Kishan Singh @ Actor vs State Of Uttaranchal (Now Uttarakhand)

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 389 OF 2019 (Arising out of (Crl.) No(s)7596/2015)

KISHAN SINGH alias ACTOR Appellant(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL (NOW UTTARAKHAND) & ANR. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

BANUMATHI, J.:

(1) Leave granted.

(2) This appeal calls in question the judgment of the High

Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.156 of

2005 dated 14th December, 2012 in and by which the High Court

has modified the conviction of the appellant from Section 302

I.P.C. to Section 304 Part-I I.P.C. while maintaining the

sentence of life imprisonment imposed upon the appellant.

(3) On 17th November, 2013 the appellant-Kishan Singh and the

deceased-Govind Singh went to the house of the appellant and

both of them were drunk. In the wordy quarrel between the

appellant and his wife, the appellant tried to attack his wife

with an axe. When the deceased-Govind Singh intervened the axe Signature Not Verified

fell on the parietal region of the deceased-Govind Singh and he Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2019.03.06 16:40:20 IST Reason:

sustained injuries and succumbed to injuries. The law was set

in motion by one Inder Singh Negi, brother of the deceased- 2

Govind Singh.

(4) Based on the evidence of Rajendra Singh (PW-4) to whom

extra judicial confession was made by the appellant and

recovery of blood-stained clothes and axe from the appellant’s

house, the Trial Court convicted the appellant for the offence

punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to

undergo life imprisonment. In appeal, the High Court has

modified the conviction of the appellant from Section 302

I.P.C. to section 304 Part-I I.P.C., as aforesaid in para (2).

(5) By order dated 7th September, 2015 notice was issued

limited on the question of sentence.

(6) We have heard Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, learned counsel

appearing for the appellant and Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma,

learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State and also

perused the impugned judgment and the evidence/materials on

record.

(7) The appellant-accused and the deceased-Govind Singh were

closed friends and used to drink together. Admittedly, at the

time of occurrence both the deceased-Govind Singh and the

appellant-accused were drunk. From the evidence it is brought

on record that the appellant attempted to attack his wife with

an axe and at that time deceased-Govind Singh intervened and

the axe fell on him. Though Motima Devi (PW-1) turned hostile,

the case of the prosecution is established by the evidence of

Rajender Singh (PW-4) to whom the appellant is said to have 3

made extra judicial confession and by other evidence. Since

there was no premeditation for the occurrence, the High Court

has rightly modified the conviction of the appellant from

Section 302 I.P.C. to Section 304 Part-I.

(8) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we

deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence of life imprisonment

of the appellant to a period of ten years while maintaining the

conviction. Ordered accordingly.

(9) This appeal is partly allowed.

.........................J. (R. BANUMATHI)

.........................J. (R. SUBHASH REDDY) NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 26, 2019.