Charan Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Grewal, J. (Oral)

Charan Singh petitioner was convicted under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/. In default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months vide judgment dated 621986 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dassuya. He was further convicted under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Jarnail Singh brother and coaccused of Charan Singh was convicted under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and pay a fine of Rs. 200/. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. He was further convicted under Section 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/. In default of payment of fine he was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. On appeal the order of conviction and sentence passed against Jarnail Singh was set aside vide order of Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur dated 25.3.1986. The conviction of Charan Singh under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code was upheld but the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for four months. The sentence of fine and in default thereof was, however, maintained. The conviction of Charan Singh petitioner was changed from one under Section 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code to one under Section 326 of the Indian Penal code and the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for nine months to rigorous imprisonment for six months.The sentence of fine or in default thereof was, however, maintained. Aggrieved against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, this revision petition has been filed by Charan Singh petitioner.

In brief facts of the prosecution case, are, that both Charan Singh and his brother and coaccused Jarnail Singh (since acquitted by the appellate Court) suspected that Sajjan Singh complainant was a police informer and had given information concerning illicit distillation of illicit liquor by the said accused to the police, and, they were apprehended in number of cases under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914. On account of that grudge the accused wanted to wreak vengeance on Sajjan Singh. On 10121984, Sajjan Singh went to the house of Joginder Singh and after taking lunch, was in the process of returning. At about 5.30 p.m. as Sajjan Singh came out in the street from the house of Joginder singh, both Charan Singh and Jarnail Singh accused armed with Dataras waylaid him while he was carrying his six months old nephew in his left arm. Charan Singh raised lalkara exhorting his coaccused to teach lesson to Sajjan Singh for giving information to the police resulting in registration of excise cases against them and further proclaimed that they would teach a lesson to Sajjan Singh. Charan Singh opened the attack and grave a Datar blow to Sajjan Singh, who raised his right arm with a view to save himself and his nephew, hitting Sajjan Singh on his right arm with its blunt side. Jarnail Singh gave a Datar blow from sharp side hitting Sajjan Singh on his right arm. On the alarm raised by Sajjan Singh, Waryam Singh and Desa Singh came to the spot and rescued Sajjan Singh. Waryam Singh actually caught hold of Charan Singh and saved Sajjan Singh from his clutches. Thereafter both the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons. After arranging a tractor, Bhajan Singh took Sajjan Singh injured first to Civil Dispensary at Maini and then to Primary Health Centre, Tanda where, the injured was medically examined by Dr. Dewan Chand on the same day at 9.45 p.m. who found the following injuries on his person :

Incised wound 2 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.3 cm right forearm running transversely and was 11 cm below right elbow joint, wound was with fresh blood. Kept under observation till Xray for bony lesion.

Swelling tenderness right forearm joint and 7 cm area with limitations for movements of right joint. Wound was kept under observation for Xray purpose.

Both the injuries were declared grievous was a result of Xray examination which revealed chip fracture of middle shaft of right ulna and fracture of lower end of right ulna. After completion of the investigation, the accused were challanged, tried, convicted and sentenced, as stated earlier.

The learned counsel for the parties were heard.

On behalf of the petitioner, it was rightly submitted that Jarnail Singh coaccused of the petitioner against whom specific charge under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code was framed by the trial magistrate, was acquitted by the appellate Court, and it would not be safe to convict Charan Singh petitioner under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Jarnail Singh who has been attributed injury with a sharp side of Datar on the right hand of Sajjan Singh has since been acquitted by the appellate Court. The State admittedly has not filed any appeal against the aforesaid acquittalof Jarnail Singh coaccused of the present petitioner and the said order has become final. Charan Singh petitioner has been attributed only a single injury during the entire occurrence on the right hand of Sajjan Singh near his wrist, for which injury he has been rightly convicted by the Courts below.

Besides the learned appellate Court had gravely erred in convicting Charan Singh petitioner under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code on the assumption that he being armed with a Datar could very well cause both the injuries to Sajjan Singh injured. Since the injury attributed to Charan Singh on the person of Sajjan Singh is a blunt injury and the fracture underneath it has been found, he has been rightly convicted under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned trial Court. The learned appellate Court, however, has erred in law in convicting Charan Singh under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and giving him the benefit of doubt, I hereby acquit him of the charge under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

Charan Singh petitioner is stated to be about 20 or 21 years of age at the time of the present occurrence. Taking into consideration his young age and his antecedents, which do not in any manner reveal that he is a previous convict, in my opinion, it is a fit case to grant benefit of Probation of Offenders'' Act. 1958 to Charan Singh petitioner in respect of the offence under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code.

For the foregoing reasons Charan Singh petitioner is directed to be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offenders'' Act 1958 for a period of two years, subject to his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 5000/ with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The petitioner shall undertake to keep peace and be of good behaviour during the aforesaid period of probation and shall undertake to appear in the Court as and when called upon to receive sentence. Sentence of fine imposed on the petitioner by the trial Court under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code is set aside in view of the authority of the apex Court in Ishar Dass v. State of Punjab, AIR 1972 SC 1295. The fine, if already paid, be refunded to the petitioner.

This appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above.