JASVEER SINGH vs STATE OF UTTARAKHANDq

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2013 Supreme(UK) 138

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh
JASVEER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 2 of 2011
Decided on : 04.04.2013

Advocates:
For the Appellant : Mr. Kuldeep Singh Rawal, Amicus Curiae
For the Respondent: Mr. H.O. Bhakuni, Brief Holder

Headnote:(A) Injuries on person of accused — Explanation of — Appellant/accused had also suffered abrasions on his body — From the statements of PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW5 held that when appellant was assaulting PW3 with knife there was scuffle between them — PW5 and other villagers had separated them — During which appellant had suffered abrasion during scuffle — Thus, injuries on person of appellant duly explained. (Para 10)
       (B) Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 307 — Offence punishable under — According to prosecution appellant had quarrel with PW3 since morning on the fateful day — He left the house in the afternoon and came to the house at about 09.00 p.m. after consuming liquor and thereafter, gave 6-7 blows of knife on the person of PW3 — Appellant was the real brother of PW3 and incident took place in front of PW1/wife of PW3 and PW2/real mother of appellant and PW3 — Held it was not a sudden provocation because appellant was having sufficient time for soothing between afternoon till night when he came to house after consuming liquor — Moreover, injuries found on the person of PW3 were serious in nature caused by a sharp edged weapon that have resulted in the culpable homicide amounting to murder — Therefore, it can not be said that appellant had no intention to kill PW3 — Also, not clear why PW2 would falsely implicate her younger son i.e. Appellant — No illegality or perversity in the order — Appeal dismissed.
        (Paras 11 to 13)
       ¼v½ vfHk;qDr ds ‘kjhj ij pksV & O;k[;k & vihykFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds ‘kjhj ij Hkh [kjksap vk;h Fkh & PW1, PW2, PW3 vkSj PW5 ds dFkuksa ls /kkfjr fd vihykFkhZ PW3 ij pkdw ls okj dj jgk Fkk muds chp >M+i gqbZ Fkh & PW5 vkSj vU; xzkeh.kksa us mUgsa vyx fd;k Fkk ftl nkSjku vihykFkhZ dks [kjksaps vkbZ Fkh gkFkkikbZ esa & bl izdkj vfHk;qDr dh pksVksa dk fooj.k Li”VA ¼izLrj 9½

       ¼c½ Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 307 & n.Muh; vijk/k & vfHk;kstu ds vuqlkj vihykFkhZ dk lqcg ls gh PW3 ls >xM+k gks x;k Fkk vkSj og nksigj esa ?kj ls pyk x;k Fkk o jkf= 9 cts ‘kjkc ihdj okfil vk;k vkSj mlus PW3 ij pkdw ls 6&7 okj fd, & vihykFkhZ PW3 dk lxk HkkbZ Fkk vkSj ?kVuk PW1/PW3 dh iRuh] PW2 vihykFkhZ dh ek¡ o PW3 ds le{k ?kVh Fkh & /kkfjr fd ;g ,d vpkud izdksiu ugha Fkk D;ksafd vihykFkhZ ds ikl i;kZIr le; Fkk [kqn dks ‘kkar djus ds fy, nksigj ls jkf= rd tc og ?kj ‘kjkc ihdj vk;k Fkk & vkSj ;g fd PW3 ds ‘kjhj ij /kkjnkj gfFk;kj ls xaHkhj pksVsa vkbZ Fkha tks fd vkijkf/kd ekuo gR;k djus ds fy, i;kZIr Fkha & blfy, ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd vihykFkhZ dk PW3 dks ekjus dk dksbZ vk’; ugha Fkk & ;g Hkh Li”V ugha fd PW2 vius NksVs csVs i.e. vihykFkhZ dks >w¡Bk D;ksa Q¡lk,xh & vkns’k esa dksbZ voSèkrk ;k foÑfr ugha & vihy [kkfjtA ¼izLrj 11 ls 13½

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. (Oral)

1. Present appeal is received from jail. Appellant, by way of present appeal, is assailing the judgment and order dated 18.12.2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Tehri Garwhal in Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2010 whereby appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and was sentenced to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- failing which to undergo five months additional imprisonment.

2. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that PW1 Urmila (informant) lodged an FIR with police station Chamba, Tehri Garhwal to the effect that on 11.04.2010 her brother-in- law Jasveer Singh (appellant herein) was having quarrel with her husband Yashwant Singh; all the family members tried to cool him down but remained unsuccessful; at about 09.30 p.m. appellant assaulted her husband several times with knife with an intention to kill him; having received the injuries at the hands of appellant, her husband fell down; she and her mother-in-law PW2 were present on the spot; having heard the hue and cry, Rakesh Rawat, Ashtam Singh and other villagers reached to the spot; Yashwant Singh was taken to hospital in 108 Ambulance.

3. Having registered the FIR, PW8 commenced the investigation. On completion of the investigation, a chargesheet was submitted against the appellant under Section 307 IPC. The trial was committed to the Court of Session and the Sessions Court has framed charge under Section 307 IPC against the appellant. Appellant denied the charge and claimed trial.

4. From the side of prosecution, informant PW1 Urmila, PW2 Sharda Devi, mother of appellant and injured, PW3 Jaswant Singh, PW4 Rakesh Rawat, PW5 Ashtam Singh, PW6 Mahavir Singh Negi, PW7 Dr. Sanjay Kardwal, PW8 Investigating Officer Pradeep Kumar Dobhal and PW9 Ram Lal Ghaud were examined. The Court has also examined Dr. A.K. Srivastava, as court witness 1. Statements of accused were also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on going through the material available on record, the trial court has passed the judgment and order under appeal.

6. I have heard Mr. Kuldeep Singh Rawal, learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. Hari Om Bhakuni, Brief Holder for the State and have carefully perused the record.

7. As per the statement of PW1, wife of Yashwant Singh PW3, appellant was having altercation with his elder brother Yashwant Singh right from the morning; all the family members tried to pacify him but in vain. In the evening at about 09.00 p.m., appellant having consumed liquor came to the house and started assaulting PW3 with knife. PW1 (wife of PW 3) and PW2 (mother of appellant and PW3) were also present on the spot. They had seen appellant assaulting PW3 with knife. PW2 (mother of appellant and PW3) also stated that appellant having consumed the liquor came to the house at about 09.00 p.m. and started assaulting his own elder brother PW3 with knife. Having received the injuries PW3 fell down; having heard the hue and cry, Rakesh Rawat and uncle of appellant Ashtam Singh reached on the spot along with other villagers. They had saved PW3 from the clutches of appellant and thereafter, PW3 was taken to Hospital in 108 Ambulance. PW3 injured in so many words has also supported the prosecution story. PW1, PW2 and PW3 were cross examined at great length, however, testimony of PW1, PW2 and PW3 could not be shattered.

8. PW7 Dr. Sanjay Kardwal in his statement stated that PW3 received 7 incised wounds on different parts of his body, which could have been caused by a sharp edged weapon. PW1 and PW2 in their statements have stated that appellant had assaulted PW3 with knife 6-7 times, therefore, their statements find corroboration with the statement of PW7 Dr. Sanjay Kardwal, who noticed 7 incised wounds on the person of PW3.

9. The knife, recovered on the pointing out of appellant and soil taken from the spot were sent for chemical

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

2013 Supreme(UK) 138

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURTHon’ble Mr. Justice Alok SinghJASVEER SINGH – Appellant VersusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent Criminal Jail Appeal No. 2 of 2011Decided on : 04.04.2013

Judicial Analysis

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh
JASVEER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 2 of 2011
Decided on : 04.04.2013