- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- 27 February 2009
- Bench
- Arijit Pasayat, Mukundakam Sharma
- Case no.
- Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2007
- Result
- Appeals dismissed.
Headnote
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 326 and 307 rlw s. 34 - Assault on three persons - Eye-witnesses to the incident including injured witnesses - As per medical evidence, injuries on the victims grievous in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature - Conviction by trial court - Confirmed by High Court - On appeal, held: In view of cogent and credible evidence of the injured witnesses and nature of injuries on the victims, conviction justified.
Seven accused, including the appellant-accused were prosecuted for having assaulted three persons. There were four eye-witnesses including two injured witnesses. Trial court convicted four accused and acquitted three. During pendency of appeal by the j convicted accused one of them died and his appeal
abated. High Court confirmed the conviction, but reduced the sentence from 10 years to 7 years. Hence the present appeals.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 In view of cogent and credible evidence of the injured witnesses there is no scope for interference in these appeals. Though false implication was pleaded, the same is without any foundation. Clearly, all persons who have suffered injuries would not shield the actual culprit and implicate an innocent person when false implication is pleaded. The foundation has to be laid on the same. In the instant case that has not been done. [Para 5] [554-A-B]
1.2 As per the evidence of the doctor who conducted medico-legal examination of the victims, all the injures were caused by sharp edged weapons. Injuries No.1 to 4 of one victim were declared as grievous in nature and the same could have been caused by sharp weapon. The injuries of the other two victims were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. As per the opinion given by the doctor, there were multiple fractures and surgical emphysema was present. So, the injuries were dangerous to life. [Para 4] [552-F-H; 553-A]
Headnote as published in the Digital Supreme Court Reports by the Supreme Court of India. Paragraph references point to the judgment below.
Judgment
OR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted in S.L.P (Crl.) No.2007 of 2008.
started giving blows by their respective weapons to Ram Sarup, Sehdav and Nakul. On seeing the occurrence, the other passengers got down and ran away to the fields. After causing serious injuries to these three persons, the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons. Thereafter, Dharambir, driver of the tempo with the help of Sanjay (PW-11), took the injured to Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak, in a Haryana Roadways bus. Sanjay got down at Madina and .i= went to village Mokhra for giving information to the family members of the injured. Dharambir got the injured admitted in the Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak. The Medical Officer attended the injured and informed the police. A message was sent to the Police Station Meham. ASI lshwar Singh came to Medical College and Hospital and recorded the statement (Ex. PN) of Dharambir on the basis of which the FIR (Ex. PN/2) was registered. ,_
On 14.11.1991, Dr. S.P. Chugh, Casualty Medical Officer, M.C.H., Rohtak (PW-9) conducted the medico-legal examination of injured Ram Sarup, Nakul and Sehdev and found the following injuries on their person:-
The injuries pertaining to Ram Sarup, injured:
¶1An incised wound 10x4x2 cm. deep over front of
the neck just above the thyrod cartilage. The trachea was cut and exposed. Advised E.N.T. Surgeon's opinion.
¶2An incised wound 16x2 cm X bone deep over right
side of the scalp extending from right eyebrow to the parietal region up to the mid line. Advised Surgeon's opinion. ,._ r 3. Incised wound 6 cm x 1 cm bone deep over left side
of the scalp extending from the left eyebrow over
the scalp. Advised Surgeon's opinion.
¶4Incised wound 4x1 x1 cm deep over the left side of
the forehead 1 cm deep over the left side of the forehead 1 cm. of mild line.
¶5Incised wound 4 x 1 x 1 cm. over the anterior
aspect of left shoulder.
¶6Crush injury 16 cm x 8 cm x bone deep over the
right shoulder underlying bone muscles were exposed.
As per the witness, injuries No. 1 to 5 were caused by sharp edged weapon and injury No. 6 by blunt weapon.
The injuries pertaining to Nakul, injured:
¶1An incised would 12 cm x 6 cm deep over the
dorsal aspect of left shoulder.
¶2An incised would 10 x 3 cm x bone deep over left
side of the occipital region 1 cm from_ mid line. Advised Surgeon's opinion.
¶3Incised would 4 cm x 2 cm x bone deep over right
side of the occipital region of the scalp 1 cm of ...... injury No.2. Advised X-ray skull.
¶4An incised wound 6 x 4 x 1 cm over the right leg, 2
cm below the tibial tubrosity. Advisied Ortho Surgeon's opinion.
¶5A crush injury over the palmer aspect of right hand.
Advised Ortho Surgeon's opinion.
¶6Incised wound 6 x 4 cm x bone deep over the lower
part of the right leg.
¶7Incised wound 3 x 2 cm x bone deep over the
palmer aspect of left hand.
¶8Incised wound 6 x 3 cm x bone deep over the paler
aspect of left hand.
¶9Incised wound 3 x 2 cm x bone deep over the left
leg.
As per the witness injures No. 1 to 4 and 6 to 9 were caused by sharp edged weapon and injury No. 5 by blunt weapon.
The injuries pertaining to Sehdev, injured:
¶1An incised wound 4 x 1 x cm over the palmer aspect of right hand. Bleeding was present. Advised Ortho Surgeon's opinion.
¶2An incised wound 6 x 4 x 2 cm over the right side of the chest. Advised Surgeon's opinion.
¶3In incised wound 3 x 1 x 1 cm over the ventral aspect of right arm just above the elbow.
¶4Multiple incised wound of verging sizes present over the right side of the face. Whole of the face was flushed with blood. Advised Surgeon's opinion. .....
As per the witness, all the injures were caused by sharp edged weapon.
Injuries No.1 to 4 of Sehdev were declared as grievous in nature vide opinion Ex. PS/1 given by the said witness, and the injures on the person of the injured could have been caused by sharp weapons Ex. P1 and P2. The injuries of Nakul and Ram Sarup were sufficient cause of death in the ordinary course of nature. As per the opinion Ex. PR/1 given by the said witness, there were multiple fractures and surgical emphysema was present. So, the injures were dangerous.to life.
After investigation, charge sheet was filed in respect of offence relatable under Sections 148, 307/149, 326/149, 324/ 149 and 323/149 IPC. Since the accused persons pleaded innocence they were put on trial. 12 witnesses were examined including the alleged eye-witnesses PWs 5, 6, 8 and 9. The trial court directed convictions and imposed sentence as aforementioned. Before the High Court, the stand taken was that no offence under Sections 307, 326 read with Section 34 IPC has been made out and prosecution has failed to prove the specific injuries alleged to have been caused by the accused to the injured. On the other hand, the State supported the judgment. The High Court after referring to the evidence of i the witnesses held the eye-witnesses' version that the accused
persons were armed with chain, gandasa and hockey sticks and that they stopped the tempo and started causing injuries to the injured. Injuries on Ram Singh and his two sons namely Nakul and Sehdev have been clearly established. Accordingly, the conviction was maintaired. The High Court noted that the injured persons were given large number of injuries ·with sharp edged weapons and blunt weapons like hockey sticks. They were mercilessly beaten and attack was also so severe that all the other passengers sitting on the tempo ran away from l spot and none came forward to save the injured. It was also
noticed that injuries caused on Nakul and Ram Swarup were definitely dangerous to life. Therefore, the conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to 7 years.
¶5In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the witnesses have not specifically indicated about what acts attracted under Section 307, if any. The sentence in respect of Section 307 was also characterized .•I to be heavy. Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the
other hand submitted that the injury on Ram Singh was so severe that he lost his memory due to the injuries caused to him. The other injured witnesses PWs 6 and 8 who suffered serious injuries were examined. In view of cogent and credible evidence ' of the injured witnesses there is no scope for interfer.nce ' in these appeals. Though false implication was pleaded, the same is without any foundation. Clearly, all persons who have suffered injuries would not shield the actual culprit and implicate an innocent person when false implication is pleaded. The foundation has to be laid on the same. In the instant case that has not been done.
¶6The appeals are without merit and deserve dismissal which we direct.
Case details
Arising from
CRIMINAL APP ELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2007.
From the Judgment & Order dated 4.1.06 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal No. 493-SB/1994.
WITH
Crl.A.No. 404/2009
Appearances
Sanjay Rathi, Kapil Kr. Dagar, Jamshed Bey, Parmanand Gaur and Prem Malhotra for the Appellants.
T.V. George for the Respondents.
,._
Source: Supreme Court of India, Digital Supreme Court Reports, via the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.