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

1992 Supreme(SC) 357

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.M. PUNCHHI AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.
Sunder, Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana, Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 701 of 1981, D/- 28-4-1992.

Advocates:
Indu Malhotra, R.C.Kohli, R.L.Kohli, RENU GEORGE GUPTA

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 -Section 302 and 304 Part 1- Appeal against conviction -Plea of self defence - Prosecution has not offered any explanation for the injuries found on the person of the accused - No adequate explanation for the recovery of blood-stained clothes of the deceased from inside the house of the accused - These circumstances lend support to, the plea of right of self-defence - The injuries that were inflicted on the persons of the deceased were inflicted during the course of exercise of right of private defence by the appellant - However, keeping in view the, nature of the injuries, in inflicting the fatal injury on the person of the deceased the appellant has exceeded the right of private defence available to him - He is liable to be convicted for the offence u/s. 304 Part I of the Code. (Paras 9, 10, 13 & 14)

Judgment

S. C. AGRAWAL, J. :- This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated April 8, 1981 whereby the appellant has been convicted of the offences under Sections 302, 325/34, 323/34, 324/34, IPC. Hukmi, the son of the appellant was acquitted of the offence under Section 302, IPC but his conviction for the offences under Ss. 325/34, 324/34 and 323/34, IPC was maintained.

2. The case of the prosecution is, briefly, as under :

Nanka Ram had three sons appellant; Sunder, Hira Ram PW- 18 and Wazir Chand, deceased. Nanka Ram had divided his land into four shares. After giving one share to each of his three sons, he kept one share for himself. Nanka Ram was residing with the deceased. The appellant was not happy with this arrangement and he wanted Nanka Ram to divide his fourth share amongst the three sons and he suspected that the deceased and Hira Ram, PW-18, were not allowing Nanka Ram to accede to this demand of the appellant. The houses of the appellant and deceased and Hira Ram, PW- 18 are adjacent to each other and are divided by a common wall. On August 15, 1979, the date of the occurrence, in the morning when the deceased was leaving his house, the appellant told him to get the share of Nanka Ram divided or otherwise bad consequences would follow. In the evening at about 6.00 p.m., the deceased along with his brother, Hira Ram (PW-18) was coming to their house with a bundle of fodder on his head from the fodder cutting machine and Smt. Parmeshwari (PW 11) the wife of the deceased was coming behind them. When the deceased reached near the house of the appellant, the appellant told Hukmi that the deceased should be taught a lesson for not giving the share from the land of the old man and thereupon Hukmi gave a push to the deceased on which the bundle of fodder fell down on the ground. Smt. Parmeshwari and Hira Ram raised a noise which attracted Hari Chand (PW-16). After Hukmi had given the push to the deceased, the appellant gave two blows with a Kasia to the deceased as a result of which he fell down on the ground and in the meanwhile Hukmi brought a Kulhari from the house and gave blows with the same on the person of Hira Ram. The appellant also inflicted blows on the person of Hira Ram. Both the accused thereafter ran away. The deceased as well as Hira Ram were taken to the hospital near Sirsa in a jeep but in the meanwhile Wazir Chand had died.

3. The First Information Report about the incident was lodged at Police Station, Sirsa at 10.35 PM on August 15, 1979, on the basis of the statement of Smt. Parmeshwari recorded in the hospital.

4. The postmortem examination of the dead body of the deceased, Wazir Chand, was conducted by Dr. Karan Singh, (PW 3) on August 16, 1979 at 11.00 a.m. and following injuries were found on his person:

"1. Incised wound 7 cm. x 1 cm. x scalp deep horizontal on the back of head in midline and to the left, 13 cms. above the posterior hair margin.

2. Incised wound 13 cms. x 2 cms. x 8 cms. deep (bone and brain under it cut), 6 cm. from top of left pinna and directed to the right and slightly backwards, cutting and separating left occipital lobe completely and right one partially and injuring the tentorium carebelli in mid-line."

4A. In the opinion of the doctor, the death was caused as a result of shock and haemorrhage due to injuries. Injury No. 1 was found to be simple but injury No. 2 was individually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Hira Ram was medically examined by Dr. R. S. Chaudhary, P.W. 4, on August 15, 1979 at 9.45 p.m. Eleven injuries were found on his person. Eight were incised wounds, two were lacerated wounds and one was contusion. The contusion which was on the back of left forearm above the left wrist was found to be grievous after X-Ray examination. The appellant was arrested on August 18, 1979 and he was medically examined by Dr. Gurtej Singh. P.W. 1, on the same day at 6.30 p.m. The fol

























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