GURDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against judgment and order of an Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, dated August 23, 1989, by which he convicted the appellant of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal code having murdered one Murlidhar with a Kirpan and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00 and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and also sentenced him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 27 of the Arms Act Appellant has filed the appeal challenging his convictions and sentences.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that Murlidhar deceased was a three wheeler scooter driver and was resident of Block No.5, Nehru Nagar, New Delhi. On June 10, 1983, he had a quarrel with one Ishwar in front of the house of Ishwar. They were exchanging abuses and the time was about 10.15 P.M. The appellant-Gurdeep Singh, who is also known as Bhola alongwith Ram Saroop reached the place and they were all known to each other and Bhola had made efforts to pacify the said two quarrelling persons. Even Ram Saroop also asked them not to exchange abuses and Ishwar was pacified and he went away to his house, whereas Murlidhar did not reconcile to the efforts made by the appellant in pacifying Ishwar. He caught hold of the appellant from his collars and started abusing him asking as to who he was to intervene and helped in getting released Ishwar. In that position Murlidhar and the appellant proceeded towards Block No.2 .while exchaning abuses and hot words and Murlidhar and the appellant grappled and thereupon the appellant is stated to have taken out his kirpan and stabbed Murlidhar in his stomach and as Murlidhar fell down the appellant landed eleven more blows on different parts of the body of Murlidhar. The occurrence is stated to have been witnessed by PW8 Jai Parkash, PW9 Harkesh Kumar and PW14 Ram Sarup and some other persons. On being informed of stabbing of his son Murlidhar, Kishan Chand PW1 came to the spot and he alongwith Manjeet Singh PW12 took the injured Murlidhar in the three wheeler scooter to the hospital and on his way Murlidhar made a dying declaration that he had been stabbed by Bhola-appellant. Murlidhar was declared drought dead' at the hospital and his post- mortern was done by Dr.Chander Kant PWIO. He found 12 injuries possible with the kirpan recovered from the appel- lant and held the injuries to the lung of the deceased sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature vide Ex.PW10/C. The fact that Murlidhar had been killed at the said time, place, by the appellant is not challenged. Even the appellant in his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure admitted all the material facts as to how the quarrel took place but he came out with the version that someone had taken out a knife and tried to attack the appellant and he snatched that knife and inflicted injuries on Murlidhar and he had no intention to kill Murlidhar as he had lost self control when he was being not only beaten by the deceased but also was being given filthy abuses involving his mother and sister. He took the plea of self-defence. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the plea of self-defence and has held the appellant guilty of offence of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The appellant could not engage a counsel to argue the appeal before us and on his request, we had requested Mr.Rajiv Awasthi, Advocate, to rep resent the appellant on State expense as Amicus Curiae. We have heard the arguments in detail. We must express our appreciation for the hard work done by Mr.Awasthi in advancing quite able arguments.