Back
2002 Supreme(SC) 2383
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar, JJ.
Billu and Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 464 of 2001
Decided On : 20-08-2002
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the injuries and the use of deadly weapons, leading to the conviction under section 326/34 for causing grievous hurt.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Offence - Section 302/34 - Section 326/34 - The court discussed the application of sections 302/34 and 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It highlighted the interpretation of the injuries sustained by the victim and the use of deadly weapons, leading to the decision to convict the accused under section 326/34 for causing grievous hurt.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were convicted under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting the deceased, leading to her death. The prosecution alleged that the accused used deadly weapons to cause the injuries.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the injuries sustained by the deceased could have been caused by a fall, and the accused could not be held liable for culpable homicide. Instead, they were convicted under section 326/34 for causing grievous hurt with deadly weapons.
Issues: The key issue was the nature of the offence committed by the accused, whether it amounted to culpable homicide or causing grievous hurt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the medical evidence and the circumstances of the case to conclude that the accused were not liable for culpable homicide but were guilty of causing grievous hurt with deadly weapons.
Final Decision: The accused's conviction under section 302/34 was set aside, and they were convicted under section 326/34 and sentenced to 7 years' imprisonment with a fine.
ORDER :
The two accused-appellants have been held guilty of an offence punishable under section 302/34 Indian Penal Code and each sentenced to imprisonment for life. Pargat Singh accused-appellant is the nephew (brother's son) of co-appellant Billu. There were two other women accused, namely Chhindo and Bachno. All the four were convicted by the trial court under section 302/34 Indian Penal Code. However, in the appeal preferred by the four accused persons, Chhindo and Bachno, the two ladies have been found not guilty and exonerated by the High Court though Chhindo had died during the pendency of appeal. So far as Billu and Pargat Singh, the two accused/appellants before us are concernd, their appeal was dismissed and conviction and the sentences passed thereon were upheld by the High Court.
2. The prosecution case briefly stated is that Tara Singh PW-2 and the accused-appellants are neighbours. Their houses are divided by a boundary wall. The deceased Raj Rani was Billu's bhabhi, that is, brother's wife. The brothers had separated and were living separately in either two houses or two parts of the same house which is not clear. On 11.9.93 Tara Singh PW-2 was sleeping in the courtyard of his house. Shortly after midnight he was awakened by the screams of Raj Rani who was shouting 'mar ditta mar ditta'. Tara Singh got up and saw in the light of an electric bulb which was on the courtyard of Pargat Singh that accused Pargat Singh armed with a sabbal and accused Billu armed with a gandasi were assaulting Raj Rani whereas the two women accused Bachno and Chhindo were holding the victim by arms and legs. Tara Singh intervened and inquired the reason for the assault whereupon the accused appellant Billu told Tara Singh to mind his own business and not to interfere. Tara Singh who had gone closer to the house of Pargat Singh returned, back to his courtyard. Therefrom he saw the accused persons throwing down Raj Rani from the roof top of kitchen into the courtyard of the witness. The accused persons then ran away.
3. Tara Singh summoned one Gurdip Singh PW-5 and narrated the incident to him. One Dr. Sukha, a private practitioner, was called. He gave first aid treatment to Raj Rani and also administered an injection to her. However, Raj Rani succumbed to the injuries and died. F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Tara Singh at 9.25 a.m. on 12.9.1993. Post mortem on the dead body of Raj Rani was performed by Dr. G.S. Dhaliwal PW-1. The deceased was found to have sustained the following ante mortem injuries :
"1. A lacerated wound measuring 4.5 x 2.5 cms on interior aspect of left leg in lower one third and upper ?rd junction of leg. Clotted blood was present in and around the wound.
2. Multiple abrasions were present measuring 1.5 x 1 cm, 1 x 1 cm, 3.5.x 1 cm over the upper ?rd area of interior aspect of the leg and an abrasion measuring 2 x 10 cms. over lower one third of interior aspect of left leg.
3. Two lacerated punctured wounds over the upper half of the right leg present measuring 5 x.5 cm and 2.5 cms deep on the middle of the leg, interiorly 5 x .5 cms and 2 as deep present 3 cms above the middle of the leg surrounded by an area of abrasion measuring 2.5 x 1.5 cms.
4. A lacerated punctured wound .5 x .5 cm over the lower one third of right leg, 6 cms above the medical malleclas, 2.5 cms deep.
5. Right ankle and feet were swollen. An abrasion 4 x 2 cms on the antero lateral aspect of the right leg, just above the ankle joint was present.
6. An abrasion 3.5 cms. x 1 cm on the inner aspect of right thigh, 4 cros above the knee joint.
7. An abrasion over the left side of back of abdomen 8 cms away from the spine measuring 3.5 x 1.5 cms."
4. On internal examination it was found that the bones of both the legs were fractured at multiple places. Major blood vessels were lacerated on the right side of the leg. In the opinion of Dr. Dhaliwal the death of Raj Rani was caused by shock and haemorrhage due to the above said injuries. All the injuries
