JUDGMENT Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.(Oral):- Present appeal has been preferred by seven appellants, namely, Harbhajan Singh, Ajit Singh, Chanan Singh, Bant Kaur, Amarjit Singh, Dara Singh and Nasib Singh. They were tried in a case FIR No.46 dated 04.06.1998 registered at Police Station Balachaur under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Nawanshahar, vide its judgment and order dated 6th October, 2000 convicted and sentenced them as under: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sl. Name of Convict Sentence Under Section No ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Harbhajan Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for one year on each count 324 IPC on two counts. RI for 3 years and to pay 326/149 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/- or in default to further undergo RI a for 6 months. RI for one year, on each count 324/149 IPC on 6 counts. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC 2. Jeet Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for one year 324 IPC RI for 3 years and to pay a 326/149 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/-, or in default to further undergo RI for 6 months. RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 7 counts. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC 3. Chanan Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for 6 months 323 IPC RI for 3 years and to pay a 326/149 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/- or in default to further undergo RI for 6 months. RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 7 counts. 4. Bant Kaur RI for one year 148 IPC RI for one year on each 324 IPC on 2 count counts. RI for 3 years and to pay a 326/149 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/- or in default, RI for 6 months. RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 6 counts. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC 5. Amarjit Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for 3 years and to pay a 326 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/- or in default to further undergo RI for 6 months. RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 8 counts. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC 6. Dara Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for one year on each count 324 IPC on two counts. RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 8 counts. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC 6. Dara Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for one year on each count 324 IPC on two counts. RI for 3 years and to pay a 326/149 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/- or in default to further undergo RI for 6 months. RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 6 counts. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC 7. Nasib Singh RI for one year 148 IPC RI for one year 324 IPC RI for one year on each count 324/149 IPC on 7 counts RI for 3 years and to pay a 326/149 IPC fine of Rs.2,000/- or in default to further undergo RI for 6 months. RI for 6 months 323/149 IPC ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 3. FIR Ex.PY/2, in the present case, was registered on the basis of a statement Ex.PY made by Mukhtiar Singh PW-3, which was recorded on 4th June, 1998. Occurrence, in the present case, had taken place on 3rd June, 1998 at about 9.00 a.m. Mukhtiar Singh PW-3 stated that he was a resident of village Gullpur and they were two brothers. He was a student of B.A. part I in R.K. Arya College, Nawanshahar. His elder brother Lakhbir Singh had opened a poultry farm in the village, whereas his father Avtar Singh had come on pension from the Army and was working with his elder brother Lakhbir Singh. One year before, a fight had taken place between his maternal uncle Jujhar Singh and Harbhajan Singh son of Nasib Singh, and both sides had received injuries. Accordingly, a case to this effect was going on in the Court at Balachaur. On 3rd June, 1998 at about 8.30 a.m., taking meals for his Taya (elder brother of his father) Major Singh, he had gone to the fields. In the way, he met Harbhajan Singh and Amarjit Singh sons of Nasib Singh. They abused him. While he was returning from the fields, after delivering the meals to his uncle, he found both Harbhajan Singh and Amarjit Singh standing along with their brother Dara Singh. At that time, Harbhajan Singh stated that weapons be lifted and today Mukhtiar Singh should be eliminated. They abused him. While he was returning from the fields, after delivering the meals to his uncle, he found both Harbhajan Singh and Amarjit Singh standing along with their brother Dara Singh. At that time, Harbhajan Singh stated that weapons be lifted and today Mukhtiar Singh should be eliminated. Hearing this, Mukhtiar Singh hastily went towards his house, when all the accused, armed with various weapons, came there. Harbhajan Singh was armed with a Gandasi, Dara Singh with a Kirpan, Amarjit Singh with a Datar and their mother Bant Kaur was also armed with a Datar. Their sister Amro was armed with a Datri, Nasib Singh with a Gandasi, Chanan Singh with handle of a hand pump and Jit Singh was armed with a Datar. At that time, Avtar Singh, father of Mukhtiar Singh, also came out of the house. Harbhajan Singh gave a Gandasi blow on the head of Avtar Singh and Dara Singh also gave a Kirpan blow on his head. Avtar Singh raised a noise, due to which Lakhbir Singh, elder brother of Mukhtiar Singh was also attracted. He was caused injury by Amarjit Singh with his Datar. Lakhbir Singh suffered an injury on the small finger of his right hand. Bant Kaur gave an injury from her Datar to Lakhbir Singh, which hit on the finger of his right hand. Nasib Singh gave a Gandasi blow to Lakhbir Singh, which hit on his left wrist. Harbhajan Singh gave a Gandasi blow from its reverse side to Lakhbir Singh, which hit on his right shoulder. Dara Singh gave a Kirpan blow to Mukhtiar Singh. To save himself, he raised his left arm and the blow landed on his left wrist. Amarjit Singh gave another Datar blow, which caused injury on the left side of head of Mukhtiar Singh, due to which he fell down. While he was lying fallen, Chanan Singh gave an injury from the handle of hand pump, which hit on the thumb of his left foot. At that time, mother of Mukhtiar Singh, Jarnail Kaur came forward to save the complainant Mukhtiar Singh. She was caused an injury by Jit Singh. Amro, daughter of Nasib Singh, also caused an injury to Jarnail Kaur. Bant Kaur gave a Datar blow to Jarnail Kaur, which hit on her right hand. Harbhajan Singh also gave another Gandasi blow to Jarnail Kaur, which hit on her left hand. She was caused an injury by Jit Singh. Amro, daughter of Nasib Singh, also caused an injury to Jarnail Kaur. Bant Kaur gave a Datar blow to Jarnail Kaur, which hit on her right hand. Harbhajan Singh also gave another Gandasi blow to Jarnail Kaur, which hit on her left hand. On the noise raised, many people of the village gathered. The accused, while raising exhortations, decamped from the spot, along with their weapons. The complainant stated that in order to save themselves, they had also caused simple injuries to the accused. 4. For the injuries caused to Avtar Singh, a charge under Section 307 IPC was framed against Harbhajan Singh and Dara Singh. Amarjit Singh was substantively charged under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous injuries to Lakhbir Singh. Bant Kaur was substantively charged for causing simple injuries to Lakhbir Singh. The Additional Sessions Judge, Nawanshahar found that no offence punishable under Section 307 IPC was made out and acquitted the accused on this count. 5. Lakhbir Singh, Jarnail Kaur and Mukhtiar Singh were medico legally examined by Dr.Sunil Pathak PW-1. Lakhbir Singh had suffered four injuries. Injury No.1 on the dorsum of his left thumb was declared as grievous. Jarnail Kaur suffered four injuries. All four injuries were declared as simple. Mukhtiar Singh suffered three injuries. All four were declared as simple. 6. Avtar Singh suffered two simple injuries. He was examined by Dr.R.K. Sharma PW-2. 7. In the occurrence, Amarjit Singh, Bant Kaur, Dara Singh had suffered injuries. Most of these injuries were superficial in nature. 8. Mukhtiar Singh, appearing as PW-3, reiterated the case divulged in the FIR. His father Avtar Singh and mother Jarnail Kaur appeared as PW-4 and PW-5 respectively and corroborated the version given by Mukhtiar Singh. 9. SI Mohinder Singh appeared as PW-9. 10. Thereafter, statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the incriminating circumstances and pleaded false implication. Bant Kaur stated that she reached at the spot to save Dara Singh and Amarjit Singh, then she also sustained some injuries. Dara Singh, in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., stated as under: “I am innocent. I & Amarjit Singh co-accused were going to Nawanshahar as usual for work on 3.6.98. Bant Kaur stated that she reached at the spot to save Dara Singh and Amarjit Singh, then she also sustained some injuries. Dara Singh, in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., stated as under: “I am innocent. I & Amarjit Singh co-accused were going to Nawanshahar as usual for work on 3.6.98. At about 9 a.m. we were present in the lane passing by the side of house of Avtar Singh PW, at the instigation of Jujhar Singh, Avtar Singh and his companions attacked us and started causing injuries to us and we had also caused some injuries to the complainant party, in self defence. We were removed to Civil Hospital, Balachaur, where we were medically examined. The police recorded my statement, the copy of which is Ex.DA in which I have given full account of occurrence.” 11. Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants, has stated that the complainant party was the aggressor and they had caused injuries to Amarjit Singh, Dara Singh and Bant Kaur, and thus, the appellants Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh have caused injuries in the right of their self defence. It is further stated that the other members of the family have been falsely implicated. 12. Counsel for the State has submitted that from the nature and number of injuries suffered by the complainant party, it is evident that the accused party was the aggressor. 13. I have given my due consideration to the rival submissions made by counsel for the parties. In the present case, occurrence had taken place on 3rd June, 1998 at about 9.00 a.m. The statement of Mukhtiar Singh PW-3 was recorded by SI Mohinder Singh PW-9 on 4th June, 1998 at about 11.15 a.m. at Civil Hospital, Balachaur. The case was registered at Police Station Balachaur on the same day, i.e. 4th June, 1998 at 11.25 a.m. The special report reached the Illaqua Magistrate on 5th June, 1998 at about 10.35 a.m. Hence, there was a delay of 24 hours in reporting the matter to the police. Mukhtiar Singh had suffered following three simple injuries: “1. A linear cut injury on left fore-arm near ulnar end at wrist joint, 3x1x1 cm fresh bleeding was present, vertically placed. On X-ray, no fracture was seen. 2. A linear cut injury on scalp, 8x1x1 cm, 6 cm vertically above left ear, horizontally placed, fresh bleeding was present. Mukhtiar Singh had suffered following three simple injuries: “1. A linear cut injury on left fore-arm near ulnar end at wrist joint, 3x1x1 cm fresh bleeding was present, vertically placed. On X-ray, no fracture was seen. 2. A linear cut injury on scalp, 8x1x1 cm, 6 cm vertically above left ear, horizontally placed, fresh bleeding was present. On X-ray no fracture was seen. 3. An abrasion on dorsum of left great toe, 3x3 cm, fresh bleeding was present.” 14. A perusal of the injuries suffered by Mukhtiar Singh shows that injury No.1 was on the wrist, injury No.3 was an abrasion and injury No.2 was a linear cut above the left ear. Civil Hospital, Balachaur and Police Station, Balachaur were closely situated. It has come in the testimony of Mukhtiar Singh that they had reached Civil Hospital, Balachaur at 10.00 a.m. on the day of occurrence. At that time, Bant Kaur, Dara Singh and Amarjit Singh accused were also present. He had seen them in the hospital. Mukhtiar Singh stated that he did not remember as to whether police met him on 3rd June, 1998 or not. It has come in the testimony of SI Mohinder Singh PW-9 that on 3rd June, 1998, he had received medico legal reports of Lakhbir Singh, Jarnail Kaur, Bant Kaur, Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh in the Police Station. Even though, the Investigating Officer had stated that the doctor had declared injured as unfit to make statement, the matter of fact remains as to no report was given by anybody to the Police for 24 hours, even though the Investigating Officer had visited the hospital on 3rd June, 1998. In this context, it is to be noticed that from the side of accused, Amarjit Singh, Dara Singh and Bant Kaur had suffered injuries. Their presence at the spot is stamped. No other accused had suffered any injury, therefore, a possibility cannot be ruled out that due to consultations and deliberations on the next day, the number of accused was inflated. Thus, as a matter of abundant caution, benefit of doubt can be extended to appellants Harbhajan Singh, Ajit Singh, Chanan Singh and Nasib Singh. However, participation of Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh at the spot is proved, as they had suffered injuries and had also explained their presence in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Both of them had suffered superficial injuries. However, participation of Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh at the spot is proved, as they had suffered injuries and had also explained their presence in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Both of them had suffered superficial injuries. They had not given their version at the earliest. Therefore, it cannot be held that the complainant party was the aggressor, as it had acted in its self-defence. The complainant Mukhtiar Singh PW-3 had stated in the FIR that they had also caused injuries to the accused. Thus, sufficient explanation was furnished by him at the earliest. However, case of the appellant Bant Kaur is on a different pedestal. On the day of occurrence, she was aged about 60 years and she was the mother of Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh. She stated that she had intervened to save her sons, when they were being caused injuries by the complainant party. In that process, she had also suffered injuries. Once, benefit of doubt has been granted to the other accused, it can be safely inferred that Bant Kaur, being an old lady, has also been falsely implicated. Thus, benefit of doubt is also extended to Bant Kaur. 15. However, I find no merit in the appeal preferred by Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh and the same is hereby dismissed. Amarjit Singh has been rightly held guilty of an offence punishable under Section 326 IPC, however, conviction of Dara Singh is modified from Section 326 read with Section 149 IPC to that of Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC. 16. At this stage, counsel for the appellants has submitted that occurrence, in the present case, pertains to the year 1998, and Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh have suffered mental pain and agony of a protracted trial. Therefore, the same be construed as a mitigating circumstance and some reduction in the sentence be considered. I find merit in this alternative prayer made by counsel for the appellants. Accordingly, sentence awarded to the appellants Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh under Section 326 IPC is reduced from three years to two years rigorous imprisonment. 17. With the above modifications in the quantum of sentence of appellants Amarjit Singh and Dara Singh, the appeal qua them is dismissed. However, other appellants are granted benefit of doubt and the appeal qua them stands disposed of accordingly. -----------0.K.B.0------------