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

2010 Supreme(SC) 347

Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. PANCHAL & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK VERMA
Daya Kishan
Versus
State Of Haryana
Criminal Appeal No. 879 Of 2007
Decided on : 22-04-2010

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Gaurav Agrawal, Advocate. For the Respondent:Rajeev Gaur 'Naseem', Kamal Mohan Gupta, Advocates.

Headnote:(a) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323, 307 and 148 IPC – Conviction based on appreciation of reliable evidence – Findings of Courts below deserve to be confirmed. (Para 9)

       (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 r/w section 149 – Accused party not having any grudge against deceased – Appellant’s son firing at deceased on his own – No evidence to establish that appellant did share common object of one of the members of the unlawful assembly to cause death of deceased – Section 149 not attracted – Conviction u/s 302 with the aid of section 149 set aside. (Para 13)

       Facts of the case:

       The appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC, Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 148 IPC.

       High Court dismissed the appeal thereagainst.

       Finding of the Court:

       Section 149 IPC is not attracted in the case.

       Result:

       Appeal partly allowed.

Judgment :-

J.M. PANCHAL, J.

1. This appeal, by grant of special leave, is directed against judgment dated August 21, 2006, rendered by Division Bench of High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 277-DB of 2004, whereby the High Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and confirmed judgment dated January 19, 2004, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonipat in Sessions Case No. 21 of 1999/2003 convicting the appellant (1) under Section 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing him to R.I. for life and fine of Rs.3,000/- in default R.I. for two years, (2) under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC and sentencing him to R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs.2,000/-in default R.I. for one year, (3) under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC and sentencing him to R.I. for one year and (4) under Section 148 IPC and sentencing him to R.I. for two years.

2. The facts emerging from the record of the case are as under: -

Bhale Ram is a resident of Village Jagsi. He has constructed shops on Bus Adda of Village Jagsi. There is a liquor vend in one of the shops constructed by him, while one shop, i.e., tea stall was being run by his son Sanjay and nephew Rajesh, son of Balbir. Two other shops are lying vacant and there is land behind these shops for tethering the cattle. According to the prosecution case a civil suit between Bhale Ram and the appellant regarding the land was pending since long time. The dispute relating to land was referred to Panchayat of the village. It was the claim of Bhale Ram that the said dispute was settled by the Panchayat but thereafter also the members of the family of the appellant were bearing a grudge against him and his family. The incident in question took place on November 30, 1998. At about 7.00 P.M. on the said date Sanjay and nephew of Bhale Ram were sitting in the shop when accused No. 1 Krishan, son of the appellant, came to the shop and asked for some goods. The goods were given by Sanjay to him. When Sanjay demanded money, an altercation ensued. Krishan threatened Sanjay that he would burn him. Krishan went back to his house, which was just behind the shop and after a short time (1) Krishan, (2) Pohla @ Sat Narayan, both sons of the appellant Daya Kishan, (3) the appellant Daya Kishan himself, (4) Ajmer and (5) Raja, both sons of Lalchand Bairagi, came there. They raised lalkara saying that Sanjay would not be spared by them. Pohla was armed with a gun whereas Ajmer was armed with Jelli and other accused including the appellant were armed with lathi. On coming to the place of incident, Pohla at once fired a shot at Rajesh from his gun, which hit on the chest of Rajesh. When Sanjay went to the rescue of Rajesh, Pohla fired at Sanjay as a result of which Sanjay sustained injuries. The appellant gave a lathi blow on the right eye of the informant Bhale Ram whereas other accused, namely, Ajmer caused injury to the first informant with a jelli and Krishan gave a lathi blow on the wrist of the informant. The other assailants caused injuries to the informant's daughters, namely, Kamlesh and Meena and wife Kishni and left. The injured were taken to Health Centre, Gohana from where they were referred to PGIMS, Rohtak. When they reached PGIMS Hospital, Rohtak, Rajesh was declared brought dead whereas others were admitted to the hospital. The first informant Bhale Ram had also caused injury to the appellant in self-defence. The Head Constable on duty at PGIMS Hospital, Rohtak, had informed the police station about the injured having been admitted in the hospital for treatment. Therefore, ASI Ram Prakash went to PGIMS Hospital and recorded the statement of Bhale Ram. The ASI sent the statement to P.S. Baroda for registration of FIR. At the police station, FIR was registered against the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 323, 307 and 302 IPC as well as under Sections 27, 54 and 59 of the Arms Act.

3. The

















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