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

1995 Supreme(SC) 999

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.N. Ray and G.T. Nanavati, JJ.
Gurmit Singh & Ors. - Appellants
versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 602 of 1985
Decided on 29-9-1995

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 Conviction under - Eye witnesses - Their evidence is consistent - It establishes that it was appellant G who fired gun and caused injuries to deceased which caused his death - Appellants P and K were with appellant G at time of incident and had taken part therein - Conduct of eye witnesses in remaining with dead body for whole night not unnatural- Delay in lodging FIR not unreasonable. (Para 6)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302/ 34,323,324 - Plea of right of private defence Both sides had pre-determined to fight – Case of free fight between two groups - Appellants to be convicted for offence committed by them individually.

       Held: The evidence dearly establishes that Appellant No.1, Gurmit Singh caused the death of Bawa Singh. He has been convicted under Section 302 and, therefore, we maintain his conviction and also the order of sentence passed again him for that offence. His conviction for the offences punishable under Section 326 and 323 both read with Section 34 is set aside. Therefore, the sentence imposed upon him for those offences is also set aside. The conviction of Appellant No. 2, Puran Singh under Section 302 read with Section 34 and also under Section 323 read with Section 34 and the order of sentence passed against him for those offences is set aside. The evidence against him establishes that he had given two Kirpan blows to Puran Singh but it is not established that he caused grievous hurt to Puran Singh. Therefore, he will have to be convicted under Section 324 IPC. For the said offence he is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The conviction of Kashmir Singh, Appellant No.3, under Sections 302 read with Section 34, 326 read with 34 and 323 read with 34 is set aside and so also the order of sentence passed against him for those Offences. His conviction under Section 323 for causing injuries to Bawa Singh and Sadhu Singh is maintained. The order of sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Section 323 is also maintained. So far as Appellant No.4, Joginder Singh is concerned his conviction under Sections 302, 326 and 323 all read with Section 34 is set aside and also the order of sentence passed against him for those offences. However, his conviction under Section 323 for causing injuries to Sadhu Singh is maintained. The order of sentence passed against him for that offence is also maintained. (Para 8)

       

JUDGMENT

Nanavati, J. - This appeal arises out of a common judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 778-DB of 1983 and Criminal Appeal No. 653-DBAof1984. Criminal Appeal No. 778-DB of 1983 was filed by Gurmit Singh who was convicted by the Sessions Court, Amritsar for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act The other appeal was filed by the State against the order of acquittal of the three co-accused.

2. Briefly, stated the prosecution case is that on 12-7-1983 at about 7.30 P.M. when Sadhu Singh (P.W. 10) and his son Parkash Singh (P.W. 12) were returning from their field to their house, Accused Gurmit Singh, Puran Singh, Joginder Singh and Kashmir Singh met them on the way. At that time, Puran Singh was carrying a kirpan, Joginder Singh was armed with a single-barrel 12 bore gun and Kashmir Singh was carrying a gandhali. On seeing Sadhu Singh (P.W. 10) and Parkash Singh (P.W. 12) the accused started uttering abusive words. Sadhu Singh and his son requested them with folded hands not to do so but after proceeding a little ahead they told the accused that they would come back with Bawa Singh to lodge a protest. After reaching their house Sadhu Singh narrated to Bawa Singh what had happened on the way. Meanwhile Duman Singh (P.W. 13) who was passing by their house was also informed about the incident. Thereafter Baba Singh (the deceased), Sadhu Singh (PW 10), Parkash Singh (PW 12), Duman Singh (P.W. 13) and Karam Singh (PW 11) went towards the house of accused Gurmit Singh to lodge a protest. Bawa Singh and Sadhu Singh, were carrying lanterns in their hands, Karam Singh and Parkash Singh had sticks and Duman Singh had a Kirpan with him. When they were a little away from the house of accused Gurmit Singh all the four accused carrying the weapons which they had earlier carried came from the opposite direction. Accused Puran Singh then raised a Lalkara to the effect that Bawa Singh should not be spared. He then gave a kirpan blow on the right elbow of Parkash Singh. One more blow was given by Puran Singh. Accused Joginder Singh gave a blow with the butt of his gun on the chest of Sadhu Singh. Accused Gurmit Singh took the gun of Joginder Singh and fired with the result that Bawa Singh received injuries on his face and chest. Accused Kashmir Singh gave a blow with the stick portion of his gandhali on the right shoulder of Bawa Singh as a result of which Bawa Singh fell down. He also gave another blow with the stick portion of gandhali on the back of Sadhu Singh (PW 10). Accused Joginder Singh picked up the stick of Parkash Singh (PW 12) and gave one blow with it to Karam Singh (PW 11). Bawa Singh already died as a result of the injuries received by him. So, Sadhu Singh, Parkash Singh and Karam Singh remained by the side of the dead body during the night as they apprehended that the accused would otherwise remove the same. Next day morning at about 630 A.M. Sadhu Singh went to the Police Post at Sultan wind falling under Police Station Sadar Amritsar and lodged the first information report.

3. On these allegations all the accused were charged for commission of offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. At the trial the prosecution mainly relied upon the evidence of the three the witnesses namely Sadhu Singh (P.W. 10), Parkash Singh (P.W.12) and Duman Singh (P.W. 13). Karam Singh (P.W.11) was not examined by was offered for cross examination. He was not cross-examined but the accused. As the learned Sessions Judge found the evidence of the eyewitnesses consistent and reliable as regards accused Gurmit Singh he convicted accused Gurmit Singh for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and Section 25 and Section 27 of the Arms Act/He acquitted the other accused as he was of the opinion that participation by the other accused as stated by the eye-witnesses was doubtful in view of the nature of injuries alleged to hav








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