Satnam Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

R.C. Khulbe, J

The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.06.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge/ 3rd Fast Track Judge, District Nainital, in Session Trial No.397 of 1997, State vs. Satnam Singh and another whereby, the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, and was sentenced to undergo four years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 IPC.

Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that on 11.11.1996 at about 7:30PM, near the husk of Jaswant Singh- informant, the accused Satnam Singh and Santokh Singh stared the crackering on which the brother of the informant stopped them not to do so. On which those did not stop and all of a sudden some husk was got fired because of being blown crackers by them. Then the accused started abusing to his brother, thereafter Santnam Singh took out knife and Santokh Singh took out sword, the accused Satnam Singh stab knife in the abdomen of his brother and on account of which his brother fell down on the spot. This incident was seen by informant along with Balbeer Singh, Jageer Singh and saved Hardayal Singh, thereafter the said accused run away from the spot. Therefore, the report lodged on the basis of information given by the informant- Jaswant Singh.

The Investigating Officer during investigation prepared the site map after inspecting the place of occurrence and took the photographs of the place of occurrence.

Investigating Officer conducted investigation in the matter and submitted the charge-sheet against the appellant under Sections 307 & 504 IPC.

The trial court framed charges against the appellant/accused for the offences punishable under Section 307 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

To prove the prosecution story, PW-1 Jaswant Singh, PW-2 Hardayal Singh, PW-3 Jageer Singh, PW-4 Constable Dayal Singh, PW-5 Mohan Singh were examined as prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, the statement of appellant-accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

The trial court, having perused the entire material made available on record, vide judgment and order under appeal, convicted and sentenced the appellant, as mentioned hereinabove. Feeling aggrieved, appellant has preferred present appeal.

Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties and perused the entire material available on the record.

Mr. Muhammad Matlub, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant fairly submits that the conviction of the appellant, as recorded by the Court below under Section 307 IPC is perfectly justified as per the evidence recorded before the trial court and he also does not want lay any challenge on the same; he only confined his prayer to the extent that the sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court may be reduced. The reasons shown, for such a prayer, are that appellant is the sole bread earner in the family; 20 years have elapsed since the incident took place; and lastly, the appellant was sentenced for four years' rigorous imprisonment.

After considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it would be just and proper to reduce the sentence of the appellant to eighteen months' R.I instead of four years R.I.

For the reasons recorded above, the appeal preferred by the appellant is partly allowed. The conviction part of the appellant under Section 307 IPC is left intact. However, the sentence of imprisonment, awarded to the appellant by the Court below, is hereby reduced to eighteen months' R.I. instead of four years R.I.

It is, however, clarified that the period already undergone by the appellant shall be adjusted from the sentence, as imposed/modified by this Court.

A copy of this judgment and order along with the LCR be sent to the Court below for compliance.