LexJAGE RAM & ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2015] 11 S.C.R. 1004 JAGE RAM & ORS. v. STATE OF HARYANA (Criminal Appeal No. 92 of 2015) JANUARY 28, 2015 [V. GOPALA GOWDA AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860- s. 307 - Prosecution case that PW- C 5 and his two sons 'S' and 'PW-6 were cutting pullas (reeds) in their fields when the accused party went there and asked them not to cut the pullas - In the wordy altercation, second accused gave pharsi blows on the head of'S' - Conviction of second accused u/s.307 IPC by Courts below- Challenged, D on ground that evidence of the witnesses suffers from material discrepancy and is self-contradictory; and additionally, the defence plea of private defence was not considered by the courts below in proper perspective - Held: PWs 5 & 6 have clearly spoken about the overt act of the accused - PWs 5 E and 6 being injured witnesses, their evidence is entitled to great weight- Evidence of PWs 5 and 6 amply corroborated by medical evidence - Evidence that had not surgical assistance been given to 'S', he would have definitely died - Having regard to the weapon used for causing the head F injuries to 'S', nature of injures, situs of the injury and the severity of the blows, conviction of 2nd accused u/s.307 IPC was justified. Sentence I Sentencing- Second accused gave pharsi G blows on the head of the victim- Convicted uls.307 IPC and sentenced to RI of five years -Appropriate punishment - Held: Question of awarding sentence is a matter of discretion - W~at sentence would meet the ends of justice would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and the courts H 1004 JAGE RAM & ORS. v. STATE OF HARYANA 1005 must keep in mind the gravity of the offence, motive for the A crime, nature of the offence and all ·other attendant circumstances - Jn the case in hand, the incident occurred more than 20 years back in the heat of passion in course of a wordy altercation -Accused surrendered in 2012 and is in custody since then, for more than three years - Period of B sentence imposed upon second accused reduced to three years aparl from directing him to pay Rs. 7. 50 lakhs as compensation to the victim - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-s.357(3). State of M.P vs. Kashiram & Ors, AIR 2009 SC 1642 = (2009) 4 SCC 26; State of M.P. vs. Bablu Natt (2009) 2 SCC 272; Alister Anthony Pareira vs. State of Maharashtra (2012) 2 SCC 648 and c Soman vs. State of Kera/a (2013) 11 SCC 382- D relied on. Hari Singh vs. Sukhbir Singh & Ors. (1988) 4 SCC 551 - referred to. E Case Law Reference AIR 2009 SC 1642 relied on Para 13 (1988) 4 sec 551 referred to Para 15 (2009) 2 sec 212 relied on Para 16 F (2012) 2 sec 648 relied on Para 16 (2013) 11 sec 382 relied on Para 16 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal G Appeal No. 92 of 2015 From the Judgment and Order dated 19.08.2011 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 181 SB of 2000 H 1006 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 11 S.C.R. A Vibha Datta Makhija, Gagan Gupta for the Appellants. B Ajay-Bansal, AAG, Akshat Goel, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Gaurav Yadav, for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 19.8.2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No.181 SB of 2000, whereby the High Court partly altowed the appe"al filed by the C appellants thereby confirming the conviction of the appellants with certain modifications. 2. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on the fateful day i.e. 18.11.1994, at about 8.00A.M. in the morning D the complainant Jagdish (PW-5) along with his two sons namely Sukhbir and Mange Ram (PW-6) were busy in cutting pullas (reeds) from the do/a of their field. Atthat time, Jage Ram (A- 1) and his sons Rajbir Singh@ Raju (A-2), Rakesh (A-3) and Madan (A-4) armed with jaily, pharsi and lathis respectively, E entered the land where the complainant was working with his sons and asked them not to cut the pullas as it was jointly held by both the parties. Wordy altercations ensued between the parties and Jage Ram insisted that he would take away F the entire pullas. In the fight, the accused persons started inflicting injuries to the complainant, and his sons Rajbir @ Raju (A-2) gave a pharsi blow on the head of Sukhbir, Jage Ram (A-1) caused injury to Jagdish (PW-5) with two jailyblows. Additionally, Madan and Rakesh at
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.