Jagga Singh & ANR.
Vs State of Punjab
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel
for the parties. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of
the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated04.12.2006. The facts have been set
out in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating the same here
except where necessary. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 24.4.92 at about
8.30 p.m., the 3 accused came to the house of Raja Singh. Later, one of them
fired at Baggar Singh on his right thigh. Baggar Singh fell down. Then the
accused took away the deceased Hoshiar Singh towards village Heerawala. After
about 20 minutes the sound of 3 or 4shots was heard. Next morning the dead body
of Hoshiar Singh was found.
The trial Court convicted
Jagga Singh to 7 years R. I.and a fine under Section 307 IPC. Jagtar Singh and
Kaka Singh were also sentenced to 7 years R.I. and a fine. The appeals of the
accused to the High Court were dismissed, but the appeal of the State regarding
acquittal of the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 was allowed, and
they were convicted under Section 302. Hence, this appeal. On the facts of the
case, we are of the opinion that the appellants are entitled to get the benefit
of doubt so far as offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code is concerned because
the prosecution case was that Hoshiar Singh was taken away by the accused and
after 15/20 minutes gun shots were heard.
However, the post
mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased found that there were only lacerated
wounds. There was no gunshot wound on the body of the deceased. Hence, some
doubt is created in the prosecution version regarding the charge under Section
302IPC whose benefit will go to the accused. Thus the appellants are entitled
to get the benefit of doubt on that charge and consequently they are acquitted
of charge under Section 302 IPC. However, we are of the opinion that the
appellants are guilty under Section 325 IPC read with Section 34 IPC because
admittedly a gun shot was fired at Baggar Singh which hit him in the leg.
On that count we award
the sentence of the period already undergone by the appellants. The impugned
judgment of the High Court is modified to the extent stated above. The Appeal is
disposed of accordingly. On 14.09.2007 this Court had ordered that the sentence
of imprisonment imposed on the appellants shall remain suspended during the
pendency of the Appeal provided each of them furnishes personal bond in the sum
of Rs. 20,000/-(Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties in the sum of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the trial court. Their
bonds are discharged accordingly.
.......................J.
(MARKANDEY KATJU)
.......................J.
(GYAN SUDHA MISRA)
NEW
DELHI;
FEBRUARY
03, 2011.
Back
