PRITAM CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred by the convict/appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 30.9.2005, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 2003/47 of 2004, convicting the appellant/accused/convict under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code sentencing him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and sentencing him to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- for offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act and in default of payment of fine, the appellant/convict was to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years and 1 year respectively, however, both the sentences were to run concurrently. The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant Ishwar Dass was having litigation of land with accused and in that respect quarrel had taken place between them. On 1.9.2002, while the complainant was going to his house from Kuthera and had reached in village Dhaulana Brahmana by short cut at about 4:30 PM, the accused came from the bushes with a dagger (Khukhri) in his hand and attacked him on his neck, back and chest, as a result of which he fell down and blood started oozing. On hearing the cries of the victim, many villagers assembled there and the victim was taken to Zonal Hospital, Hamirpur for treatment. On information by Dr. Ashok Kaushal, police arrived and Rapat No. 21 Ext. PW-12/A was recorded. An application (Ext. PW-1/A) was moved by ASI Swami Ram to the Medical Officer for obtaining the opinion of the doctor to record the statement of the injured/victim. ASI Swami Ram recorded the statement (Ext. PW-2/A) of the complainant/injured Ishwar Dass. In that respect, F.I.R. Ext. PW-12/B was recorded. Injured/victim was medically examined vide MLC Ext. PW-1/D and for treatment, the victim was referred to IGMC, Shimla. Accused was arrested and recoveries from the spot were made and after investigation, the accused was charged for the aforesaid offences.

(2.) In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as 16 prosecution witnesses, whereas, accused through his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., denied the prosecution case and the accused also took defence that for land dispute he has falsely been implicated by the complainant, as such, did not plead any evidence in defence.

(3.) Pw-1 (Dr. Ashok Kaushal) had examined injured Ishwar Dass (PW-2) and has noted the injuries and has also opined as follows:--