KULDIP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals (Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 1992, Kuldip Kumar and another versus State of Himachal Pradesh; and Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1993, State of Himachal Pradesh v. Kuldip Kumar and another) are directed against the judgment of Sessions Judge in S. Tr. No. 54U/7 of 1992/89, dated 19/10/1992 whereby accused Kuldip Kumar has been convicted for of fence under Sections 32/307/324 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 and accused Kamal Dev for offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Prithi Chand died during the trial of the case. Ac cused Kuldip Kumar has sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay compensation of Rs. 4,000.00 to Smt. Nirmala, mother of deceased Ajay Sharma, for offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code; rig orous imprisonment for five years and to pay com pensation of Rs. 4,000.00 payable to Smt. Nirmala, wife of deceased Sat Pal, for offence under Section 307, Indian Penal Code; rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay compensation of Rs. 2,000.00 payable to Smt. Nirmala Devi, for offence under Section 324, Indian Penal Code; and rigorous im prisonment for one year for offence under Section 27, Indian Arms Act. All the sentences of imprison ment have been ordered to run concurrently allow ing benefit of set off under Section 428, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 1992 has been preferred by the accused for their acquittal, while Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1993 has been preferred by the State of Himachal Pradesh for conviction and sentence for the offences they were charged. Now, we discuss the facts of the case briefly.

(2.) Sat Pal (deceased was the head of the family. Wife is Smt. Nirmal (injured), daughters are Alka (injured) and Arti (deceased), son is Ajay Kumar (deceased) - five in all. The house of this family is located nearby the village common path, on the other side of which is located the land of accused Prithi Chand (died during the trial) and his sons accused Kuldip Kumar and Kamal Dev.

(3.) On 14/11/1988, deceased Ajay Sharma was pruning the branches of hedge on this path in order to remove the obstruction that had been cre ated by them in this path. Accused Kamal Dev appeared on the scene and asked deceased Ajay Sharma not to do so since the same belonged to his family. Deceased Ajay Sharma replied that he would continue to prune the hedges since he had been doing so in the past also. Accused Kamal Dev exchanged hot words with deceased Ajay Sharma and thereaf ter left towards his house proclaiming that he would teach deceased Ajay Sharma a lesson. Soon thereaf ter, accused Kamal Dev, Kuldip Kumar came out of their house and reached at the place where deceased Ajay Sharma was pruning the hedges. Accused Kuldip Kumar was carrying a gun while accused kamal Dev had an iron road in his hand. Armed with an axe, accused Prithi Chand also followed them.