JUDGMENT Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.:- On 25.6.1995 at about 5.00 P.M. in the area of Village Bahmniwala, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Ferozepur, two groups clashed and caused injuries to each other. At the instance of one group, FIR No.193 dated 26.6.1995 was registered at Police Station Sadar Jalalabad under Sections 326, 325, 324, 148, 149 IPC. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Sucha Singh son of Surjan Singh. Cross version to the FIR was divulged by Tehal Singh son of Guddar Singh. On the basis of FIR lodged by Sucha Singh, 15 persons were tried, namely, Surjit Singh, Kashmir Singh, Gajjan Singh, Makhan Singh, Surjan Singh, Veero Bai, Ishar Kaur, Surain Singh, Puran Singh, Tehal Singh, Balbir Singh, Desa Singh, Bishamber Singh, Joginder Singh and Narain Singh. In the cross version narrated by Tehal Singh, eight persons, namely, Bhagwan Singh, Mohinder Singh, Sucha Singh, Dhanno Bai, Kulwant Singh, Malkiat Singh, Bhagwan Singh and Paramjit Singh alias Pamma son of Jora Singh were tried. Both the trials were conducted separately but simultaneously. In the FIR case, fifteen (15) persons were tried and held guilty of offence under Sections 324, 148, 307, 323, 149 IPC vide judgment dated 28.11.2001 and vide a separate order dated 29.11.2001, they were sentenced as under:- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sr. Name of Offences for Substantive Fine In default No. Convict which convicted sentence of payment of fine --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Surain 324 IPC R.I. for ten -- -- Singh Months 148 R.I. for nine -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 2 Narain Singh 324 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307 IPC R. I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 148 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.500/- R.I for 30 days 3 Surjan Singh 324 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307 IPC R.I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 148 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 4 Gajjan Singh 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R. I for nine months -- -- 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 307 /149 IPC R.I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 5 Surjit Singh 324 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307 IPC R.I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 148 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.500/- R.I for 30 days 6 Kashmir Singh 324 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 307/149 IPC R.I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R. I for four months 7 Puran Singh 324 IPC R. I for ten months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R. I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R. I for 30 days 307/149 IPC R.I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 8 Balbir Singh 324 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 148 IPC R. I for nine months -- -- 323/149 IPC R. I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R. I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R. I for 30 days 307/149 IPC R.I for 2-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 9 Bishamber 326 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1000/- R. I for three Singh months 148 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 323/149 IPC R. I for six months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 10 Tehal Singh 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 11 Makhan Singh 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 12 Joginder Singh 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 13 Desa Singh 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 14 Ishar Kaur 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for eight months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 15 Veero Bai 323 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for eight months -- -- 307/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 4. The present appeal arises in FIR case and the appellants have assailed their conviction and the sentence awarded to them in the above said table. 5. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide its judgment dated 28.11.2001 in the version given by Tehal Singh appellant held Bhagwan Singh son of Sucha Singh and his seven co-accused guilty of offences under Sections 323, 324, 325, 326, 148, 149 IPC and vide a separate order dated 29.11.2001 sentenced them as under:- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sr. Name of Offences for Sentence Fine In default No Convicts which convicted of payment of fine --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Kulwant Singh 324 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. Name of Offences for Sentence Fine In default No Convicts which convicted of payment of fine --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Kulwant Singh 324 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months 2 Malkiat Singh 323 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months 3 Bhagwan Singh 324 IPC R.I for one year -- -- son of Mehar Singh 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months 4 Paramjit Singh 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months 5 Sucha Singh 326 IPC R.I for two years Rs.1500/- R.I for four months 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months 6 Bhagwan Singh 323 IPC R.I for nine months -- -- son of 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- Sucha Singh 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R. I for ten months -- -- 7 Dhano Bai 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 323/149 IPC R. I for six months -- -- 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 324/149 IPC R. I for ten months -- -- 7 Dhano Bai 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 323/149 IPC R. I for six months -- -- 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months 8 Mohinder Singh 148 IPC R.I for one year -- -- 323/149 IPC R.I for six months -- -- 324/149 IPC R.I for ten months -- -- 325/149 IPC R.I for 1-¼ years Rs. 500/- R.I for 30 days 326/149 IPC R.I for 1-½ years Rs.1000/- R.I for three months --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 7. Two Criminal Appeals bearing No.7-SB of 2002 and 25-SB of 2002 pertaining to the cross-version to the FIR have also been decided today, vide a separate judgment. 8. In the present appeal bearing Criminal Appeal No.8-SB of 2002, this Court shall confine to case FIR No.193 dated 26.06.1995 lodged by Sucha Singh. The version given by Sucha Singh has been noticed by the trial Judge in para 2 of its judgment. The statement made by Sucha Singh is Ex.P19. The trial Judge has condensed the version given by him as under: “Sucha Singh stated that he is resident of village Bahmniwala. Dispute between Surjit Singh son of Surain Singh and Mohinder Singh son of Harnam Singh regarding 8 kanals of land is pending and this land is situated abutting Farm-house of Sucha Singh in the revenue limits of village Bahmniwala. Complainant Sucha Singh claims to be supporting Mohinder Singh in this dispute and due to this land dispute complainant and accused party were bound in security proceedings held under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. Mohinder Singh being in possession of the disputed land transplanted paddy in it. Complainant Sucha Singh claims to be supporting Mohinder Singh in this dispute and due to this land dispute complainant and accused party were bound in security proceedings held under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. Mohinder Singh being in possession of the disputed land transplanted paddy in it. On 25.6.1995 at about 5 p.m. complainant Sucha Singh along with his son Rajinder Kumar, brother Baj Singh and wife Dhanno Bai along with Mohinder Singh son of Harnam Singh were present at farm house of complainant and there Surain Singh accused armed with gandasi Narain Singh, Surjan Singh, Gajjan Singh, Surjit Singh and Kashmir Singh accused armed with gandasi each, Puran Singh armed with sword, Balbir Singh with gandasi, Bishamber Singh with sword, Tehal Singh and Makhan Singh each with sotas (sticks), Joginder Singh armed with dang, Desa Singh, Ishar Kaur and Veero Bai armed with sotas each came present in the fields of Mohinder Singh referred above. All these accused started raising lalkaras by proclaiming that they will uproot paddy transplanted by Mohinder Singh in the disputed land. On it complainant Sucha Singh along with his sons Rajinder Kumar, Bhagwan Singh and wife of complainant namely Dhanno Bai as well as Mohinder Singh prevented accused from uprooting paddy but accused inraged started inflicting injuries. Surain accused gave gandasi blow to ward off which complainant raised his right hand and as such said gandasi blow hit complainant on index finger of his right hand. Narain Singh accused gave two sharp edged side gandasi blow in head of complainant and like-wise Surjan Singh accused gave two sharp edged side gandasi blows in head of complainant whereas Surjit Singh accused gave two sharp edged side gandasi blows on back side of head of complainant. Even Gajjan Singh accused gave two reverse side gandasi blows in the back of head of complainant. Complainant fell on the ground and then Kashmir Singh gave sharp edged side gandasi blow in back of complainant. Puran Singh, Balbir Singh and Bishamber Singh accused gave injuries with the weapons held by them on persons of Rajinder Kumar son of complainant Sucha Singh. Tehal Singh and Makhan Singh accused inflicted injuries with their weapons on person of Baj Singh, brother of complainant. Joginder Singh, Desa Singh, Ishar Kaur and Veero Bai inflicted injuries with their weapons on persons of Dhanno Bai and Mohinder Singh. Tehal Singh and Makhan Singh accused inflicted injuries with their weapons on person of Baj Singh, brother of complainant. Joginder Singh, Desa Singh, Ishar Kaur and Veero Bai inflicted injuries with their weapons on persons of Dhanno Bai and Mohinder Singh. All accused persons inflicted these injuries in furtherance of the common object of each of accused. After inflicting injuries accused fled away from the spot and thereafter above named injured taken to Civil Hospital, Jalalabad by Makhan Singh son of Amar Singh.” 9. The above said FIR was investigated and report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted against the accused appellants. 10. The appellants were charged for various offences. They had caused injuries to Rajinder Kumar, Bhagwan Singh, Mohinder Singh, Dhanno Bai and Sucha Singh. These injured persons were medicolegally examined by Dr.Rajesh Kumar Sharma PW-2. 11. Rajinder Kumar suffered three incised injuries. Injury No.1 was on the wrist, injury No.2 was on the left ring finger and injury No.3 was a superficial incised injury on the head. Bhagwan Singh suffered four injuries and all of them were abrasions. Mohinder Singh suffered one injury on the left elbow caused by a blunt weapon. Dhanno Bai suffered three injuries. Injury No.1 was on her head caused by a blunt weapon, injury No.2 was an abrasion of the right arm and injury No.3 was complain of pain. Sucha Singh suffered ten injuries. Injury No.1 on his person was an incised injury on the right hand, injuries No.2 to 5, 7 and 9 were on the head caused by incised weapon, whereas injuries No.6 and 8 were also on the head caused by a blunt weapon and injury No.10 was an incised injury on the back. 12. In support of the version given in the FIR, injured complainant Sucha Singh appeared as PW-4, injured Bhagwan Singh as PW-5, injured Dhanno Bai as PW-6, injured Mohinder Singh as PW-7and injured Rajinder Kumar as PW-8. 13. This Court need not to go into all intricacies and evidence of other witnesses who had participated in the investigation, as the trial Court had given the following findings in para 21 of its judgment, relevant portion whereof is as under: “21. 13. This Court need not to go into all intricacies and evidence of other witnesses who had participated in the investigation, as the trial Court had given the following findings in para 21 of its judgment, relevant portion whereof is as under: “21. … … … So even if result of investigation qua free fight cannot be given the status of legal evidence but despite that facts and circumstances of the case itself enough to show that present case was a case of free fight in which both the parties received injuries at hands of each other allegedly in exercise of right of self defence.” 14. From the evidence of Sucha Singh PW-4, Bhagwan Singh PW-5, Dhanno Bai PW-6, Mohinder Singh PW-7 and Rajinder Kumar PW-8, as dealt with by the trial Court, it is evident that the fight between two sides was a free fight. This finding has also been reiterated in crosscase, pertaining to which Criminal Appeal No.7-SB of 2002 and Criminal Appeal No.25-SB of 2002 have been decided by this Court vide a separate judgment of even date. 15. In the present case, both the parties were asserting their possession over the land. To prove their claim, sowing of paddy became an important issue for the parties, thus both the sides caused injuries to each other. They were determined to settle their possession by use of weapons. In such a situation, it is difficult to find out as to how the occurrence originated. Genesis of the occurrence cannot be comprehended. Therefore, it can be safely said that it is a case of free fight. It is a settled legal position that in a case of free fight, each accused is responsible for his individual role and Section 149 IPC cannot be applied. This Court in Gurmit Singh and others v. State of Punjab, Criminal Appeal No.857-SB of 1997, decided on 22.1.2010 considered the case law and observed as under:- “.....In Gajanand and others v. State of U.P., AIR 1954 Supreme Court 695, Hon’ble Apex Court held as under:- ‘A free fight is “when both sides mean to fight from the start, go out to fight and there is a pitched battle. The question of who attacks and who defends in such a fight is wholly immaterial and depends on the tactics adopted by the rival commanders.’ It was further held that in case of free fight, each accused is responsible for his own act and can only be convicted for individual liability. In ‘State of Haryana v. Chandvir and others’ (1996)8 Supreme Court Cases 678, Hon’ble Apex Court held that in case of free fight, liability of each accused has to be considered independently. This view was further followed in ‘Kanbi Nanji Virji and others v. State of Gujarat’ AIR 1970 Supreme Court 219. In ‘Kashi Rai and others v. State of Bihar’ 1994 SCC (Cri) 416, the settled legal position was further reiterated and it was held that assailants should be held liable for their individual acts. Further reliance can be placed upon ‘Pundalik Mahadu Bhane and others v. State of Maharashtra’ (1997)11 Supreme Court Cases 567.” 16. In view of the discussion made above, Surain Singh, Kashmir Singh, Puran Singh and Balbir Singh are hereby held substantively liable for an offence punishable under Section 324 IPC; Narain Singh, Surjan Singh and Surjit Singh under Sections 324 and 307 IPC; Bishamber Singh is held substantively liable for an offence punishable under Section 326 IPC; whereas Gajjan Singh, Tehal Singh, Makhan Singh, Joginder Singh, Desa Singh, Ishar Kaur and Veero Bai are held substantively liable for an offence punishable under Section 323 IPC. All the appellants are acquitted of other charges. 17. In the present case, occurrence pertains to the year 1995. A period of fifteen (15) years is going to elapse. Taking into consideration that the accused have suffered mental pain and agony of a protracted trial, the sentence awarded to eight appellants is hereby reduced as detailed below, whereas the other seven appellants are released on probation as stated thereafter: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sr. No. Name of the accused Section Sentence reduced to ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. Surain Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 2. Kashmir Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 3. Puran Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 4. Balbir Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 5. Narain Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 307 IPC One year rigorous imprisonment. However, sentence of fine and default clause is maintained. 6. Surjan Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 307 IPC One year rigorous imprisonment. Puran Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 4. Balbir Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 5. Narain Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 307 IPC One year rigorous imprisonment. However, sentence of fine and default clause is maintained. 6. Surjan Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 307 IPC One year rigorous imprisonment. However, sentence of fine and default clause is maintained. 7. Surjit Singh 324 IPC Five months rigorous imprisonment 307 IPC One year rigorous imprisonment. However, sentence of fine and default clause is maintained. 8. Bishamber Singh 326 IPC Nine months rigorous imprisonment ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 18. The substantive sentences to each accused-appellants, in the relevant cases, shall run concurrently. 19. Whereas, Gajjan Singh, Tehal Singh, Makhan Singh, Joginder Singh, Desa Singh, Ishar Kaur and Veero Bai, who are individually held liable for an offence punishable under Section 323 IPC, are hereby ordered to be released on probation under Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 for a period of six months. They shall furnish personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court with an undertaking that they shall maintain peace, good conduct and behaviour during the period of probation. In case the petitioners commit breach of any of the terms and conditions of the bonds, they shall be called upon by the trial Court to undergo the sentence awarded and the benefit of probation shall not accrue to them. The appeal shall stand disposed of in the above terms. --------------