CHELA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chela Singh, aged 65 years, has filed this appeal against his conviction under Part-I of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment awarded by the Sessions Judge, Ferozepore, on the finding that on the forenoon of 15th March, 1970, the appellant had intentionally caused fatal injuries with an axe to the co-causing his death and he had exceeded his right of self-defence in doing so. The appellant's sons Jagir Singh and Kaky Singh, who had been tried along with the appellant had been acquitted as they were found to have remained within the proper limits while exercising such right of defence of their father.

(2.) The appellant and the deceased owned adjoining fields and there was a dispute going on between them over the question of the demarcation of the common boundary. Security proceedings had also been taken against the deceased on the application of the appellant. It is, however, admitted by the prosecution that the piece of land over which the fight took place that day was actually in possession of Chela Singh on the date of occurrence. Machhi Singh had tried to disturb the cultivation of this land by Chela Singh and his sons and had attacked Chela Singh with a light stick, Exhibit P.O./2. Chela Singh appellant thereupon picked up a spear or an axe lying near at hand. His sons and co-accused Jagin Singh was also described to have armed himself in a similar manner. The post-mortem examination of Machhi Singh's dead body had revealed that there were eight injuries on his person and that three of these injuries had resulted in cuts of the vertabral column and the spinal cord at three different places. Two of these injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature of cause death. Machhi Singh had died at the spot within a few second of sustaining these injuries.

(3.) Chela Singh appellant had also been medically examined and was found to have three simple injuries on his person. These had been caused with a blunt weapon. The prosecution had not tried to make any secret of these injuries and it had been mentioned in the first information report as well that the deceased had given a few blows with a light stick to the appellant.