RAVI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated May 16, 1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, whereby the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the prosecution case are that on May 29, 1996 a quarrel had taken place betwecn Hans Raj deceased and accused Ravi Kumar, who is the servant of one Gandharv Singh on a very trivial matter within the revenue limits of village Jadla, which the parties belonged to Hans Raj deceased reported the incident to his brothers Mohan Lai (P.W.3) and Ram Lubhaya. On May 30, 1996 at about 7 A.M. when the three brothers were present in the Hada Rori of village Jadla, Gandharav Singh called Hans Raj to get the dispute settled with his servant Ravi Kumar accused. Mohan lal and Hans Raj followed Gandharav Singh to his tubewell. Ravi Kumar accused and Bahadur Singh (P.W.4) were already present there. Gandharav Singh placed a Dhangu behind him. When the talks were going on, a quarrel between Ravi Kumar accused and Hans Raj deceased again ensued. Ravi Kumar picked up the Dhangu placed behind Gandharav Sino and gave two blows on the head of Hans Raj deceased. Hans Raj fell down. Mohan Lal (P.W.3) raised an alarm. In the meantime Ram Lubhaya also reached there. Accused Ravi Kumar then made good his escape. Hans Raj was taken to the Primary Health Centre, Jadla by Mohan Lal and Ram Lubhaya. After giving first aid, Hans Raj was referred to Civil Hospital, Nawanshahr.

(3.) Dr. Harbans Lai Mann (P.W.1) medico-legally examined Hans Raj at 9.05 A.M. on May 30, 1996. The doctor found two injuries - (i) incised wound on the right side of the scalp and (ii) swelling on the occipital frontal region. Both the injuries were kept under observation. The probable duration of the injuries was within two hours. Injury No. 1 was the result of a sharp-edged weapon while injury No. 2 was the result of a blunt weapon the doctor opined that injury No. 1 could not be caused with a Dhangu (Ex. PI). However, possibility of sustaining injury No. 2 with the said Dhangu could not be ruled out. Hans Raj was unfit to make a statement and was referred to the P.G.I. Chandigarh.