CHANAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21.5.1998/order of sentence dated 25.5.1998 passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa whereby he convicted and sentenced Chanan Singh, Naib Singh and Gurdev Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each under Section 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine the defaulter's to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and were further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. each with a further direction that the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Shortly put, facts of the prosecution case are that on 7.9.1994 Sandhura Singh lodged a complaint stating that he is resident of village Rori and is an agriculturist. On 7.9.1994 at about 9.30 P.M. he was returning home after having purchased the medicines from the market. When he reached in front of the shop of Hem Raj, he noticed the accused Chanan Singh, Naib Singh and Gurdev Singh grappling with his brother Hazura Singh. The accused Gurdev Singh had caught hold of his brother from his hair whereas his above mentioned co- accused were giving fist/slap blows on his brother's person. When he intervened to rescue his brother, meanwhile, Baldev Singh also came at the spot. The accused Gurdev Singh and Naib Singh yelled that a lesson be taught for intervening physically. Thereafter, the accused Chanan Singh took out a sword and gave a blow in his abdomen. He (Sandhura Singh) fell down on the ground. The accused dragged him and continued giving fist blows. On being raised alarm, all the three accused decamped from the spot with their respective weapons. In fact, there was a dispute between Hazura Singh and the accused regarding appointment of a 'mahant' in the gurdwara of the village. On the basis of this complaint, formal F.I.R. was registered. Sub Inspector Shivdan Singh prepared rough site plan showing place of the occurrence and arrested the accused. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sirsa who committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial of the accused.

(3.) On commitment, the accused were charged under Section 307/324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial.