Jagga Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab

JAGGA SINGH & ANR. Appellant (s)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent(s)

O R D E R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This Appeal has been filed against the impugned

judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated

04.12.2006.

The facts have been set out in the impugned judgment

and hence we are not repeating the same here except where

necessary.

In brief, the prosecution case is that on 24.4.92 at

about 8.30 p.m., the 3 accused came to the house of Raja

Singh. Later, one of them fired at Baggar Singh on his

right thigh. Baggar Singh fell down. Then the accused

took away the deceased Hoshiar Singh towards village

Heerawala. After about 20 minutes the sound of 3 or 4

shots was heard. Next morning the dead body of Hoshiar

Singh was found.

The trial Court convicted Jagga Singh to 7 years R.I.

and a fine under Section 307 IPC. Jagtar Singh and Kaka

Singh were also sentenced to 7 years R.I. and a fine. The

appeals of the accused to the High Court were dismissed, but the appeal of the State regarding acquittal of the

accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 was allowed,

and they were convicted under Section 302. Hence, this

appeal.

On the facts of the case, we are of the opinion that

the appellants are entitled to get the benefit of doubt so

far as offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code is

concerned because the prosecution case was that Hoshiar

Singh was taken away by the accused and after 15/20 minutes

gun shots were heard. However, the post mortem examination

on the dead body of the deceased found that there were only

lacerated wounds. There was no gun shot wound on the body

of the deceased. Hence, some doubt is created in the

prosecution version regarding the charge under Section 302

IPC whose benefit will go to the accused. Thus the

appellants are entitled to get the benefit of doubt on that

charge and consequently they are acquitted of charge under

Section 302 IPC.

However, we are of the opinion that the appellants are

guilty under Section 325 IPC read with Section 34 IPC

because admittedly a gun shot was fired at Baggar Singh

which hit him in the leg. On that count we award the

sentence of the period already undergone by the appellants.

The impugned judgment of the High Court is modified to

the extent stated above. The Appeal is disposed of

accordingly.

On 14.09.2007 this Court had ordered that the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellants shall remain

suspended during the pendency of the Appeal provided each

of them furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/-

(Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties in the sum of

Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction

of the trial court. Their bonds are discharged accordingly.

.......................J. (MARKANDEY KATJU)

........................J. (GYAN SUDHA MISRA) NEW DELHI;

FEBRUARY 03, 2011.