Nandu vs State of Haryana

A.S. Bains, J.

The petitioners were convicted and sentenced by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hissar vide his judgment and order dated 29th January, 1980, as follows :

U/s 326/34, IPC. RI for two years and a fine of Rs. 500/ each or in default of payment of fine, further RI for four months each.

U/s 325/34, IPC. RI for one year and six months and a fine of Rs. 500/ or in default, further RI for four months, each.

U/s 324/34, IPC. RI for one year each.

U/s 323/34, IPC. Fine of Rs. 100/ each or in default, to suffer further RI for one month each.

All the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. On appeal, their conviction and sentence was upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar. Hence this revision petition.

The occurrence took place on 7th August, 1974 at about 6.00 p.m. It is alleged that Dewan Singh PW 4 was taking meals at his house after returning from the fields. He heard abuses being given by Lachhman petitioner in front of his house. He went out of his house and asked Lachhman petitioner to desist from calling bad names. Meanwhile, the remaining three petitioners Bhal Singh, Sant Lal and their father Nandu also came there. Lachhman petitioner, who was having a Kasiya, entered the house of Dewan Singh PW Nandu and Sant Lal petitioners were having lathis and Bhal Singh petitioner was having a Kulhari. Lachhman petitioner opened the attack by giving a Kasiya blow on the head of Dewan Singh PW and another Kasiya blow on his chest. Bhal Singh petitioner gave a Kulhari blow on his hand. On receipt of these injuries. Dewan Singh PW fell down. It is alleged that Nandu and Sant Lal petitioners also caused injuries to Dewan Singh PW with their respective weapons when he was laying down. On heached there and he too was caused injuries by the petitioners. Smt. Sandokhi PW 7, wife of Dewan Singh PW, in order to prevent injuries on her husband, fell upon him and during this course she also received injuries. One Dalip Singh son of Hari Singh and Udmi PW 6 father of Dewan Singh PW also came there and they too were given injuries by the petitioners. The occurrence was witnessed by Maman PW 8 and Siri Chand, who had reached the place of occurrence by the time.

The case against the petitioners was registered at Police Station Sadar, Hissar on 8th August, 1974 at 10.15 a.m. on the basis of the statement Ex. PW. 4/A of Dewan Singh PW 4 recoded by ASI Tek Ram PW 14 at 9.30 a.m. in Civil Hospital, Hissar. The formal First Information Report is Ex. PW 4/B.

Dewan Singh, Hawa Singh and Udmi injured PWs were medically examined by Dr. M.K. Bajaj PW 1 on 8th August, 1974 at 2.15 a.m. who found 5,6 and 5 injuries on the person of each injured respectively. Out of these injuries, two injuries on the person of Dewan Singh PW and one on the person of Hawa Singh PW were declared grievous and rest of the injuries were declared simple in nature. The duration of the injuries was within 12 hours.

Smt. Sandokhi PW 7 was medically examined by Dr. (Mrs) Pushpa Sethi PW 2 on the same day at 11.10 a.m. She found 7 injuries on her person, out of which injury No. 5 was kept under observation and rest were declared simple. Duration of the injuries was within 24 hours.

Sant Lal and Lachhman petitioners were medically examined by Dr. A.K. Suri DW 3 on the same day at 2.45 p.m. and the doctor found 7 and 4 injuries respectively. All the injuries were simple in nature having duration of about 16 hours caused by blunt weapon. On the person of Smt. Jaiti wife of Lachhman petitioner this doctor found 3 injuries, which were simple in nature. Their duration was about two days and were the result of blunt weapon.

At the trial, the petitioners denied the prosecution allegation and pleaded false implication. They took the plea of self defence. In the crossexamination of Dewan Singh PW 4 it was suggested that Dewan Singh, PW, armed with a sword. Hawa Singh PW armed with a Kulhari and Udmi PW and Sheo Ram armed with lathis had entered the house of Lachhnan petitioner and had caused injuries to Lachhman and Sant Lal petitioners and Smt. jaiti wife of Lachhman petitioner, and that the complainant party received injuries when Lachhman and others exercised the right of selfdefence. In their defence the petitioners produced three persons. Hans Ram DW 1 Smt. Jaiti DW 2 and Dr. A.K. Suri DW 3.

It is a case of rival versions. According to the prosecution version, the injuries were caused to them by the petitioners in front of the house of Dewan Singh PW 4, but according to the defence version, it was the complainant party, i.e. Dewan Singh, Hawa Singh, Udmi PWs. and Sheo Ram, who came armed with sword, kulhari and lathis and caused injuries to Lachhman and Sant Lal petitioners and Smt. Jaiti wife of Lachhman petitioner after entering into the house of Lachhman petitioner. The injuries suffered by the complainant party are 23 in number, whereas the injuries suffered by the accused party are 14 in number. Although the injuries suffered by the accused party were declared simple by Dr. A.K. Suri DW 3, but some of the injuries were on vital parts of their body. The injuries suffered by the accused party have not been satisfactorily explained. According to the complainant party, Lachman and Sant Lal petitioners got the injuries during the course of scuffle and when Hawa Singh PW wielded his lathi in selfdefence, Kasiya of lachhman petitioner fell down and Sant Lal petitioner fell on the Kasiya and received injuries. This explanation hardly seems to be probable as seven injuries could not have been caused just by falling on the Kasiya.

The motive seems to be on the side of the complainant party as Lachhman petitioner had given one Danda blow to Dewan Singh PW 4 on the occasion of Teej festival on account of some altercation. Thus it was Dewan Singh PW, was aggrieved and not Lachhman petitioner.

There is also delay in the recording of the first information report. It was recorded after sixteen hours. The occurrence took place on 7th August. 1974 at about 6.00 p.m. and the report was lodged on the following day at 10.15 a.m. The independent witnesses Dalip Singh and Siri Chand though cited have not been produced by the prosecution. Thus, the injured persons on the complainant side and the injured persons on the accused side in addition to Dr. M.K. Bajaj PW 1, Dr. (Mrs.) Pushpa Sethi PW 2 and Dr. A.K. Suri DW 3 have been produced and examined. Maman was examined as PW 8. It seems that the complainant party has suppressed the true origin and genesis of the occurrence. On these circumstances, it is not safe to maintain the conviction of the petitioners as recorded by the Courts below on the interested evidence of the complainant party. Accordingly the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of doubt.

In the result the petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence as recorded by the Courts below is set aside. The petitioners are on bail. Their bailbonds shall stand discharged. Fine, if realsed, shall be refunded to them.

Petitioner allowed