IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
PANKAJ BHANDARI, BHUWAN GOYAL, JJ.
Harna @ Harnath Singh and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 137 of 1993
Decided On : 18-12-2023
JUDGMENT :
(Pankaj Bhandari, J.)
Accused appellants have filed the instant appeal aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.04.1993 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hindaun City whereby all the accused appellants were acquitted for offence under Sections 147, 148, 302/149, 324/149, 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and appellant - Harna @ Harnath Singh has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of IPC and has been sentenced to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1 Lac and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of 7 years and accused appellants - Shyam Singh, Shivbhan, Shiv Singh and Babu Singh have been convicted for offence under Section 323 of IPC and have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months each.
2. During the pendency of the appeal, appellant No.4 - Shiv Singh has expired and the appeal stands abated qua appellant No.4 - Shiv Singh. Now, the appeal survives qua appellant Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 - Harna @ Harnath Singh, Shyam Singh, Shivbhan and Babu Singh.
3. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that on 27.10.1990 at 7:00 PM a written report (Exhibit-P1) was submitted at Police Station, Hindaun City by one Bharat Singh. It was inter-alia stated therein that some dispute took place between Rajendra son of Harna & Harnath Singh and Narsi - brother of complainant. Thereafter, Harna Singh fired his gun at Janak Singh, who expired and Harna Singh opened other fire towards persons, who came to intervene. In the FIR, allegations were levelled against 12 persons and Janak Singh expired. On the basis of said written report, police registered an FIR for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 307 & 323 of IPC. The police after due investigation charge-sheeted 12 persons. The accused appellants and other co-accused denied the charges levelled against them and sought trial, upon which, on behalf of the prosecution, 14 witnesses were examined and 49 documents were exhibited. In defence, 1 witness was produced and as many as 20 documents were exhibited. The Court after examining the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and after hearing the arguments has acquitted 7 of the accused and has convicted the present 5 accused appellants. Appellant No.1 - Harna @ Harnath Singh has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of IPC and rest of the appellants have been convicted for offence under Section 323 of IPC. Learned Trial Court has acquitted the accused appellants for rest of the offences. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellants have preferred the present appeal before this Court.
4. It is contended by learned Senior Advocate, Mr. V.R. Bajwa, assisted by Ms. Savita Nathawat, Adv., appearing on behalf of the accused appellants that there was a cross-FIR and in fact, complainant side was the aggressor. They were convicted by learned Trial Court in cross-case and in appeal, the conviction order was upheld by the High Court and they were given benefit of probation. It is also contended that dispute took place in font of house of appellant No.1 - Harna Singh. All the persons from complainant side armed with weapons including firearms came to the house of Harna @ Harnath Singh and started the quarrel. Deceased - Janak Singh opened fire and Udai Singh received gunshot injuries. In self-defence, appellant No.1 - Harna @ Harnath Singh has also fired, which hit deceased- Janak Singh.
5. It is contended that learned Trial Court has acquitted seven of the accused. The acquittal of the seven accused is not challenged by the State. Similarly, the acquittal of the present accused appellants for offences under Sections 147, 148, 324/149 & 323/149 of IPC and appellant Nos.2, 3 & 5 for offence under Section 302/149 of IPC also has not been challenged. Thus, it has attained finality.
6. It is contended that Exhibit-D14 to Exhibit-D20 are the injury reports of the accused side.
The right of private defense under IPC Sections 100 and 102 was upheld, leading to the acquittal of the accused as they acted in self-defense during the incident.
The right of private defense is justified when imminent danger is present, and the response must be proportionate to the threat.
Point of Law : It is well established law that while exercising right of private defence, it is not required that defence be modulated step by step.
Multiple stab wounds on the body of the deceased call for conviction of the accused u/s 302 IPC.
The court established that the accused acted in self-defense against an unlawful assembly, leading to their acquittal despite initial convictions.
To establish a case under Section 34 of I.P.C. prosecution has to prove prior meeting of minds which may be determined from the conduct of the offenders unfolding itself during the course of action a....
Minor inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony do not undermine the overall credibility of the case, particularly when witnesses have sustained injuries and evidence reflects a disproportionate respon....
The court established that actions taken in the heat of passion without premeditation can lead to a conviction for culpable homicide rather than murder.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.