Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sureshwar Thakur, Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.
Mangal Singh @ Manga – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRA-D. No. 937-DB of 2003
Decided On : 26-07-2024
Criminal - Conviction - IPC Sections 302, 323, 34 - The court upheld the conviction based on eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, interpreting the right to private defense as exceeded by the accused due to their superior numbers and use of lethal weapons.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a violent altercation where the accused attacked the deceased with lethal weapons, resulting in his death. The prosecution presented eyewitness accounts and medical evidence to establish the charges against the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the eyewitness testimonies were credible and consistent, corroborated by medical evidence indicating the cause of death was due to injuries inflicted by the accused. The court concluded that the accused exceeded their right to self-defense.
Issues: Whether the accused acted in self-defense and whether the evidence presented was sufficient to uphold the conviction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the accused, due to their superior numbers and the nature of their weapons, exceeded the limits of self-defense, leading to the conclusion that their actions constituted murder.
Result: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the conviction and sentence of the accused.
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
The instant appeal is directed against the impugned verdict, as made on 11.10.2003, upon sessions case bearing number S.C. No.403/2003/FTC, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Ad), Amritsar, where through in respect of charges drawn against the accused qua offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 34 of the IPC, thus the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to record a finding of conviction against appellants-convicts. However, the other co-accused namely Bikkar Singh and Gurmit Kaur were acquitted from the charges drawn against them. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of even date, the learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced both the appellants-convicts in the hereinafter extracted manner.
2. All the above imposed sentences of imprisonment, were ordered to run concurrently. The period spent in prison by the convicts, thus during investigation or trial, was, in terms of Section 428 of Cr.P.C., ordered to be set off from the above imposed substantive sentence(s) of imprisonment, upon the convict.
3. Both the accused-convicts become aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, become aggrieved from the consequent thereto sentence(s) of imprisonment, and, of fine as became imposed, upon them, by the learned convicting Court concerned, and, hence have chosen to institute there against their respective criminal appeals, before this Court.
4. Since appellant No.1 namely Mangal Singh @ Manga died during the pendency of the appeal, therefore, the proceedings qua him stand abated through an order made by this Court, on 19.07.2024.
Factual Background
5. The genesis of the prosecution case becomes embodied in the appeal FIR, to which Ex.PB/2 is assigned. The narrations carried in Ex.PB/2 are, that on 23.2.2002, at about 8 Ñ.Ì., his father Nirmal Singh after taking meals was of the his fitting planks in the outer entrance of their house as there was no regular door, when Gurmit Kaur by looking from over wall of the house which is near the place of the occurrence started hurling abuses to Nirmal Singh. When Nirmal Singh requested her not to abuse them as the matter will be taken to Panchayat in the morning, she started throwing brick bats towards him and shouted and exhorted her co-accused not to spare him, as his death was waiting for him, and he had not been desisting from collecting manure near their wall and also from taking tractor through the street to his house. In the meanwhile her husband Bikkar Singh and her sons Mangal Singh and Gurdev Singh who were taking liquor raising lalkara came there. Bikkar Singh was having dang, Mangal Singh was armed with handle of hand pump and Gurdev Singh was carrying iron rod. It is alleged that Gurmit Kaur caught held shirt of Nirmal Singh and pulled to take him in the street, that Mangal Singh gave three blows with the handle of the pump one after the other on his head and on shoulder. When Nirmal Singh fell down, Gurmit Kaur caught hold her long hairs and dragged him and Gurdev Singh gave him 3/4 blows of iron road near his left ear and on his forehead and near his left eye, and Bikkar Singh gave dang blows on his legs, and on the back of his left hand and on the left leg below knee, and Mangal Singh gave another blow with handle of the hand pump thrust wise, when Jagir Singh and his wife Palwinder Kaur tried to intervene, Gurdev Singh gave blow with iron rod on the head and left arm of Balwinder Kaur. In the meanwhile on hearing noise, Gurmit Kaur wife of Darbara Singh and Jaswinder Singh son
The right to self-defense is limited by the necessity of proportionality and cannot be claimed when the defender has superior numbers and uses lethal force.
Conviction based on eyewitness testimony was quashed due to significant investigative failures, including lack of weapon recovery and forensic analysis, undermining the prosecution's case.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the accused's exercise of the right of private defence.
The court affirmed that the appellants exceeded their right of private defence due to their superior strength and armed status, justifying the conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conclusive and creditworthy evidence to support the charges against the accused, especially in cases involving eyewitness testi....
The establishment of mens rea through eyewitness accounts confirms collective criminal liability among participants in a murder, as vicarious responsibility persists even with varying roles in the ac....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on credible evidence, including ocular witness testimony, medical evidence, and corroborative disclosure statements and recoveries,....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
