LexHARDEV SINGH versus HARBHEJ SINGH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A HARDEY SINGH. v. HARBHEJ SINGH AND ORS. NOVEMBER 20, I996 B [M.K. MUKHERJEE AND S.P. KURDUKAR, JJ.] Criminal Law : Criminal Trial-Witness-Closely related-Evidence of-Both C witnesses gave minute details of weapons used by accused and manner of assaulting deceased-Their evidence corroborated from fact that bloodstained earth seized from site of occurrence contained human blood- However, one of two gunshot injuries not explained by these two witnesses- He/d: Evidence of close relatives not to be rejected merely on ground that they happened to be relatives-However, evidence of such witnesses must D be scrutinised very carefully. In the facts and circumstances of the case, non-explanation of one of two gunshot injuries would neither dilute their evidence nor their presence could be doubted. Criminal Trial-Prosecution-Independent witness-Non-examination of-However, two relatives of deceased examined-Held: non-examination E of other independent witnesses who came to place of incident could not be ground to discredit evidence of said two eye-witnesses. Criminal Trial-Evidence-Appreciation of-Accused armed with deadly weapons while victims and their relatives totally unarmed-Held: F acquittal of accused on ground of non-intervention of relatives of deceased including eye-witnesses during assault on victims to protect them was unsustainable. Criminal Trial-Identification-Visibility in night-Incident took place at 7.30 p.m. in month of May-Witnesses emphatically asserted that there G was enough light to identifY accused-Accused known to witnesses-Held: High Court totally wrong in recording a finding that it was a blind murder during dark night. Criminal Trial-Evidence-Appreciation of-Sudden assault-Eye H witness did not describe correct distance from where gun was fired-Held: 856 • • •• HARDEY SINGH v. HARBHEJ SINGH 857 Jn a sudden assault it was difficult for eye witness to describe distance A from where gun was fired-Such minor discrepancy immaterial. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Section 154. FIR-Lodging of-Within 3 hours of occurrence naming accused with all details-Held: order of acquittal of accused recorded by High Court on ground that case against accused was framed in village with B connivance of police lvas based on nzere surmise. Penal Code, 1860: Sections 3241149. Injuries-Received by eye witness-During assault-Caused by accused-Evidence of eye witness corroborated from evidence of doctor C and other eye witnesses---Held: in the circumstances of the case, the accused, who were members of an unlawful assembly, caused injuries to witness and committed offence under Ss.3241149. Sections 149 and 302--Accused armed with deadly weapons-Came D along with other accused and participated in murderous assault on victims- Held: courts be/0w erred in not holding both accused guilty with aid of S 149 for substantive offence under S.302. · The respondents-accused were convicted and sentenced under sections 449, 302/34 and 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, I 860 by the E Sessions Judge. However, in appeal, the High Court set aside the judgment and order of conviction and acquitted them. Being aggrieved the appellants, brother and son of the deceased, preferred the present appeal, According to the prosecution, P.W.2 was doing some construction F work, On the fateful night at 7,30 p.m. in the month of May, when P.W.2 was sitting in his house, the deceased and P.W.3 came into his house with a view to help him in the construction work, At that time the accused persons armed with deadly weapons-double barrel gun, Gandhali, Kirpan and Gandasas-transpassed into the house of P.W.2 G and a 'lalkara' was given to teach a lesson to him and others for causing injuries to the accused (A-1). Immediately all these accused persons started assaulting P,W.3 on his chest. In the meantime accused (A-I) fired a shot from his gun hitting the deceased, H, which caused a bleeding injury upon which he fell down. Accused (A-2) then inflicted blows from the sharp side of the gandasa on the shoulder of H 858 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1996] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. A the deceased while he was lying on the ground, accused (A-3) gave a gandasa blow from its sharp side on his right thigh: Accused (A-6) gave a gandasa blow on his right ankle. An alarm was raised whereupon all the accused persons fled away with their weapons. It is the further case of the prosecution that when the accused B perso
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.