Gurdev Singh and anr. vs State of Punjab

K.P.S. Sandhu, J. (Oral)

The two appellants, namely, Gurdev Singh and his father Harbans Singh have come up in appeal against their conviction under section 307 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. They were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/ each, in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, vide his judgment and order dated 12th January, 1983.

Both the appellants are alleged to have caused injuries to Bhagwant Singh son of Jang Singh complainant (P.W.3) on 16th September, 1982 at about 7 A.M. in the area of village khokkar khurd, while Harbans Singh appellant was armed with gandhali (Exhibit P2) and Gurdev Singh appellant was armed with takua (Exhibit P1).

The first information report in this case was recorded on the basis of the statement of Jang Singh (P.W.3) at 12.25 P.M. on the same day at Police Station, Mansa.

Dr. A.K. Bansal (P.W1) medically examined Bhagwant Singh injured (P.W.6) at 8.15 A.M. on 16th September, 1982, and found the following injuries on his person :

"1. Lacerated wound 6.5 cm x .5cm. x scalp deep and 5 cm. above the medial end of right eyebrow and 1.5 cm. from the midline on the forehead (right side). Advised Xray.

Incised wound 7cm. x. 75cm. x scalp deep and 2cm. from injury No. 1 Lower end of the wound was 3.5 cm. from the right eye brow. Wound was present on the forehead. Xray was advised.

Incised wound 5cm. x 1.5 cm x scalp deep at 2.5 cm. from the injury No. 2 on the right side of forehead. Lower end of wound was .5 cm. from the right eyebrow. Xray was advised.

Incised wound 2 cm. x .5 cm. x muscle deep and 1.5 cm. below injury No. 3 and .5 cm. from the lateral end of right eyebrow on the right temple. Xray was advised.

Lacerated wound .75 cm. x. 5 cm. x muscle deep and 4cm. above and behind injury No. 3 on the right parietal region and 8 cm. from the root of right pinna. Xray was advised.

Incised wound 2.5 cm. x .5 cm. on the back of left pinna near its root and in the upper part. Fresh bleeding was present from the wounds described above i.e. from No. 1 to No. 6.

Diffused swelling tender 10 cm. x 4 cm. present on the right temporal and parietal region and 4 cm. from the external angle of right eye. Xray was advised.

Diffused tender swelling 8 cm. x 5 cm. present on the left temporal region and 4 cm. from lateral end of left eyebrow.

Bhagwant Singh injured and the appellants are very closely related. They are near collaterals. Gurdev Singh appellant is married to Bhagwant Singh''s first cousin. The cause of trouble between the parties is that about 11/2 months prior to present occurrence there was a dispute between the appellants and Jang Singh and Bhagwant Singh P.Ws. about the turn of water. They had exchanged abuses about but the village Panchayat brought about a compromise.

Mr. Harbans Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, tried to show that the two P.Ws., namely. Bhagwant Singh and his father Jang Singh, have falsely implicated the appellants since they had nursed a grudge against them and there is no independent corroboration. The occurrence took place in broad day light. The injured was medically examined after about one hour of the occurrence. The parties are collaterals. There is no reason for the P.Ws. to name the appellants falsely and leave out the real culprits. Hence there is no substance in the contention of the learned counsel.

The main and the last contention of the learned counsel is that in view of the medical evidence and the fact that the parties are close relations and there was a dispute about the turn of water, the case does not fall with in the mischief of Section 307, Indian Penal Code. Out of the eight injuries suffered by Bhagwant Singh two injuries i.e. injury No. 2 and injury No. 5 were described to be grievous by the doctor. The doctor also opined that the injuries collectively could have proved dangerous to life. Mr. Harbans Singh has placed reliance on Jai Narain Mishra & Others v. State of Bihar, 1972 C.A.R. 19 (SC), where in their Lordship of the Supreme Court were pleased to hold that to bring the offence within the mischief of Section 307, Indian Penal Code, it must be held that the injury was such which could have resulted in death but for timely medical aid. In that case the injury was caused with a Farsa and the doctor had opined that the injury was dangerous to life.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the view that the case squarely falls under Section 326 Indian Penal Code, and not under Section 307 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code. Accordingly the appellants are acquitted of the charge under Section 307 read with S. 34 Indian Penal Code instead they are convicted under Section 326 read with Section 35 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/ each, in default of payment of fine each of them shall undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The fine, if realised shall be paid to the injury P.W.

Except for the alteration in the conviction and the sentence, as indicated above, the appeal fails and is dismissed.