Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 6 (PNJ)

Baldev Singh v. State Of Punjab

2006-01-03

M.M.AGGARWAL

body2006
Judgment M.M.Aggarwal, J. 1. This judgment shall dispose of two appeals on filed by Baldev Singh, Shingara Singh, Surinder Singh and Ujagar Singh and another by Gursewak Singh, Karora Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Kahla Singh and Harnek Singh. Baldev Singh, Shingara Singh, Surinder Singh and Ujagar Singh were convicted for offence under Section 308 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 4-1/2 yeas, whereas other accused i.e. Gursewak Singh, Karora Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Kahla Singh and Harnek Singh were sentenced to undergo RI for 3-1/2 years. Karora Singh accused was convicted for offence under Section 326 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3-1/2 years and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. Whereas all other accused i.e. Baldev Singh, Shingara Singh, Surinder Singh and Ujagar Singh were convicted for offence under Section 326/149 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 2-1/2 years each and pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. Further for offence under Section 148 IPC, these appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for two years. 2. At the outset, Shri P.K. Gupta, counsel for the appellants had stated that Karora Singh and Ujagar Singh appellants have since died during pendency of the appeal. 3. Prosecution case against appellants is that on 17.3.1989 at 12 noon Baldev Singh, Ujagar Singh, Shingara Singh and Nachhatar Singh accused-appellants armed with Gandasi, Surinder Singh armed with Salang, Karora Singh armed with a Spear came along with Gurcharan Singh, Gursewak Singh, Nek Singh and Kala Singh, who were empty handed. They challenged Harbans Singh by saying that Harbans Singh and his helpers would not be spared. Then Baldev Singh accused gave a Gandasi blow on the head of Hardial Singh. Surinder Singh gave a Salang blow on the right shoulder of Hardial Singh. Ujagar Singh gave a Gandasi blow on the head of Hardial Singh. Nachhatar Singh gave a Gandasi blow on the right arm of Hardial Singh. Shingara Singh gave a Gandasi blow, which hit Hardial Singh on right thumb. When Harbans Singh tried to intervene, Karora Singh attacked with his spear and gave Harbans Singh spear blows one on his right shoulder and the other on his right hand. Ujagar Singh gave a blow on Harbans Singh which hit him on the right eye. Shingara Singh gave a Gandasi blow, which hit Hardial Singh on right thumb. When Harbans Singh tried to intervene, Karora Singh attacked with his spear and gave Harbans Singh spear blows one on his right shoulder and the other on his right hand. Ujagar Singh gave a blow on Harbans Singh which hit him on the right eye. Gurcharan Singh, Nek Singh, Kala Singh and Gursewak Singh who were empty handed gave fist blows on the person of Hardial Singh, as a result of which Hardial Singh fell down. All the accused continued causing injuries on the person of Hardial Singh. This occurrence was witnesses by Gurmel Singh and Gurdarshan Singh. Matter was reported to the police. Case for offence under Sections 308/148/149 was registered. It was investigated. Then after investigation, accused-appellants were sent for trial. Nachhtar Singh who was one of the accused had died before challan could be presented. After trial, prosecution case against accused appellants was found to be proved. They were accordingly convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. 4. In the present case, on examination of Hardial Singh, as many as 21 injuries were found on his person. Some of the injuries were referred for X- ray examination, but found to be simple in nature. There were four injuries on the person of Harbans Singh, out of which three were simple. Injury No. 4 which was on distal part of the right middle finger was found grievous on X- ray examination. It had been attributed to Karora Singh accused. 5. Counsel for the appellants did not address arguments on merits but had prayed that occurrence had taken place long back as on 17.3.1989 about 17 years back. Out of the accused, one had died before the challan was presented and two have died during the pendency of the appeal. He pointed out that from the ages of the accused as mentioned in the judgment it would come out that Harnek Singh was of 60 years at that time, whereas Baldev Singh and Surinder Singh were of 40 years. Karora Singh and Ujagar Singh who were 70 and 50 years of age, have died. He had prayed that lenient view be taken. 6. In this case, I find that accused appellant has already undergone imprisonment for about two months. I am of the view that injured can still be compensated with compensation. 7. Karora Singh and Ujagar Singh who were 70 and 50 years of age, have died. He had prayed that lenient view be taken. 6. In this case, I find that accused appellant has already undergone imprisonment for about two months. I am of the view that injured can still be compensated with compensation. 7. Karora Singh who is stated to have caused grievous hurt and was convicted for offence under Section 326 IPC, is stated to have since died. For offence under Section 308 IPC, accused-appellants had just been sentenced but no fine was imposed. When hurt had been caused, there could be imprisonment for seven years or fine or both. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case where sentence of imprisonment for offence under Sections 308/326/149/148, IPC is reduced to already undergone. Whereas all the surviving accused-appellants are sentenced further to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each for offence under Section 308/149 IPC. In default of payment thereof, to further undergo RI for six months. If the fine is recovered, then it shall be paid to Hardial Singh and Harbans Singh injured in the ratio of 60:40. Subject to above modification, these appeals stand dismissed.