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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 485

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sureshwar Thakur, Kuldeep Tiwari, JJ.
Subhash @ Makkar & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CRA-D-474-DB-2013 and CRA-D-1529-DB-2013
Decided On : 18-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Sumeet Goyal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Rose Gupta, Advocate Mr. Shivam Kaushik, Advocate Mr. Paramvir Parmar, Advocate Mr. Sumeet Goyal, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Rose Gupta, Advocate Mr. Shivam Kaushik, Advocate Mr. Paramvir Parmar, Advocate, for the Respondent

The court assigned preponderance to the credible eye witness account over the medical account and deemed the minimal digressions or contradictions in the witness's statements insignificant. The presence of all the accused at the crime site remained unrebutted and uncontroverted.

Headnote:

Criminal Conspiracy - Conviction under Section 302 IPC - [120-B IPC, 302 IPC, 149 IPC] - The court upheld the conviction of the convicts under Section 302 IPC and Section 120-B IPC. The court also upheld the acquittal of accused Vikas @ Vicky. The medical evidence and the eye witness account were considered, and the court assigned preponderance to the credible eye witness account over the medical account. The minimal digressions or contradictions in the witness's statements were deemed insignificant as the presence of all the accused at the crime site remained unrebutted and uncontroverted.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a criminal conspiracy resulting in the death of Satyawan. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of the complainant, Dharampal, who alleged that all the accused were present at the crime site and were involved in the incident. The medical evidence and the eye witness account were considered in the trial.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the convicts guilty of the charges under Section 302 IPC and Section 120-B IPC. The acquittal of accused Vikas @ Vicky was upheld. The court assigned preponderance to the credible eye witness account over the medical account and deemed the minimal digressions or contradictions in the witness's statements insignificant.

Issues: The main issue was the credibility of the witness's account and the medical evidence in establishing the guilt of the accused. The court also addressed the relevance of the minimal digressions or contradictions in the witness's statements.

Ratio Decidendi: The court assigned preponderance to the credible eye witness account over the medical account and deemed the minimal digressions or contradictions in the witness's statements insignificant. The presence of all the accused at the crime site remained unrebutted and uncontroverted.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals, affirmed the conviction of the convicts, and upheld the acquittal of accused Vikas @ Vicky. The sentences imposed on the convicts were ordered to be executed, and the case property was to be dealt with in accordance with the law.

JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J. - Since both the criminal appeals arise from a common judgment, therefore, both are amenable for a common verdict becoming recorded thereons.

2. CRA-D-474-DB-2013 is directed by the convicts- appellants, against the verdict of conviction, as made on 26.03.2013, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, upon, Sessions Case No.65 of 2010, wherethrough, in respect of charges drawn for offences punishable under Section 120-B IPC and under Section 302 of the IPC read with Section 149 IPC, he made a finding of conviction against the accused.

3. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order drawn on 01.04.2013, the learned trial Judge proceeded to impose upon the convict (supra) both sentence(s) of imprisonment as well as of fine, but in the hereinafter extracted manner :-

Convicts Subhash @ Makkar, Ram Kumar, Baru Ram and Santro.

u/s 302 read with Section 149 IPC

All the convicts/accused are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, the convicts/accused shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 days.

u/s 120-B IPC

All the convicts/accused are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each. In default of payment of fine, the convicts/accused shall further undergo imprisonment for a period of 2 days.

4. All the sentence(s) were ordered to run concurrently. The convicts become aggrieved from the verdict of conviction (supra), besides become aggrieved from the above imposed sentence(s), thus, they led to cast thereagainst the instant appeal CRA-D-474-DB-2013 before this Court.

5. CRA-D-1529-DB-2013 is directed by the complainant- Dharampal, against the verdict of acquittal made on 26.03.2013, upon the accused-respondent No. 6-Vikas @ Vicky, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, upon Sessions Case No. 65 of 2010.

Factual background

6. The genesis of the prosecution case becomes encapsulated in the appeal FIR to which Exhibit PH/1 is assigned. The present FIR is lodged at the instance of father of the deceased Satyawan. The informant-complainant Dharampal, has made narrations thereins that that he is resident of village Pabra. In the year 1999 he had purchased 6 acre of land from Subhash son of Datu Ram, resident of village Pabra and sale deed and mutation are in his name. After about three years. Santro wife of Subhash and his sons filed a civil case in civil Courts against him regarding this land on the ground that he had purchased the said land after administering liquor to Subhash and the said case has been decided in his favour. During the pendency of trial of that case, Subhash and his family members convened a panchayat, so that the said land be returned back to them by him. Upon this, he agreed that he would return back the said land on payment of sale amount of the land, but Subhash and his family members did not pay the said amount. It was further alleged that Subhash and his brother Ram Kumar, his wife Santro, his brother in law Baru and Rakesh used to theaten him and his family to return their land otherwise he and his family would be finished. About 8-10 days prior to the occurrence, Vicky @ Vikas came on leave from Jail and threatened him with dire consequences if the land is not returned. On 25.10.2009 at about 7 AM, he alongwith his nephew Ram Phal were going towards their fields situated towards Kinala. His son Satyawan was going at a distance of about half killa from them for answering the call of nature and when he reached near Dasuwala Johar, a Tata Sumo crossed them in a very fast speed and hit Satyawan with force on his back in their presence. His son Satyawan then tried to save himself, the Tata Sumo again tried to hit his son and his son again tried to save himself. In the meantime, Ram Kumar, Baru, Rakesh and Santro alighted from the Tata Sumo and fell him on the ground and Subhash ran over Tata Sumo upon Satyawan and thereafter the said v

            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 Back to top