SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(SC) 230

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.L. OZA AND K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, JJ.
Gulshan and others, Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 355 of 1978, D/- 22-3-1988.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code – Section 302 – Appellants who have been convicted one Ashok Kumar was a boy of 17 years and the other Gulshan was a boy of 19 years at the time of the incident – So far as Ashok Kumar is concerned, he is alleged to have inflicted one blow with sharp edged weapon and it is alleged that the deceased died after six days of the injury – It is a penetrating wound according to the medical report – It also appears that the person Darshan Singh with whom there was trade rivalry, present and has been acquitted by the High Court – It also appears that there were some other injuries and admittedly they were neither fatal nor serious – In the light of these circumstances and also the fact that these appellants were released on bail by orders of this court, about ten years back –Held, Facts stated above in our opinion offence under section 302 could not be attributed to them – Therefore, conviction of the two appellants under section 302 read with section 34 could not be maintained – They could only be convicted for an offence under section 304 Part I and 304 Part I read with section 34 – In the circumstances of the case, in our opinion, sentence normally would be that of seven years – But in the circumstances of this case and looking to the age of the appellants and the time that has elapsed after they were released on bail, in our opinion, sentence already undergone will meet the ends of justice – Order accordingly.

Judgment

JUDGMENT:- Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Two appellants who have been convicted one Ashok Kumar was a boy of 17 years and the other Gulshan was a boy of 19 years at the time of the incident. So far as Ashok Kumar is concerned, he is alleged to have inflicted one blow with sharp edged weapon and it is alleged that the deceased died after six days of the injury. It is a penetrating wound according to the medical report. It also appears that the person Darshan Singh with whom there was trade rivalry, present and has been acquitted by the High Court. It also appears that there were some other injuries and admittedly they were neither fatal nor serious. In the light of these circumstances and also the fact that these appellants were released on bail by orders of this court in August, 1978, about ten years back.

3. On the facts stated above in our opinion offence under section 302 could not be attributed to them. Therefore, conviction of the two appellants under section 302 read with section 34 could not be maintained. They could only be convicted for an offence under section 304 Part I and 304 Part I read with section 34. In the circumstances of the case, in our opinion, sentence normally would be that of seven years. But in the circumstances of this case and looking to the age of the appellants and the time that has elapsed after they were released on bail, in our opinion, sentence already undergone will meet the ends of justice.

4. The appeal is, therefore, allowed to the extent indicated above.

Order accordingly.

For Citation : AIR 1988 SC 2110

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top