JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For causing the death of Balkar Singh, Jamail Singh, the appellant before us. Modan Singh and Teja Singh were tried for and convicted of the offence under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code by the Session Judge, Bhatinda. In appeal, the high Court acquitted Teja Singh but upheld the convictions of the appellant and Mohan singh. Aggrieved thereby, only the appellate has filed this appeal.

(2.) From the impugned judgment we notice that the High Court has recorded a categorical finding that the plot of land on which the incident took place was in exclusive possession of the accused persons and that on the fateful day the deceased along with his brother Avtar Singh (P. W. 1) , father ajaib Singh (now dead) and one Kulwinder singh had gone to that plot and started ploughing it with a tractor. The High Court held that it is at that time that the accused persons appeared there and assaulted Balkar Singh with the weapons, they were carrying. In the context of the above findings with which we are in complete agreement there cannot be any manner of doubt that the accused persons assaulted the deceased in exercise of their right of private defence of their property in which the deceased and other members of his family had criminally trespassed. However, their such right, though exercised in good faith and without premeditation, did not extend to death as the offence committed by the deceased did not attract Section 103, indian Penal Code Considering this aspect of the matter and the nature of weapons used and the number of injuries inflicted, we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of Exception 2 of Section 300, Indian Penal Code

(3.) For the foregoing discussion we set aside the conviction of the appellant under section 302/34, Indian Penal Code and convict him under section 304 (Part III) , Indian Penal Code For the conviction so recorded we sentence him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. The appeal is, thus, disposed of.