1982 Supreme(Gau) 27
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
K. N. SAIKIA, J.
MOIRANGTHEM CHAOBA SINGH AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
STATE OF MANIPUR
Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 1 of 1975,
Decided on : 18 -2 -1982.
A person charged with an offense under Section 307 IPC can be convicted under Section 326 IPC if the evidence shows that he committed the latter offense, even if he was not charged with it.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL LAW - S.307/34, 307, 326/34, 326 I.P.C. - CHARGE - CONVICTION - S.221(1), (2) CR. P.C. - COMMON INTENTION - S.34 I.P.C. - SENTENCE - REDUCTION.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants, Moirangthem Chaoba Singh and Moirangthem Gojendra Singh, were convicted under Sections 326/34 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), respectively, for causing grievous hurt to Ningthoujam Lakpa Singh. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with their father, Ibomacha Singh, assaulted Lakpa Singh with a dagger while he was tethering his cows on a hill slope near their paddy field.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the injury to Lakpa Singh was caused by Gojendra Singh, who admitted to thrusting Lakpa Singh, causing him to fall inside the ingkhol, which was about 40 feet away from its eastern end. The court also found that there was no evidence of common intention between Chaoba Singh and Gojendra Singh to cause grievous hurt to Lakpa Singh.
Issues: 1. Whether the conviction of Chaoba Singh under Section 326/34 IPC was illegal since Section 326 IPC is not a minor offense vis-à-vis Section 307 IPC? 2. Whether common intention for the purpose of Section 34 IPC was proved?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the decision in AIR 1956 Raj 39 (1956 Cri LJ 270), which held that Section 326 IPC is not a minor offense vis-à-vis Section 307 IPC, is doubtful in light of subsequent Supreme Court decisions. 2. The court held that there was no evidence to show the formation of any common intention between Chaoba Singh and Gojendra Singh to cause grievous hurt to Lakpa Singh.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal of Moirangthem Chaoba Singh and set aside his conviction under Section 326/34 IPC. The court dismissed the appeal of Moirangthem Gojendra Singh but reduced his sentence to the period already undergone, considering his age at the time of the occurrence and the fact that nearly a decade had expired.
1. The appellant Moirangthem Chaoba Singh, aged about 19 years and Moirangthem Gojendra Singh, aged about 17 years have been convicted, the former under S.326/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to 1½ years' R.I and the latter under Section 326 I.P.C. and sentenced to 2 years' R.I.
2. The evident facts are that Ningthoujam Budhi Singh (P.W. 2) lodged information with the O/C. Moirang Police Station on 2-9-1973 stating that his brother Ningthoujam Lakpa Singh was lying unconscious and likely to die as the two appellants attempted to murder him with a dagger (Louri Thangchou) that morning at 7-00 a.m., being so informed by Khoiron Amusana Singh (P.W. 5). Moirang Police Station registered the case in F.I.R. 113(8) 73 u/s. 307/34 I.P.C. and P.W. 7 Maibam Biramangol Singh took up investigation, reached the place of occurrence at 10-40 a.m. Prior to this, A.S.I. Babudhon Singh, who registered the case had already submitted injury form to the Medical Officer, in-charge of Moirang Primary Health Centre, where the injured Lakpa Singh had been admitted for treatment. Biremangol Singh, arriving at the place of occurrence found blood stain, one spade near the blood stain and a paddy field to the north east of the blood stain at a distance of about 40 feet. He collected some blood stained earth and grass; examined some persons, but could not arrest the accused appellants as they absented from their home. But he arrested them later when they surrendered on 4-10-1973. The injured Lakpa Singh being unable to speak could be examined only on 24-9-1973. The charge sheet was submitted on 23-10-1973.
3. At the Session, both were charged under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and the appellant Gojendra Singh was separately charged under S.307 I.P.C., to which both pleaded not guilty. At the trial, prosecution examined 9, while the defence examined two witnesses.
4. The injured Lakpa Singh, examining himself as P.W. 6, deposed that on that morning at about 6-00 or 7-00 a.m., he proceeded towards Khongjaingamba Ching for tethering two cows on the said hill and while he was doing so on its slope, the two appellants and their father Ibomacha Singh, who were working in their paddy field towards the north at a distance of about 130', shouted to him not to tether the cattle there. Lakpa Singh told them that he would keep the cattle tethered there within the forest land and would keep watch upon them and immediately, the two appellants. Gojendra Singh with a Thangjou in hand, rushed towards him and while Chaoba Singh caught-hold of him, Gojendra Singh assaulted him on the left side of his head with the said Thangjou and receiving the blow he immediately ran for a distance around the hill slope and then fell down on the ground. While so running he received another blow on his back and could not say by whom; and he lost his senses which he regained only in the General Hospital at Lamphelpat. In cross-examination, he admitted that the paddy field was in the possession of the accused and that there was also an ingkhol to the west of the said Lou, which was also in the cultivating possession of the accused-appellants and that the distance between the eastern end of the paddy field and that of the ingkhol would be about 130'. He also admitted that he fell down at a place inside the ingkhol, which would be about 40' away from its eastern end. When he arrived at the place for tethering he found the accused Gojendra Singh about to plough the ingkhol portion with a buffalo and the accused Chaoba Singh was working with a spade in the ingkhol towards the west of the accused Gojendra Singh. He said that the place of tethering was within the forest area, but denied that no cattle was allowed to graze there.
5. The defence version as appearing from the trend of cross-examination, the two defence witnesses and the statement of the accused-persons under Section 313 Cr. P.C. is that Chaoba Singh and Gojendra Singh were working in their field when they saw 6 heads of cattle belonging to Lakpa