State of Haryana vs Babu Singh

K.S. Tiwana, J.

Ram Ditta Singh of village Kalanwali had two sons, Kaur Singh P.W.6 and Chand Singh. Gurdeep Singh P.W.5 is the son of Chand Singh. Jiwan Singh P.W.7 and Harbans Singh P.W.8 are the sons of Kaur Singh P.W.6.

Four/five days before the occurrence, Babu Singh accused told Kaur Singh P.W.6 that his son Jiwan Singh P.W.7 had illicit relations with the wife of Gurdeep Singh P.W.5 Kaur Singh P.W.6 protested to Babu Singh accused against the levelling of this false allegation. Because of this there was an exchange of hot words between Babu Singh accused and Kaur Singh P.W.6. People intervened and pacified them.

On 29th of August, 1983 at about 8 p.m. Gurdeep Singh P.W.5 had gone to the house of Kaur Singh P.W.6 Jiwan Singh P.W.7 and Harbans Singh P.W.8 sons of Kaur Singh P.W.6 were also present there. They all were talking to each other Babu Singh accused armed with a spear, Gurdeep Singh P.W.5 accused armed with a takwa, Lila Singh alias Darshan Singh and Gita Singh alias Gurmit Singh sons of Babu Singh armed with spears came there. Babu Singh accused shouted that they would teach Kaur Singh a lesson for insulting him. Babu Singh accused gave a spear blow on the left shoulder of Kaur Singh P.W.5 and another spear blow stickwise on his head. Lila Singh accused gave a spear blow on the left side of the chest of Jiwan Singh P.W.7, Gurdeep Singh accused gave 3/4 takwa blows from the reverse side of Harbans Singh P.W.8 on his head, right cheek, right upper forearm and the right hip. Gita Singh accused gave a spear blow on the left side of the chest of Harbans Singh P.W and another spear blow on his right arm. Gita Singh accused gave another blow from the stick of the spear on the left leg of Harbans Singh P.W.8. The eyewitnesses raised alarm, on which the accused ran away.

Gurdeep Singh P.W.5 went to Police Station Kajanwali and made a report at 9.05 p.m., which was recorded by Digamber Singh S.I. P.W.9.

On 29th of August, 1983 at 10.30 p.m. Dr. Prem Jain P.W.1 on medical examination of Jiwan Singh found a stab would measuring 11/4" x 1/2" obliquely placed inward and medically over the front of the left side of chest 1/2" below and 2" lateral to the left nipple. The injury was not probed. The margins of the wound were sharp, clear cut and inverted. During the examination it was found that there was hissing sound of escape of air from the lung. The respiratory movements were restricted. Breath sound was heard equally on both sides. Percusion was not done. The injury had been caused by a sharppointed weapon and its duration was within six hours preceding the examination. The doctor later declared this injury to grievous and dangerous in nature.

On the same day at 11 p.m. the same doctor on medical examination of Harbans Singh P.W.8 found one lacerated wound on the lift occipital region, two contusted abrasions on the top of right shoulder and left scapular region. The doctor also found three stab wounds in the middle of the right arm; left thigh and the left side of the chest. The doctor also found sweeling on the lower part of the right buttock. The stab injures were caused by sharppointed weapon and the others were caused by blunt weapon. The probable duration of the injuries was within six hours preceding the examination.

On the same day at 11.30 p.m. the same doctor on medical examination of Kaur Singh P.W.6 found one lacerated wound on the middle of the parietal region, a stab wound on the left upper arm and a contusion on the left back. The stab wound was the result of a sharppointed weapon and the other injuries had been caused by blunt weapon. The probable duration of the injuries was within six hours preceding the examination.

Dr. R.K. Pishoi P.W.2 on 30th of August, 1983 on Xray examination of Jiwan Singh P.W. found hydropneumothorax on the left side with bruising of lung in the left middle and lower zone. There was no fracture of any rib etc.

During the course of investigation the accused were arrested and weapons of offence were recovered from them.

At the trial Gurdeep Singh P.W.5, Kaur Singh P.W.6, Jiwan Singh P.W.7 and Harbans Singh P.W.8 narrated the details of the occurrence which have been noticed in the earlier part of the judgment. The rest of the witness examined at the trial were formal in nature.

When examined at the house of the prosecution case the accused returned plea of denial simplicitor and stated that they had been falsely implicated.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, after trial held that charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the accused. He convicted all the accused under Section 452, Indian Penal Code. He convicted Babu Singh accused under Sections 324/34, 324/34 323/34, Indian Penal Code, Lila Singh accused under Sections 324, 324/34, 324/34, 323/34, Indian Penal Code and Gita Singh accused under Sections 324, 324/34, 324/34, 323/34, Indian Penal Code and Gurdeep Singh accused for the offences under Sections 323, 324/34, 324/34, Indian Penal Code for the injuries of Jiwan Singh, Harbans Singh and Kaur Singh P.Ws. The learned trial Judge did not pass any sentence against the accused and giving them the benefit of probation released them on probation to maintain peace for a period of two years on furnishing surety and personal bones in the amount of Rs. 3,000/, with a direction that in case of violation of the conditions of the bond they shall be called upon to suffer sentence. They were also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1200/ each, for payment as compensation to the injured witnesses.

The State of Haryana did not feel satisfied with the acquittal of the accused under Section 307, Indian Penal Code, and has filed Criminal Appeal No. 20DBA of 1985 (State of Haryana v. Babu Singh and others), 1987(1) RCR(Crl.) 117 (P&H) : Gurdeep Singh P.W. has filed Criminal Appeal No. 541SP of 1984 (Gurdeep Singh v. Babu Singh etc.) against the order of release of the accused under the probation of Offenders Act. As both these appeals arise out of the same judgment, they shall be disposed of through a common judgment recorded in Criminal Appeal No. 20DBA of 1985.

So far as the facts are concerned there is no contest about them as the accused have accepted the order of conviction and have not filed any appeal. The judgment of the trial Court on facts is final and in the State appeal they cannot ask for the reopening of the question of fact.

The learned trial Judge formed on opinion that Lila Singh accused, to whom the injury on the chest of Jiwan Singh P.W.7, which is the main injury in the case, is attributed, did not have the intention to commit the murder of Jiwan Singh or the intention as envisaged under Section 307 Indian Penal Code, to cause that injury. He further held that there was no fracture of any rib or rupture of the lung and hence, in his view only a charge under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, was made out. Regarding the statement of the doctor about the dangerous or grievous nature of the injury, the learned trial Judge observed that more ipse dixit of Dr. Prem Jain P.W.1 in this behalf could not be accepted. It is on these findings that the learned trial Judge had acquitted Lila Singh accused under Section 307, Indian Penal Code.

Intention to cause an injury is to be inferred from the circumstances of each case. The relations between the parties; the place of occurrence; the preparation made by the accused in causing the injury weapon used in the commission of offence; manner of occurrence etc. are some of the factors, which guide the courts to arrive at a conclusion regarding the intention of an accused to cause a particular injury. Jiwan Singh P.W.7 and Harbans Singh P.W.8 are the son of Kaur Singh P.W.6 and Gurdeep Singh P.W.5 is the sons of Chand Singh real brother of Kaur Singh P.W.6. The prosecution witnesses are closely related and were on visiting terms with each other. In the case in hand, the evidence of motive, which was not shaken in crossexamination and was accepted by the learned trial Judge and which could not be challenged before us, is that Babu Singh accused had levelled an accusation that Jiwan Singh P.W.7 had an illicit intimacy with the wife of Gurdeep Singh P.W.5. He conveyed this to Kaur Singh P.W.6 father of Jiwan Singh P.W.7 and Kaur Singh P.W.6 resented the conduct of Babu Singh accused and this led to an abusive altercation between them. The accused were unhappy with Jiwan Singh P.W.7, which provided the motive for the commission of the offence. Gurdeep Singh, Lila Singh and Gita Singh accused are the sons of Babu Singh accused. Out of them, three accused namely, Babu Singh, Lila Singh and Gita Singh accused, armed with spears and Gurdeep Singh accused with takwa entered the house of the complainants. They had done so after making preparations for causing injuries to the complainant party. If they had not made any preparation then there was on question of their carrying such dangerous weapons with them. Going inside the house of the complainants, at the exhortation of Babu Singh accused, Lila Singh accused plunged spear in the chest of Jiwan Singh P.W.7. Spear is a dangerous weapon and chest is a vital part of the body. The injury inflicted was with sufficient force. It is indicated from the depth to which the weapon travelled in the chest cavity. The doctor found air coming out of the wound and on Xray hydropneumothorax of the left lung in the lower part was found. This phenomenon occurs due to blood collection in the lungs, which is, mostly because of the injury to the lung. Lung is a vital part of the body and if the lung is reputured, then in the absence of medical treatment, in time death may not be avoided. In this case the injured had received medical aid within hours of the infliction of the injuries and Jiwan Singh P.W. and lucky to survive. It is because of the medical attention which he got that Jiwan Singh P.W. managed to survive. Dr. Prem Jain, P.W.1 was of the opinion that the injury was dangerous to life. The doctor could not say beyond this, as Jiwan Singh P.W.7 had survived. This is not accepting the ipse dixit, as was observed by the learned trial Judge, of the doctor. He gave this opinion from the examination of the injury and the Xray report. The finding recorded by the learned trial Judge that there was no rupture of the lung is against the record. Air could not escape from the lung uncles there was a deep wound in it. This observation of the learned trial Judge being against the record has to be set aside. Fracture of the bone is not necessary in every case as lung can be reached through the ribs without injuring the bone. The spear travelled to the lung through the gap between the ribs. Abdominal injuries are also dangerous to life inspite of the fact that they do not involve the fracture of any bone. These observations of the learned trial Judge are not based on facts on record nor on any acceptable reasoning.

Injury to the lungs is one which can pose danger to the life of a person and if it is not attended to in time by the medical treatment, it may result into the death of the victim in the ordinary course of nature. In the case in hand, Lila Singh went from his house armed with a spear along with his companions and plunged the spear in his chest, the vital part of the body of Jiwan Singh P.W.7. He selected chest of Jiwan Singh P.W. for causing the injury. He had the intention to cause that injury, which he actually caused and the nature of it has been discussed above. He is, therefore, guilty under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The findings of the learned trial Judge in acquitting the accused for his offence are set aside and Lila Singh accused is convicted under Section 307, Indian Penal Code. The accused have been convicted by the learned trial Judge with the aid of Section 34, Indian Penal Code, for all the offences.

Benefit of probation cannot be given to the accused after conviction under Section 307, Indian Penal Code, as it carries punishment for imprisonment for life. The other offences for which the accused have been released on probation will be inconsistent with their sentence to undergo imprisonment for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The order granting probation by the learned trial Judge to the accused for other offences has a natural consequence to the alteration of the offence and has to be set aside. As the accused have been convicted for this offence and they have faced trial for more than three years, we do not want to pass harse sentence on them. Lila Singh accused is sentenced under Section 307, Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. His other coaccused, namely, Babu Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Gita Singh are convicted under Sections 307/34, Indian Penal Code, for the injury of Jiwan Singh P.W. and are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each. The sentence of Gita Singh accused under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, for the injury of Harbans Singh P.W. is enhanced to six months rigorous imprisonment. The sentence of Lila Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Babu Singh accused for the same offence under Sections 324/34, Indian Penal Code, is enhanced to six months rigorous imprisonment. For the injuries of Kaur Singh P.W. the sentence of Babu Singh accused under Section 324 Indian Penal Code is enhanced to six months rigorous imprisonment. For the same offence the sentence of Gurdeep Singh, Lila Singh and Gita Singh is enhanced to six months rigorous imprisonment. For the injuries of Harbans Singh P.W. the sentence of Gurdeep Singh under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, is enhanced to three months rigorous imprisonment. For the same offence the sentence of Babu Singh, Lila Singh and Gita Singh accused under Sections 323/34, Indian Penal Code is enhanced to three months rigorous imprisonment. The sentence of Babu Singh, Gurdeep Singh, Lila Singh and Gita Singh under Section 452, Indian Penal Code is enhanced to six months rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences in respect of each of the accused shall run concurrently.

In the result Criminal Appeal No. 20DBA of 1985 (State v. Babu Singh etc) is accepted to the extent indicated above. There need not be any separate order in Criminal Appeal No. 541SB of 1984 (Gurdeep Singh v. Babu Singh etc.) which is disposed of accordingly.