Ganga Dass Vs. State of Haryana  INSC 467 (2 November 1993)
K. JAYACHANDRA (J) REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J) RAY, G.N. (J) CITATION: 1994 SCC Supl.
(1) 534 JT 1993 Supl. 17 1993 SCALE (4)309
Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J.- Special leave
appellant, who figured as original accused 1, was tried along with three others
under Sections 302 and 302/34 IPC. The trial Judge acquitted the other three
accused but convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC simpliciter.
convicted accused namely the appellant filed an appeal challenging his
conviction and the State also filed an appeal against the acquittal of the
other three accused. Both the appeals were dismissed by the High Court.
Singh, aged about 65 years, is the deceased in the case. On November 18, 1988 he had gone to Mandir to worship
where at about 7.45
a.m. he was attacked.
His son Dharampal, PW 6 reached the Mandir and he also found his brothers there
at the Mandir. By then the deceased was injured and on being enquired the
deceased told PW 6 that the appellant hit him with an iron pipe while he was
worshipping. The other eyewitnesses PWs 12 and 13 also informed PW 6 about the
occurrence. Thereupon PW 6 went and informed the police. The injured was
removed to the hospital and was examined by PW 11, a Doctor at the Primary
Health Centre. Thereafter the injured was shifted to P.G.1., Chandigarh. PW 15, a Neuro-Surgeon at P.G.1., Chandigarh carried out an operation on November 20, 1988 on the injured deceased. However,
he died on December 5,
1988 as a result of
head injury due to septicaemia, renal failure, respiratory failure and finally
cardio-respiratory arrest. An altered FIR was issued and the charge-sheet was
laid after due investigation.
accused denied the offence and gave some evidence to show that there was some
enmity. Both the courts below having believed the evidence of the eyewitnesses
convicted the appellant who was responsible for inflicting the blow on the
counsel for the appellant submits that even if the entire prosecution case is
to be accepted, an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC is not made out.
find considerable force in this submission. As stated above the occurrence took
place on November 18,
1988 and the deceased
died 18 days later on December
5, 1988 due to septicaemia
and other complications. The Doctor found only one injury on the head and that
was due to single blow inflicted with an iron pipe not with any sharp-edged
regard to the circumstances of the case, it is difficult to hold that the
appellant intended to cause death nor it can be said that he intended to cause
that particular injury. In any event the medical evidence shows that the
injured deceased was operated but unfortunately some complications set in and
ultimately he died because of cardiac failure etc. Under these circumstances,
we set aside the conviction of 536 the appellant under Section 302 IPC and the
sentence of imprisonment for life awarded thereunder. Instead we convict him
under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentence him to undergo six years' RI. The
sentence of fine of Rs 2000 along with default clause is confirmed. Accordingly
the appeal is partly allowed.