Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 674

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Gurvinder Singh Gill, Ramesh Kumari, JJ
Kulbir – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
CRA-D-700-2019

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vipin Kumar
For the Respondents: Munish Sharma

An accused is liable for murder if the intentional injury is inherently fatal or imminently dangerous, falling under Section 300 IPC. Delayed death resulting from septicemia or medical complications does not negate the causal link if such developments are a natural or probable consequence of the original injury.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 300 and 302 - Murder - Culpable homicide amounting to murder - Death occurring due to septicemia or complications following assault - Principles for determining murder when death is delayed due to intervening medical complications - If an injury is intentional and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, or imminently dangerous, subsequent medical developments or infections do not absolve the assailant of liability for murder. (Para 10(xi))

(B) Evidence Act, 1872 - Stamped witnesses - Testimony of injured eye-witnesses - Credibility of - The testimony of injured witnesses, who suffered injuries at the hands of the accused during the same incident, cannot be discarded without strong reasons, as they are present at the scene and have no motive to implicate the accused falsely - Minor contradictions in medical reports do not discredit the ocular account when the occurrence is corroborated by immediate medical examination. (Para 10(iii))

(C) Criminal Procedure Code - Delay in lodging FIR - Impact on credibility - Delay in FIR must be tested on the anvil of attending circumstances - Where delay is explained by exigencies such as widespread civil disorder or law and order situations, it is not fatal to the prosecution's case. (Para 10(iv))

(D) Criminal Procedure Code - Recovery of weapon - Absence of independent witnesses - Conviction can be based on the testimony of police officials if found reliable and trustworthy - Recovery of a weapon is not a sine-qua-non for conviction if direct eyewitness evidence is available. (Para 10(v))

Facts of the case:
The appeal challenged a conviction for murder and causing grievous hurt, where the accused, armed with a knife, attacked three individuals during the night. One victim succumbed to injuries later due to sepsis. The defense argued that the injuries were not fatal, the weapon recovery was planted, the FIR was delayed, and the accused was absent at the time of the occurrence.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction, finding that the causal link between the assault and death was established beyond reasonable doubt despite the delay in death. Professional medical opinions confirmed that the injuries were consistent with the recovered weapon, and the testimonies of the injured witnesses remained credible.

Issues: Whether a death occurring days after an assault due to septicemia constitutes murder, and whether the evidence of injured witnesses and police-led recovery is sufficient to sustain a conviction.

Ratio Decidendi: An assailant is liable for murder if the intentional injury inflicted is such that death occurs as a natural or probable consequence, even if medical complications or infections intervene. The principle of chain of causation is not broken by medical intervention or delayed expiration if the original injury was fatal.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural history and initial prosecution allegations of the crime. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. summary of witness testimonies and the accused's 313 cr.p.c statement. (Para 5 , 6)
3. grounds for appeal and the contention of false accusation. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. evaluation of evidence, medical reports, and causality in death after medical complications. (Para 10)
5. final order dismissing the appeal and upholding the conviction. (Para 11 , 12)

RAMESH KUMARI J.

1. This appeal is filed by Appellant - Kulbir @ Anku hereinafter referred as ‘accused’ against the impugned judgment of conviction dated 24.05.2018 , and the impugned order of sentence dated 25.05.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri for the offences under Sections 302 IPC and 324 IPC in a case arising out of FIR No. 189, dated 28.08.2017, registered at Police Station Bilaspur, Yamuna Nagar (Haryana) for commission of murder of one Purshotam and of having inflicted simple injuries by sharp edged weapon (knife) on the person of the complainant/injured Kuldeep Singh and eye-witness/injured Yashpal and wherein he has been sentenced as under:-

Offence under Section	Period of sentence	Fine imposed	Period of sentence in default of payment of fine
302 IPC	Imprisonment for life	Rs.50,000/-	RI for one year
324 IPC	RI for three years	Rs.5,000/-	RI for one month

Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

2.(i) As per prosecution allegations, PW10 Dr. Shama Parveen, Medical Officer, PHC Bilaspur, sent medical ruqqa Ex.PU alongwith MLRs No.SHP/BSP/17/207, No.SHP/BSP/17/208, No.SHP/BSP/17/209 dated 24.08.2017 Ex.PR, Ex.PS and Ex.PT respectively of injured Purshotam, Kuldeep and Yash Pal to police Station Bilaspur.

Thereafter on 25.08.2017, telephonic information was received from MM College and Hospital of Medical Science, Mullana regarding admission of injured Purshotam (since deceased) in the said hospital.

Due to duty to maintain law and order in connection to Ram Rahim Dera Sacha Sauda, Sirsa, case action could not be taken.

Again on 28.08.2017, telephonic information was received from MM College and Hospital of Medical Science, Mullana that injured Purshotam had died in the said hospital on account of injuries received in a quarrel.

ii) Thereupon, when PW5-ASI Satish Kumar alongwith ASI Ishwar Singh and other officials were going to MM College and Hospital of Medical Science, Mullana then on the way at Shiv Chowk, Bilaspur, PW2- complainant Kuldeep Singh son of Yashpal Singh resident of Sandhaye, Police Station Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar met them and he got recorded his statement Ex.PB, which is in Devnagri script and when translated in English, it makes the following reading:-

“ I am resident of above mentioned address and doing labour work. My father has two younger brothers namely, Jai Kumar and Sanjeev Kumar. They are also residing with us. Our houses are adjacent to each other and all of us have a common courtyard. On 23-08-2017, my brother-in-law (wife’s brother) Purshotam, age about 35 years son of Jasmer Chand resident of Yakubpur, District Yamuna Nagar had come to our house, who is doing labour work and at about 9:30/10 P.M. in the night, after taking dinner, I and my brother-in-law above said Purshotam had slept under a tree in courtyard on a cot and at that time, son of my uncle Jai Kumar namely, Kulbir alias Anku was not in house. During the night at about 12:00 O'Clock. when we were sleeping on cot, I heard the shrike of my brother-in-law Purshotam and when I woke up due to tension, I saw that Kulbir alias Anku, son of my uncle, was giving a blow with knife to my brother-in-law Purshotam and when I tried to save my brother in law, Anku gave first blow of knife on right side of my stomach, second blow on left side of my left shoulder and third blow on near my eye. When I and my brother-in law Pushotam made a noise of "Bachao-Bacho" on hearing our noise my father Yashpal son of Nathi Ram and ot

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 674

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHGurvinder Singh Gill, Ramesh Kumari, JJKulbir – AppellantVersusState Of Haryana – RespondentCRA-D-700-2019

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Gurvinder Singh Gill, Ramesh Kumari, JJ
Kulbir – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
CRA-D-700-2019