2013 Supreme(SC) 578

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, JJ.
Swarn Kaur …. Appellant
VERSUS
Gurmukh Singh and Ors. …. Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1624 OF 2008
Decided on : July 03, 2013.

Headnote:(a) Indian Penal Code1860-Section 304, Part 2-The Sessions Judge convicted the five accused persons no. 1 to 5 and acquitted two other accused for offence under Sections 302/34 and Section 201/34, and imposed the punishment of imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 r/w Section 34, besides imposing a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, further sentence of imprisonment for six months each- For the offence proved under Section 201, all the five accused were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year, apart from a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default, imprisonment for one month each- The sentence were directed to run concurrently. In appeal the High Court reversed the judgment of the Sessions Judge and set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused persons-The State did not prefer appeal but defacto complainant filed appeal before the Supreme Court-The Supreme Court set aside the acquittal order passed by the High Court, restored the conviction recorded by the Sessions Judge- However, the Supreme Court altered the conviction from one under Section 302 IPC to one under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced each of the accused to 7 year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50,000/-, in default of payment to undergo further sentence of one year RI-Out of the fine so imposed a sum of Rs. 2 lacs shall be paid to the appellants.

        (b) Indian Penal Cost, 1860- Section 304, Part II- Where from the only two injuries multiple contusions and contusion inflicted on the person of the deceased it cannot safely be said that the accused assaulted the deceased with intention to cause such injury so as to cause death-The accused persons were upset by the poor quality of food cooked by the deceased and, therefore, assaulted him- The nature of injury or the weapon used do not suggest that the accused assaulted him with the intention of causing death- However, the accused knew that the injury inflicted by them is likely to cause death- Held, the offence of the accused persons would fall under Section 304, Part II IPC (Para 39).

        (c) Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 8 - Conduct of accused- Where the accused themselves inform the police about the missing of the deceased, their deliberate failure to identify the deceased when his dead body is shown to them would be relevant which has to be considered and held against the accused. (Para 33).

        (d) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 357 - Compensation

       The five accused persons were convicted under Section 304, Part II, apart from sentence each was imposed fine of Rs.50,000/-. Out of the fine so imposed the Court ordered for payment of compensation Rs. 2 lacs to the appellants. (Para 39).

       Facts of the Case

        The case of the prosecution was that on 30.03.2002, a group of pilgrims were led by the second accused to Shah Talai for orshiping Baba Balak Nath. The deceased Jeet Singh, was taken by the second accused along with the team for the purpose of cooking. The pilgrims reached Shah Talai on 30.03.2002. On reaching Shah Talai and after paying obeisance at the temple, the pilgrims stayed at Dana Mandi in Shah Talai. The accused party appeared to have been not satisfied with the food prepared by Jeet Singh and being annoyed by the said factor, it was alleged that the accused beat the deceased Jeet Singh, after tying his hands with Parna (a piece of cloth used both as head-gear and towel by the villagers). The deceased was taken towards a khud in a jeep-taxi belonging to P.W.6. The accused stated to have given fist blows and kicks to the deceased and on the next day morning the body of Jeet Singh was found in the bed of a rivulet known as ’Saryali Khud’, near Dana Mandi. All the seven accused persons were put on trial for offences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34, IPC. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted two accused persons, convicted five accused persons and passed imprisonment as stated above. In appeal the High Court acquitted the accused persons. In further appeal carried to Supreme Court, the Court reversed the judgment of the High Court, restored that of the trial Court. However altered the conviction of the accused persons from 302/34 to one under Section 304 Part II IPC.

       Findings

        The case is based on circumstantial evidence, the Court found the various links of circumstantial evidence proved against the accused persons and convicted them under Section 304, Part II IPC.

       Result : Appeal allowed.