Back
2009 Supreme(P&H) 955
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Sham Sunder, J.
Jagmohan Singhs
Versus
State Of Punjab
Criminal Appeal No. 249 of 1995,
Decided On : MAY 15, 2009
The sufficiency of evidence, including medical evidence and eyewitness testimony, is crucial in establishing guilt under the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Conviction - Indian Penal Code - Section 308 - Summary: The court upheld the conviction of Jagmohan Singh under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code based on medical evidence and eyewitness testimony. The appeal of Jagjit Singh was accepted, and he was acquitted due to lack of independent evidence implicating him in the crime.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a quarrel resulting in a serious head injury to Amarjit Singh, leading to the conviction of the accused under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found Jagmohan Singh guilty based on medical evidence and eyewitness testimony, while Jagjit Singh was acquitted due to lack of independent evidence.
Issues: Delay in lodging the first information report, sufficiency of evidence for conviction, non-examination of a witness, and false implication of an accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The delay in lodging the first information report was explained and did not discredit the prosecution's case. The medical evidence and eyewitness testimony were deemed sufficient for conviction. Non-examination of a witness did not affect the merits of the case. Lack of independent evidence led to the acquittal of Jagjit Singh.
Final Decision: Jagmohan Singh's appeal was dismissed, upholding his conviction, while Jagjit Singh's appeal was accepted, leading to his acquittal.
Sham Sunder, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgement of conviction, and the order of sentence dated 18.04.95, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot, vide which, it convicted the accused, and sentenced them, as under:-
Names of the accused (now appellants)
Offence for which convicted
Sentence awarded
1
2
3
(i) Jagmohan Singh
(a) Under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code.
To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.
The substantive sentences, were ordered, to run concurrently.
2 The facts, in brief, are that Jasmel Singh and Jaswinder Singh were real brothers. Jagmohan Singh, accused, and Jasmel Singh, were neigh- bourers. Jaswinder Singh, was working as tailor-master at village Gholia Kalan. The sister of Amarjit Singh, prosecution witness, was married to.Jaswinder Singh. Amarjit Singh, was working as apprentice with Jaswinder Singh, for the last one year. On 06.01.94, Jaswinder Singh had gone to see his brother Jasmel Singh. At about 11/12 noon Jinder Kaur, sister of Amrjit Singh came to the tailors shop and intimated Amarjit Singh that Jasmel Singh and Jaswinder Singh were quarreling with Jagmohan Singh, accused. Amarjit Singh left the shop and went to the place where Jaswinder Singh and Jasmel Singh on one side, and Jagmohan Singh, and Jaggi, accused, on the other side were quarreling, but they were separated when Amarjit Singh, reached the spot. Jagmohan Singh, was armed with tamba. Jaggi, accused, raised an exhortation that the man power of the complainant party had increased with the arrival of Amarjit Singh. He then exhorted Jagmohan Singh, to attack the members of the complainant party, failing which they may attack them. Jagmohan Singh gave a tamba blow hitting the head of Amarjit Singh, prosecution witness, as a result whereof, he fell down on the ground. The occurrence was witnessed by Jasmel Singh and Jaswinder Singh. Amarjit Singh, injured, was taken to Civil Hospital, Moga, where he was medico-legally examined by Dr. Mohinderpal, at about 1.20 PM on 06.01.94 and the following injuries were found on his person :-
(i) An abrased contusion (red) of the size of 3 1/2x4 cms on the head 5 cms right of midline and 4 cms behind anterior hairline (abrasions was of the size of 3 x 1/8 cms placed in the center of contusion). Fresh blood was oozing out from the abrasion. Xray was advised.
(ii) Patient present with history of beating in the head. There was no history of unconscious afterthe incident. There was history of vomiting. There was history of bleeding per right ear. No history of bleeding per nose. Patient was disphasicadisarthic. Patient felt difficulty in moving of left arm. Pupils by laterally sluggage reaction to light. Pupils were unequal in size. BP of the patient was 120/80. Pulse rate was 90 per minute. This injury was to be observed for the assessment of the damage to the brain in view of these signs and symptoms.
He also proved copy of the medico-legal report and copy of the pictorial diagram showing the seats of injuries. Injury No. 1, on the person of the injured was kept under observation and after receipt of Xray report and surgical opinion from Dr. Ramesh Sharma, Dr. Mohinderpal, declared injury No. 1 as dangerous to life, vide his supplementary report PB.
3 A wireless message was received in Police Station Baghapurana from Police Station Moga City, whereupon, Assistant Sub Inspector Harpreet Singh, went to Civil Hospital, Moga, where Amarjit Singh, injured, was admited. Assistant Sub Inspector Harpreet Singh moved an application PE on 06.01.94 before the doctor to find out the condition of the injured, but the doctor vide his endorsement PE/1 declared that the injured was unfit to make statement. Again on 08.01.94, Assistant Sub Inspector Harpreet Singh, went to Civil Hospital, Moga, and moved an application PH to find ou
