RAJ PAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.9.2002/order of sentence dated 20.9.2002 passed by the court of learned Sessions Judge Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri whereby he convicted and sentenced Raj Pal accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with a further direction that the amount of fine shall be paid to Gurnam Singh injured as compensation and acquitted the accused of the other offences.

(2.) Shortly put, facts of the prosecution case are that on 15.2.2002 at about 7.00 a.m. Gurnam Singh son of Jinda Ram had gone to ease himself on tubewell situated in his fields. In the meanwhile, Raj Pal accused came from the side of village Harnauli. As soon as, he reached near Gurnam Singh, he took out the gandasi from the fold of his blanket with which he had covered his body and delivered a gandasi blow, which landed on the back side of head of Gurnam Singh, who took turn. The accused dealt another blow which rested on the front side of the head of Gurnam Singh, who fell down on the ground and in a bid to save himself, he raised his hands. The accused caused injuries on his hands as well as arm due to which, one of his finger was also cut. On being raised alarm Jinda Ram came at the spot. On catching his sight, the accused decamped from the spot with his weapon while leaving behind a threat that today he has been saved, but he would be taught a lesson on some other day. The case was registered. In due course, the accused was put under arrest. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri who committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial of the accused. The accused was charged under Section 307/506 I.P.C., to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial. To bring home guilt against the accused, the prosecution examined PW-1 Rameshwar Dass S.I. , PW-2 Abey Ram HC, PW-3 Raj Kumar Patwari, PW-4 Dr. Mamta Goel, PW-5 Ayub Khan, PW-6 Ilam Chand, PW-7 Jinda Ram complainant-father of the injured, PW-8 Gurnam Singh injured, PW-9 Swaran Ram HC Investigator and closed its case.

(3.) When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against him and pleaded false implication. He has come up with the following plea:-