Total Pageviews

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Grevious Hurt--Conviction--Ocular version given by complainant and injured witness duly corroborated by medical evidence

2010(1) LAW HERALD (P&H) (DB) 427
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
(DIVISION BENCH)
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Chauhan
Criminal Appeal No.187-DB of 2001 & Criminal Appeal No.339-DBA of 2002
Nirmal Singh & Anr.
v.
State of Punjab
{Decided on 15/01/2010}
For the Appellants: Mr. J.S.Verka, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mrs. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Addl. Advocate General Punjab.
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 326, 324, 323 r/w S.34--Murder--Grevious Hurt--Conviction--Ocular version given by complainant and injured witness duly corroborated by medical evidence--Further, respective kirpans recovered in pursuance of disclosure statement suffered by appellants--Testimony of injured eye witness that deceased died a result of fatal blows at the hands of appellant no.1 corroborates medical evidence--Occurrence taken place on 20.10.1993 at 5.00 p.m.--Statement of complainant recorded and completed on 7.15 p.m.--Witnesses supported version given before Police--No contradictions in statements of eye witnesses--Accused party was aggressors having entered fields of complainant for committing said gruesome act--Thus, appellant no.1 was rightly convicted and sentenced by learned Trial Court. (P.22, 24 & 31)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 326, 324, 323 r/w S.34--Murder--Grievous hurt--Conviction--No injury by appellant no.2 on person of deceased on any vital part of body except a kirpan blow on right leg of deceased which as per post mortem report of deceased was not cause of his death--Said injury admittedly was on non vital part of body--Further, admittedly no blow injury was inflicted by appellant no.2 either on injured or on the deceased twice which thus evidently shows lack of his sharing common intention with his other co-accused so as to attract penal provisions of Section 34 IPC--Injuries inflicted by appellant on vital parts of body of deceased as well as injured not being dangerous to life at the best falls within ambit of Section 326--In view of facts appellant no. 2 did not share common intention to kill with other co-accused--Occurrence related to year 1993--It would be appropriate to convict appellant no.2 for his individual act--Conviction of appellant no.2 recorded under S.302/324/323 IPC set aside--Conviction Section 326 IPC upheld--Sentence of five years under Section 326 reduced to three years. (P.32)