STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. IQBAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the State of Punjab feeling dissatisfied against judgment dated July 16, 2001 passed by the learned Magistrate, Bathinda, whereby respondents No.1 and 2 were acquitted under Section 326 IPC but convicted under Sections 324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and they were released on probation in view of the provisions contained in the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

(2.) IN nut -shell, the case of the prosecution as unfolded by Mohinder Singh son of Jang Singh resident of Ghuda District Bathinda is that there was a turn of water in Tellan Wala Field which was to be taken by him from his brother Iqbal Singh at 7:29 A.M. In the meantime, his daughter Baljit Kaur also came in the field. At about 7:30 A.M., he asked Iqbal Singh and Balkaran Singh to provide him the turn of water but Iqbal Singh who was armed with Gandasa stated that they were already searching for him, whereafter Iqbal Singh dealt a Gandasa blow hitting Mohinder Singh on his right leg. Balkaran Singh who was armed with Dah dealt a blow on the left leg of Mohinder Singh. In the meantime, Iqbal Singh inflicted two successive blows with his Gandasa which resulted into injuries on the left leg and thigh of Mohinder Singh. On sustaining injuries, he fell down and raised noise which attracted his daughter Baljit Kaur to the spot but during that period, Balkaran Singh again dealt a blow of his Dah while shouting that today they would cut him into pieces. He fell unconscious. Both the accused fled from the spot with their respective weapons. Then his daughter made arrangement for a vehicle and he was got admitted in a hospital. On the basis of the aforesaid statement by Mohinder Singh, the instant FIR was registered against the accused persons.

(3.) IN support of its case, the prosecution examined Dr. Swaran Singh/PW -1, Surinder Pal/PW -2, Mohinder Singh/PW -3, Baljit Kaur/PW -4, HC Gurtej Singh/PW -5, ASI Nachhattar Singh/PW - 6 and ASI Mukhtiar Singh/PW -7. Thereafter, the prosecution closed its evidence.