SUKHA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment/order of sentence dated 8.2.1997 passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur whereby he convicted and sentenced the accused Mukhtiar Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 I.P.C. or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and also sentenced Sukha Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 I.P.C. or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment Criminal Appeal No. 143 SB of 1997 2 for six months and also sentenced Bohar Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 326 read with Section 34 I.P.C. or in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months with a further direction that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Succinctly put, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 26.12.1995 around 7.30 A.M. Sukhdev Singh alongtwith his wife Simarjit Kaur was going to irrigate land measuring 3 1/2 acres, which they had taken on lease from Virsa Singh son of Arjan Singh resident of village Awan. Sukhev Singh was ambling ahead of her. When Sukhdev Singh neared mustard and barseen (cattle fodder) field of Subha Singh son of Behel Singh, resident of same village, meanwhile, Mukhtiar Singh duly armed with a kirpan, his brother Sukhdev Singh armed with a kulhari and his other brother Bohar Singh carrying 'sota' emerged out of the mustard field suddenly. Mukhtiar Singh challenged Sukhdev Singh to run away in any direction he wished, as he has purchased a fight by quarrelling with them and he will not be left alive. On hearing so, Simarjit Kaur started running towards her husband. The accused Mukhtiar Singh gave a kirpan blow, which landed on the head of Sukhdev Singh. Bohar Singh dealt soti blow which rested on the left arm of Sukhdev Singh, who while yelling "Bachao Bachao" fell down on the ground. In a bid to save her husband, Simarjit Kaur fell upon him, but the accused by throwing her away caused injuries to Sukhdev Singh with their respective weapons. This occurrence was witnessed by Tehal Singh son of Budha Singh who had arrived at the spot. All the three accused decamped from the spot with their respective weapons. The motive behind the occurrence was that a quarrel had ensued Criminal Appeal No. 143 SB of 1997 3 between Sukhdev Singh and the accused 4/5 days prior to this occurrence and the same was got settled with the intervention of the panchayat. The accused Mukhtiar Singh and others nursed a grudge and caused injuries to Sukhdev Singh, who being unfit to make the statement, the case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Simarjit Kaur. In due course, the accused were put under arrest. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur who committed the case to the court of Sessions for trial of the accused.

(3.) The accused Mukhtiar Singh, Bohar Singh and Sukha Singh were charged under Sections 307/326 read with Section 34 IPC to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. In order to bring home guilt to the accused, the prosecution examined PW-1 Dr. Harbans Lal Garg, PW-2 Simarjit Kaur eye witness, PW-3 Sukhdev Singh injured, PW-4 Dr. Vikas Priya, PW-5 Dr. Som Dutt, PW-6 HC Gurdeep Singh, PW-7 ASI Harbhaj and closed its evidence by tendering the Chemical Examiner's report. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. all the accused denied the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them and pleaded innocence as well as false implication. Accused Mukhtiar Singh has come up with the following plea:-