LAWS(P&H)-1985-3-66

GURMEL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On March 20, 1985
GURMEL SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was tried, convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months, under section 32d, Indian Penal Code, and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under section 324, Indian Penal Code, by the trial Court. His convictions and sentences were upheld by the lower appellate Court. He came up in revision to this Court and the revision petition was admitted to hearing by B.S. Yadav, J.

(2.) THE petitioner is alleged to have caused injuries to his uncle Bachittar Singh on 5th June, 1981 at about 9.30 P.M. The petitioner was irrigating his fields. At the time in question, admittedly, the petitioner had the turn of water. The turn of Bachittar Singh, who is an injured witness, was to start at 10.00 P.M. after the turn of the petitioner. He is alleged to have gone to the field of the petitioner at 9.30 P.M. and asked for turn of the water. In return the petitioner gave three injuries to Bachittar Singh, out of which injuries Nos. 1 and 2 were grievous. The injured was medically examined by Dr. S.S. Walia (P.W. 1) on 5.6.1981 at 10.20 P.M. F.I.R (Exhibit PB/1) was lodged at police Station City, Muktsar, on 6.6.1981 at 12.40 A.M., on the basis of the statement of injured Bachittar Singh. The eye witness account has been given by Bachittar Singh (P.W. 2) who is a stamped witness, (Ghrjant Singh W 3) and Mithu Singh ( P.W. 4). According to the site -plan (Exhibit PE) the occurrence has taken place in the Pehi leading to the field of the complainant.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the case of the parties is that the time of the occurrence it was the petitioner's turn of water and he had the right to irrigate his fields Bachittar Singh injured, who is the uncle of the petitioner, tried to interfere with the right of the petitioner and the petitioner caused injuries to defend his right to property. In this view of the matter, I give benefit of doubt to the petitioner and set aside his conviction and sentence. Conviction set aside.