Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1983 (1) TMI 287

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lbir Singh, respondent No. 2, for an offence under Sections 304 Part II and 323 both read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and 6 months respectively. On appeal, the High Court has upheld the conviction of respondent No. 1 Mann Singh but reduced his sentence to the period already undergone i.e. for a period of 20 months and to a fine of ₹ 2000/- or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years, but acquitted his son Balbir Singh, respondent No. 2 of both the offences. 2. The prosecution in brief is as follows. On the date of occurrence i.e. on June 22, 1973, early in the morning Mst. Lila Wanti, wife of the accused Mann Singh and one Mst. Rekhi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... both the accused then left the place of occurrence. The deceased was taken in an unconscious condition to Civil Hospital, Mukerian where he was examined by Dr. Randhiraj Singh, P.W. 1 who found the following two external injuries: 1. A vertical lacerated wound 2.3/4 X 1/4 X 1/6 on the left side of the head. It was 4 away from left pinna and 3 above the left eye-brow. 2. A transverse incised wound 1 X 1/8 X 1/8 on the top of the head, 3 from the root of the nose and 5 above the left pinna. These injuries were bleeding head injuries and the deceased was in a precarious condition. Dr. Randhiraj Singh, P.W. 1 found that the deceased was in a serious condition and therefore referred him to Cancer Hospital, Talwara for treatme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d Mann Singh and Balbir Singh came armed with deadly weapons and when they struck the deceased on the head with a Dang and Gandasi, they must necessarily be attributed with knowledge (that it was likely to cause such bodily injury as was likely to cause death, having regard to the fact that the deceased was an old man of 65 years. The learned Sessions Judge accordingly convicted the accused Mann Singh for having committed culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under Section 304 Part II and Section 323 for having voluntarily caused hurt to Mst. Joginder Kaur, and sentenced him as stated above. He further convicted the accused Balbir Singh for having committed an offence punishable under Sections 304 Part II and 323 read with Se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e conclusion reached by the High Court proceeds on mere conjectures and surmises and is wholly unwarranted by the evidence on record. According to the evidence of Dr. Randhiraj Singh, P.W. 1 the deceased Pala Singh had two head injuries. One was a lacerated wound and the other was an incised wound. In his opinion, the lacerated wound was caused by a blunt-edged weapon and the incised wound was caused by a sharp-edged weapon. The unimpeachable testimony of the three eye-witnesses viz. Sewa Singh, P.W. 4, Harbans Singh, P.W. 8, and Mst. Joginder Kaur, P.W. 9 clearly shows that both the accused Mann Singh and his son Balbir Singh made a joint assault on the deceased Pala Singh by their weapons. In view of this, the learned Sessions Judge was r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... equences of his act. In all the facts and circumstances of the case, if there is to be a reduction of the sentence, the proper sentence to award on the accused Mann Singh would be a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years, and a fine of ₹ 3000/- or in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years more. 9. The result therefore is that the appeal must succeed and is allowed. The judgment of the High Court dated January 10, 1975 is set aside and instead the judgment and sentences of the learned Sessions Judge dated February 13, 1974 are restored subject to a modification in the sentence. Respondent No. 1 is convicted for having committed an offence punishable under Sections 304 Part II and 323 and sentenced to under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates