LexGURMAIL SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2011] 5 S.C.R. 550 GURMAIL SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 974 of 2008) APRIL 20, 2011 [HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - ss.3021149, 302, 3241149 and 3231 C 149 - Murder - Common intention - Enmity between the parties as daughter of one of the accused was teased - Seven accused armed with weapons raised lalkara threatening retribution - Injuries inflicted on 'RS' and 'BS' by accused-'GS' and 'SS' - 'BS' succumbed to his injuries - Conviction of D accused 'GS', 'SS' and two others whereas acquittal of the remaining accused - Upheld by the High Court - On appeal, held: Injury was caused directly and deep into the stomach of the victim, a very vital part, which led to death within a short time - Thus, it cannot be said that there was no intention to E cause that very injury which ultimately led to the death of the victim - Accused were all of one family and they were annoyed with the members of the victim family - They lived close together in the same locality and had come out armed and raised a lalkara that the opposite party be done away with and F thereafter, the injuries had been caused to 'RS' as well 'BS' - One injury proved fatal for 'BS' - Thus, a case of common intention is made out - Perusal of the injury attributed to 'SS' on the person of deceased would indicate that it is of very small dimensions and there is a clear doubt as to whether an abrasion could be caused with a lathi which 'SS' was said to G be carrying - Therefore, 'SS' is given benefit of doubt and is acquitted - However, conviction of the other accused is upheld. Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1958 SC 465; H 550 GURMAIL SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 551 Laxman Kar/u Nikalje v. The State of Maharashtra 1968 (3) A SCR 685; Harjinder Singh v. Delhi Administration AIR 1968 SC867; Randhir Singh alias Dhire v. State of Punjab 1981 (4) SCC 484, Tho/an v. State of Tamil Nadu 1984 (2) SCC 133; Arun Nivalaji More v. State of Maharashtra 2006 (2) · SCC 613 - Referred to. B Case Law Reference: AIR 1968 SC 867 Referred to Para 6 1984 (2) sec 133 Referred to Para 6 . AIR 1958 SC 465 Referred to Para 7 1968 (3) SCR 685 Referred to Para 7 1981 (4) sec 484 Referred to Para 7 2006 (2) sec 613 Referred to Para 7 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 974 of 2008. c D From the Judgment & Order dated 19.01.2007 of the High E Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. Appeal No. 609-DB of 1997. WITH Crl. A. No. 975 of 2008 & 981 of 2011. P.N. Puri, Manu Sharma, Sanjay Jain, D.P. Singh, Avneet Toor, Kuldip Singh for the appearing parties. The following order of the Court was delivered ORDER 1. This judgment will dispose of three appeals, being Criminal Appeal Nos. 974 of 2008, 975 of 2008 and 981 of F G 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 4898 of 2008. H 552 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 5 S.C.R. A 2. The facts are being taken from the paper book of Criminal Appeal No. 974 of 2008 entitled Gurmail Singh v. State of Punjab. 3. The facts leading to these appeals are as under: B 3.1 Sohan Singh, P.W., the complainant, and his co- accused Nachhattar Singh and Parshotam Singh, are married to real sisters. Nindo is the daughter of Sher Singh, accused. Darshan Singh accused is the son of Sher Singh. A few days prior to the incident which happened on the 25th March, 1996 C a message was received with regard to the proposed marriage of the son of Parshottam Singh accused, on which the accused had got together in his house to celebrate the occasion by taking liquor. At about 1 O:OOp.m. the accused came out in the street and raised a lalkara that they would teach the D complainant party a lesson for having teased Nindo. At that time accused Gurnam Singh and Gurmail Singh were both armed with small knives (kirch) and Sher Singh, Nachhattar Singh, Parshottam Singh, Dharampal Singh and Avtar Singh were armed with lathis. Sohan Singh came out into the street E to persuade them not to abuse and that they would sort out the dispute in the morning. While he was still talking to the accused . Rajwinder Singh PW and Baljinder Singh also arrived there. Nachhattar Singh, Sher Singh, Dharam pal Singh and Avtar singh then raised a lalkara saying that they should not be F allowed to go alive and should be taught a lesson for having teased Nindo. Gurnam Singh thereupon gave a knife blow on the right side of the abdomen of B
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.