SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(P&H) 689

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Sham Sunder, J.
Jagir Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Criminal Appeal No. 30 of 1995,
Decided On : APRIL 16, 2009

Headnote:(A) Criminal Law--Grievous hurt--Doctors who conducted operation in relation to injury could be best witnesses to find out as to whether said injury was grievous or dangerous to life--Doctors who conducted operation in relation to injury not examined--Evidence of doctor who did not conducted operation to injury could not be relied upon--Conclusion of trial Court that that since it was not proved that injury was dangerous to life offence stood altered to Section 326 IPC arrived at without material and data--Injury simple in nature falling within purview of offence punishable under Section 324 IPC--Accused liable to be convicted and sentenced under Section 324 IPC instead of Section 326 IPC--Penal Code, 1860, Section 323, 324, 326 and 34. (Para 13, 15 & 16)

       (B) Criminal Law--Grievous hurt--Release on probation--Appellants facing protracted criminal proceedings for last more than 17 years--They committed no offence of like nature after conviction --In facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, age of appellants and that they are not previous convicts they are entitled to be released on probation of good conduct--Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, Section 4--Penal Code, 1860, Sections 323, 324 & 326. (Para 14 & 16)

       

Judgment

Sham Sunder, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgement of conviction and the order of sentence, dated 10.01.1995, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide which, it convicted the accused (now appellants), and sentenced them, as under:-

Names of the

accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted

Sentence awarded


1

2

3


(a) Tarsem Singh

(i) Under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pav a fine of Rs. 500, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.



(ii) Under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous "imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs: 200/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months.



(iii) Under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian . Penai Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months.


(b) Kabal Singh

(iv) Under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.



(v) Under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs. 200/-. in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months.



(vi) Under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months.


(c) Jagir Singh

(vii) Under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.



(viii) Under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months.



(ix) Under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months.


All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2 The facts, in brief, are that on 05.10.1991. Kashmir Singh loaded his paddy crop, in a vehicle, and took it to the commission agent shop of Satpal. Lakhwinder Singh and his father stopped Kashmir Singh not to take paddy crop to the shop of Satpal. On account of this reason, there was some dispute between them. On 06.10.1991. at about 9.00 AM, when Lakhwinder Singh reached,, in front of the house of Mukha Singh Rai Sikh, to take milk, Tarsem Singh, armed with barchhi. Kaba! Singh, armed with dang, Kala@ Jagir Singh, armed with datar, and Vir Singh, empty handed, came there. Vir Singh, raised an exhortation to catch hold of Lakhwinder Singh and teach him a lesson for restraining his father from taking paddy crop to the shop of Satpal. in the meanwhile, Kabal Singh gave a dang blow. which hit the back of Lakhwinder Singh, who fell down. Thereafter, Tarsem Singh, gave a barchhi blow, which hit the right side of the chest near the shoulder of Lakhwinder Singh. Kala aimed a datar blow, which Lakhwinder Singh, warded off, by raising his hand, and the same hit the middle finger of his left hand. In the meanwhile, Gudip Singh father of Lakhwinder Singh and Ajit Singh son of Balwant Singh reached there, who had come to village Khussupur, to take trolley of Ajit Singh. They witnessed the occurrence. Lakhwinder Singh raised an alarm, as a result whereof, the accused ran away, with their respective weapons. After arranging a vehicle. Lakhwinder Singh, was taken to Civil Hospital. Lopoke, by his father, where he was given first aid. He was referred to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar. He was got admitted there. On the basis of the statement PA of Lakhwinder


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top