jaydip Pati, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR
Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv.
Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv.
Mr. Fateh Singh, Adv.

Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The appeals are allowed in part in terms of the signed order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SWETA BALODI) (POONAM VAID)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Signed order is placed on the file)