(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court upholding the conviction of the appellants for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC). Though they were charged of several other offences they were acquitted of those charges. In the appeal filed by the appellants before the High Court there were several co-accused i.e. Jagdish, Devinder, Balwan and Murti Devi. Accused Jagdish and Devinder who were convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 and Section 452, IPC. The other two accused persons i.e. Balwan and Murti were acquitted of all charges.
(3.) Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows : On March 20, 2000 at 4.00 p.m. Man Singh was sitting near the gate of his house, while members of his family were present inside the house. Hawa Singh, Parkash and Jagdish armed with swords, Balwan and Devender @ Raju armed with lathis, their sister Murti armed with rapri and their mother Gindori armed with pharsa came there. They entered the house and upon exhortation that a lesson be taught to Man Singh for getting them convicted, Hawa Singh opened the attack with a sword with which he hit Man Singh on the head. This was followed by Parkash giving a blow with his sword which hit Man Singh in the middle of his head. Jagdish also gave a sword blow which hit Man Singh on the back of the head. When alarm was raised Balwan hit Sajjan (PW-7) with a lathi on his forehead above left eye. Devender @ Raju hit Sajjan (PW-7) with a lathi on his left leg. Murti and Gindori also inflicted injuries on Sajjan. They also caused grievous injuries to Anju and Sard. Sajjans younger brother Krishan and his uncle Azad Singh reached the spot to rescue them from the assailants. During the course of rescuing the injured, Azad Singh also sustained injuries. Some injuries were also inflicted by complainant party on the accused in self defence before the accused retreated from the spot with their respective weapons. After the occurrence was over, the injured were taken to Civil Hospital, Bhiwani. On reaching the hospital Man Singh succumbed to his injuries whereas the injured were medico legally examined. Anju and Sajjan were medico legally examined by Dr. Arjun Chander Yadav (PW-1) at 6.35 p.m. and 8.15 respectively. Anju was found to have various injuries on her right hand. The case was registered at Police Station Sadar, Bhiwani on the basis of the statement of Sajjan (PW-7) recorded by ASI Suraj Bhan at 10.50 p.m. on the same evening at General Hospital, Bhiwani. FIR was recorded in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302, 148, 149, 452 and 323, IPC. Special report was delivered at 3.50 a.m. on March 21, 2000. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer took up the investigation by first preparing the inquest report on the dead body of deceased Man Singh. After the inquest proceedings, post mortem was conducted by Dr. Ramesh Kumar (PW-4). The Medical Officer found several injuries on the body of Man Singh. In the opinion of the Medical Officer the death was caused due to hamorrhage and shock and injury to the brain. The accused were arrested on March 30, 2000 by Inspector Darshan Lal (PW-11). On the basis of their respective disclosure statements, certain weapons were recovered from possession of the accused i.e. axes from Parkash and Hawa Singh, rapris from Jagdish and Devender @ Raju and a lathi from Balwan. After completion of the investigation all the accused barring Murti were sent up for trial. Murti was placed in column 2 of the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code). She was subsequently summoned to stand trial under Section 319 of the Code. Charge was first framed against the accused on July 19, 2000 under Section 302 read with Section 149, IPC and other related offences. Charges were reframed on January 25, 2001. By this time Murti Devi had been summoned as accused. Finally charge was reframed on April 15, 2004. All the accused persons were found guilty and convicted. Before the High Court the specific stand was that Section 302 had no application because there was free fight and the occurrence took place in course of sudden quarrel. The High Court accepted that there was a sudden quarrel and there were injuries on both sides. But it took the view that the appellants were apparently the aggressors and, therefore, the conviction under Section 302, IPC was in order.