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) 173

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY AND R.C. PATNAIK, JJ.
Kishan Chand and another, Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 54 with 352 of 1981,
D/- 19-2-1992.
WITH
Gian Chand, Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab, Respondent. 33

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 - Ss. 302, 307 read with Section 34 and 326 - SC Enlargement of Criminal Jurisdiction Act – Offence of murder – Voluntarily causing hurt – Charged – Evidence - Occurrence took place on at about 7 p.m. in village which is at distance of three miles from police station - Because of some previous enmity this occurrence is alleged to have taken place - About a month prior to occurrence and another committed theft in respect of green fodder from field belonging - Deceased caught hold of them - Because of that they bore grudge - On day of occurrence, four accused came with arms - Had a and other two accused were armed with spears - Assistant Sub-Inspector PW 12 received information from doctor - He went to hospital and recorded the statement of PW-6 and case was registered - Injured was alive and doctor PW-l examined him and found five injuries - He died oni.e. after two weeks - An inquest was held and dead body was sent for post-mortem - Doctor PW-2 conducted post-mortem and he found three injuries - Injury No. 1 is wound 12cm x 2 cm bone deep on top of head, oblique in direction starting from centre of hair going obliquely to left parietal region - Held, difficult to say that death was direct result of injury - At any rate Court have to note that it was only a trivial quarrel which led to this occurrence - Attributed only one blow - Doctor who conducted post-mortem noted general condition of deceased and stated in his evidence that he was in coma and the injuries were declared by him to be such which endanger the life - Deceased died after two weeks death may be because of intervening cause - So Court find it difficult to hold that common intention was to commit the murder - In that view of the matter, appellants have to be found guilty for their individual acts - So far is concerned, as noted already, he dealt only one blow - Court confirm fine and in default of payment of fine, he would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months is convicted under S. 326, IPC - On date of occurrence he was about 71 years and from record Court find that he has undergone imprisonment for quite some time - Therefore his sentence is reduced to period already undergone - Fine imposed by courts below is confirmed and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months - With this modification in sentences, appeals are partly allowed.

Judgment

JUDGMENT :- There are two appellants before us namely Gian Chand and Kishan Chand. Both of them along with two others were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar for offences punishable under Ss. 302, 307 read with S. 34 IPC. The trial court acquitted the other two accused and convicted Gian Chand under S. 302 and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Kishan Chand was convicted under S. 326, IPC read with S. 34, IPC and sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. Both of them preferred appeals to the High Court and the State also preferred an appeal against the acquittal of Kishan Chand of the offence punishable under S.302, IPC. The Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeals filed by Gian Chand and Kishan Chand but allowed the appeal filed by the State and convicted Kishan Chand under S. 302 read with S. 34, IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I.. for life. Kishan Chands appeal is admitted under the provisions of the SC Enlargement of Criminal Jurisdiction Act. In respect of Gian Chand, Special Leave was granted and both of them figure as appellants in this Criminal Appeal No.54 of 1981.

2. The occurrence took place on 15th April 1978 at about 7 p.m. in the village Birpind which is at the distance of three miles from police station Nakodar. Because of some previous enmity this occurrence is alleged to have taken place. About a month prior to the occurrence Kishan Chand and another committed theft in respect of green fodder from the field belonging to Labmber Singh. The deceased Nirmal Singh caught hold of them. Because of that they bore grudge. On the day of occurrence, the four accused came with arms. Gian Chand had a Gandasi, Kishan Chand had a Khunda and the other two accused were armed with spears. On exhortation by Kishan Chand. Gian Chand dealt a blow on the head of the deceased. The other two acquitted accused are also alleged to have given blows. Thereafter Kishan Chand also took part in the actual occurrence and he gave one blow on the head of the deceased. Nirmal Singh fell down and on seeing P.Ws. 7 and 10 coming, they ran away. The occurrence was witnessed by P.W. 6 also, PW-6 the brother of the deceased took the injured in a bullack cart to the hospital. The Assistant Sub-Inspector PW 12 received the information from the doctor. He went to the hospital and recorded the statement of PW-6 and the case was registered. The injured was alive and doctor PW-l examined him and found five injuries. He died on 28th April 1978 i.e. after two weeks. An inquest was held and the dead body was sent for post-mortem. Doctor PW-2 conducted the post-mortem and he found three injuries. Injury No. 1 is wound 12cm x 2 cm bone deep on the top of head, oblique in direction starting from the centre of hair going obliquely to the left parietal region. The second injury was lacerated wound 3 cm x1/2 cm bone deep present on the inner side of left eye-brow. The third injury was lacerated wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm bone deep present on the left temporal region of scalp. The underlying bone was fractured. The other injuries are found to be simple. The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of P.Ws. 6, 7 and 10. The trial court however held that so far as Kishan Chand is concerned he did not share the common intention to commit the murder of the deceased. The trial court however held that Gian Chand alone was responsible for causing the death and accordingly convicted him. As mentioned earlier, the High Court interfered and convicted both the appellants under S. 302 read with S. 34 IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that PWs-6 and 10 are interested witnesses. We have gone through their evidence. Both the courts below have given good reasons for accepting their evidence.

4. Now coming to the question of the nature of the offence, there are certain circumstances which have to be taken into consideration. According to the prosecution ca



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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