9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal against judgment and order of Punjab and Haryana High Court altering conviction from Section 302/34 IPC to 325/34 IPC, sentencing respondents to RI and fine; Prosecution's case of murder and assault on complainant and deceased; Defense denial and plea of innocence; Examination of witnesses and medical experts; Legality of High Court's judgment altering conviction; Challenge to High Court's decision; Sustaining of conviction and sentence under Section 323/34 IPC. Analysis: The State of Punjab filed a Criminal Appeal challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court's judgment altering the conviction of the respondents from Section 302/34 IPC to 325/34 IPC and the consequent sentencing. The case involved the murder of Bakhtawar Singh and assault on Mukhtiar Singh. The trial court had convicted the respondents under Sections 302/34 and 323/34 IPC, while the High Court altered the conviction and imposed a different sentence. The defense denied the accusations, claiming false implication. Witnesses and medical experts testified in support of the prosecution's case. The Addl. Sessions Judge's decision was appealed, leading to the High Court's altered judgment, which was challenged in the Supreme Court. The prosecution's evidence detailed the events leading to the murder and assault, with witnesses describing the accused's actions and the injuries sustained by the victims. The High Court's alteration of the conviction was based on the nature of injuries and the common intention of the accused. The defense maintained innocence and sought acquittal. The Supreme Court, upon scrutiny of the evidence and judgments, found the High Court's decision to be legally unsustainable. The Court noted the autopsy report confirming the cause of death and the injuries inflicted, leading to the conclusion that the alteration of conviction was erroneous. The Court held that the High Court had committed a serious error of law in changing the conviction from Section 302/34 IPC to 325/34 IPC. In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing the High Court's judgment altering the conviction and restoring the trial court's decision. The respondents were directed to surrender to serve the remainder of their sentences. The Court emphasized the importance of considering the evidence and legal principles in determining the appropriate conviction in criminal cases.
|
