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

2007 Supreme(UK) 327

HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL
DHARAM VEER, J.
DEWAN SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
Cri. Appl. 1694 Of 1985
Decided On : JUNE 8, 2007

Advocates Appeared:
Amit Bhatt, Gomti Devi, JITENDRA CHAUDHARY, M.A.Khan

The main legal point established is the reliance on corroborated witness statements and medical reports to prove the appellants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - S. 374(2) - Conviction under Ss. 307, 323/34, I. P. C. - Summary

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted under Ss. 307, 323/34, I. P. C. for causing injuries to the victims while they were ploughing a mortgaged land. The appellants were armed and had the common intention to take possession of the land forcibly.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution proved the appellants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on the corroborated statements of the injured witnesses and medical reports.

Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants had the common intention to cause injuries to the victims and forcibly take possession of the land.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the corroborated statements of the injured witnesses, medical reports, and the absence of evidence supporting the appellants' claims of self-defense or a cross case.

Final Decision: The court confirmed the conviction and sentences of the appellants under Ss. 307, 323/34, I. P. C. and dismissed the appeal.

( 1 ) THIS appeal, preferred under S. 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as cr. P. C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-6-1985 passed by Special Judge (Additional Sessions Judge), nainital, in Session Trial No. 70/1983, State v. Dewan Singh and others, whereby, the learned Special Judge (Additional Sessions judge), Nainital has convicted the appellant-Dewan Singh under Ss. 307, I. P. C. and 323/ 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I. P. C.) and appellants-Ratan singh, Kashmir Singh and Balbir Singh have been convicted under Ss. 307/34, I. P. C. and ss. 323/34, I. P. C. The appellant-Dewan singh was awarded sentence for a period of 4 years R. I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-under S. 307, I. P. C. and also to undergo R. I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of rs. 500/- under Ss. 323/34, I. P. C. and in case of default of fine under the aforesaid sections, it was directed that the appellant-Dewan Singh would undergo R. I. for a further period of six months and three months respectively. The appellants-Ratan Singh, kashmir Singh, and Balbir Singh were directed to undergo R. I. for a period of 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- under s. 307/34, I. P. C. and also to undergo R. I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of rs. 500/- under Ss. 323/34, I. P. C. In case of default of payment of fine under the aforesaid sections, each of the appellants were directed to undergo R. I. for a further period of six months and three months respectively. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. It was also directed that out of the fine recovered from the appellants, an amount of Rs. 1,000/- shall be paid to injured Inder Singh and Rs. 500/- to injured kehar Singh by way of compensation u/s. 357, Cr. P. C.

( 2 ) IN brief, the prosecution story is that on 30-7-1982 at about 12. 00 noon, Inder singh along with Kehar Singh had gone to plough his land at village Madanapur. The said land was mortgaged by Dewan Singh in favour of Inder Singh. When Inder Singh had started to plough the land at 12. 00 p. m. , then appellant-Dewan Singh armed with pistol (tamancha), appellant-Ratan Singh armed with sword and appellants-Kashmir singh and Balbir Singh, each armed with lathis, had entered into the field. As soon as they arrived into the field, they told, "how they dare to plough the land. " In the meantime, the appellants started to beat Kehar singh and Inder Singh. When Kehar Singh had asked them why they were doing so, then appellant-Dewan Singh had fired by a (tamancha) pistol on Kehar Singh, which hit at the thigh of Kehar Singh. After receiving the injury of fire, Kehar Singh fell down on the land. Then Dalip Singh son of Inder singh along with the help of his brother variyam Singh and Awtar Singh and other people of the village had saved Inder Singh, and Kehar Singh from the appellants. After that the appellants ran away towards their village Motipur. The litigation was also going on about the disputed land between inder Singh and Dewan Singh. For the above said incident, Dalip Singh, son of injured inder Singh had lodged the F. I. R. in Police chowki, Dineshpur, Police Station, rudrapur on 30-7-1982 at 1. 15p. m. i. e. Ex. Ka. 5. On the basis of this F. I. R. Ex. Ka. 5, the Clerk Constable, Mohan Lal prepared the chick report i. e. Ex. Ka. 6. The distance of the Police Chowki from the place of occurrence as shown in the chick F. I. R. is 3 kms. At the same time, the entry was made in the G. D. i. e. Ex. Ka. 7. The injured Inder singh, was examined by Superintendent Dr. O. S. Sharma, in J. L. Nehru Hospital, rudrapur, at 4. 15 p. m. On 30-7-1982, the medical report was prepared by superintendent Dr. O. S. Sharma, i. e. Ex. Ka. 1, the injured Kehar Singh, was also medically examined by Superintendent Dr. O. S. Sharma at 4. 30 p. m. on the same day i. e. 30-7-1982. The injury report of Kehar Singh is Ex. Ka. 2. The supplementary



































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