Back
1992 Supreme(P&H) 364
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
A.L.Bahri, I.S.Tiwana and B.S.Nehra JJ.
Sarwan Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Criminal Appeal No. 89 of 1989,
Decided On : MARCH 17, 1992
In cases of sudden fights or conflicts where there is no clear evidence of pre-consultation or formation of a similar intention between the accused to commit the crime, the provisions of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with common intention, may not be applicable, and the liability of each accused must be considered independently.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302, 304 PART II, 326, 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - FACTUAL MATRIX INVOLVING A SUDDEN FIGHT RESULTING IN HOMICIDE - INTERPRETATION OF EXCEPTIONS TO SECTION 300 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - APPLICATION OF THE RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE - DISTINCTION BETWEEN SAME INTENTION AND SIMILAR INTENTION UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a sudden fight between two parties, resulting in the death of one individual, Bikkar Singh. The prosecution alleged that Swaran Singh, one of the accused, attacked Bikkar Singh with a gandasi, causing a fatal head injury. The other accused, Mewa Singh, joined the fight later and also inflicted injuries on Bikkar Singh and Nachhattar Singh, another individual present at the scene. The accused claimed self-defense, stating that they were attacked by Bikkar Singh and Nachhattar Singh.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a motive for the accused to commit the crime. The court also held that the evidence did not conclusively establish which party was the aggressor in the fight. The court further found that the accused did not act in pursuance of a common intention, as required under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, to attract the provisions of vicarious liability.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved the motive for the accused to commit the crime. 2. Whether the evidence established which party was the aggressor in the fight. 3. Whether the accused acted in pursuance of a common intention to attract the provisions of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove a motive for the accused to commit the crime, as the suggested motive was not sufficient to establish a clear intent to harm the deceased. 2. The court found that the evidence did not conclusively establish which party was the aggressor in the fight, as there was no clear indication of pre-consultation or formation of a similar intention between the accused to attack the deceased. 3. The court held that the accused did not act in pursuance of a common intention, as required under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, as there was no evidence of pre-consultation or formation of a similar intention between them to commit the crime.
Final Decision: The court convicted Swaran Singh under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, considering the sudden nature of the fight and the absence of an intention to kill. The court also convicted Swaran Singh and Mewa Singh under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code for causing grievous hurt to Nachhattar Singh. The court sentenced Swaran Singh to rigorous imprisonment for the period already undergone and a fine of Rs. 5,000, and Mewa Singh to the sentence already undergone and a fine of Rs. 5,000.
, J.
1. Because of divergent opinion expressed by Honble Judges constituting the Bench hearing the appeal, this appeal has now come up before me.
2. Sessions Judge, Sirsa, on February 6, 1989, convicted Swaran Singh appellant under Sec.302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Swaran Singh and Mewa Singh, appellants, were further convicted under Sec.32ft read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each or in default or" fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Mewa Singh accused was acquitted of the charge framed under Sec.302 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case on October 21, 1987, at about 9.00 p. m. Bikkar Singh was coming to his house when Swaran Singh accused met him near the water tap in village Kumbthala. Swaran Singh accused raised a lalkara to teach him a leason for objecting to his visits to Nibal Singhs house and inflicted a gandasi blow hitting Bikkar Singh on his head who fell down. Nachhattar Singh PW came forward. He also received gandasi blow from Swaran Singh on his head. Mewa Singh accused came from his house, situated nearby, and inflicted injuries on the person f Nachhattar Singh. In the meantime Harjodh. Singh brother of Nachhattar Singh was attracted to the spot and in order to save Nachhattar Singh and Bikkar Singh, he caused some injuries to the two accused-Swaran Singh and Mewa Singh. The accused managed to run away from the spot. The two injured Bikkar Singh and Nachhattar Singh were taken to hospital at Sirsa, from where Bikkar Singh was referred to Medical College Hospital, Rohtak, where he succumbed to his injuries. On the statement of Nachhattar Singh recorded by the police in Civil Hospital, Sirsa, case was registered.
4. During investigation of the case, both the accused were arrested and in pursuance of their disclosure statements, they got recovered gandase which were alleged to have been used in the occurrence PW-6 Nachhattar Singh PW 7 Dilbag Singh PW-11 Harjodh Singh gave the ocular account of the occurrence which has been briefly described above. PW-8 Nazar Singh deposed about the disclosure statements and in consequence thereof recovery of the gandase by the two accused. The medical evidence consists of the statement of PW-1 Dr. G. K. Kataria, who medically examined Mewa Singh and Swaran Singh accused on October 22, 1987 at 12.30 p. m. He gave the details of the injuries found. PW-2 Dr. Gurtej Singh conducted X ray of Naehhattar Singh and found fracture of frontal bone and fracture of middle phalanx of third toe. He also conducted X-ray on Mewa Singh and found fracture of both of the bones of left fore arm PVV-10 Dr J. S. Chhimpa medically examined Bikkar Singh on October 22, 1987 at about 12.25 a. m. He gave the description of the injuries found As stated above, Bikkar Singh was referred to Medical College Hospital, Rohtak, PW-12 Dr. O P. Dhania, Medical Officer, Midhut Dispensary, Model Town, Rohtak, conducted post mortem on the dead body of Bikkar Singh. According to his opinion the injury found on the scalp of the deceased was ante mortem and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature and the death was the result of the head injury. The drafts man as well as the Investigating Officer were also produced in this case.
5. While denying the allegations of the prosecution, the accused putforth their story of the occurrence. Swaran Singh was coming from the house of Nihal Singh when he was stopped by Bikkar Singh and Nachhattar Singh who were armed with stick and gandasi, respectively. They assaulted Swaran Singh whereupon Mewa Singh came there and inflicted injuries to the complainant party in defence of Swaran Singh accused. These accused tendered copies of the First Informatio
