SATBIR SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the following facts :

(2.) The prosecution in support of its case examined inter-alia, PW-1 Dr. Jagmal Singh, who had medico-legally examined Amrit Lal accused at 8.55 P.M. on 9.7.1998 and had found seven simple injuries on his person; PW-2 Dr. Surinder Kumar, who alongwith Dr. S.P.S. Bhatia had conducted the post-mortem on the dead body and had found four injuries thereon and had opined that injury No. 2, which was a depressed fracture of the skull had been detected only after feeling the same; PW-7 Dr. Rajan Kohli, Medical Officer of the Community Health Centre, Pehowa, who had examined Raj Kumar for his injuries at 10.00 P.M. on 8.7.1998 and had found two injuries on his person and also examined Jai Bhagwan at 10.30 P.M. and had found three injuries on his person with injury No. 2 being declared to be grievous in nature on X-ray examination and further examined Sat Pal on the same day and found three simple injuries on his person; two injured eye-witnesses Jai Bhagwan and Sat Pal PWs 8 and 9 respectively, who gave the eye-witness account of what had happened; and PW-14 Inspector Ram Chander, the Investigating Officer.

(3.) The prosecution case was then put to the accused and their statements recorded under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein they denied all the allegations leveled against them and pleaded that Raj Kumar and the others had been celebrating the birth of a son to Raj Kumar's daughter and after taking liquor had got into a fight with 2/3 persons of the village, who were also under the influence of liquor and that it was in the process of the aforesaid quarrel that the injuries had been suffered by Raj Kumar, whereas the injuries on Jai Bhagwan and Sat Pal were self-suffered or suffered by friendly hands. They, however, led no evidence in defence.