KHUMAN SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 357 · Decided: 24-11-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

KHUMAN SINGH AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF MADRY A PRADESH 
NOVEMBER 24, 2004 
B 
[B.P. SINGH AND ARUN KUMAR, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860; Ss. 149, 299, 300, 302, 304 Part-II, 324 and 326: 
Allegation of assault and murder against accused persons-Trial Court 
found accused persons guilty of murder and sentenced them to life C · 
imprisonment-Affirmed by High Court-On appeal, Held : Though the 
deceased had suffered several injuries, none of them was sufficient to cause 
death in ordinary course of nature-Death of the deceased caused by 
fracture of a rib bone puncturing the liver-The injury was not intended 
by the accused and was accidental-Section 300 thirdly not attracted-In D 
the facts and circumstances of the case, 'the conviction fall under Section 
304 Part-II-Conviction of the accused under Section 302 set aside. 
Accused persons, complainant and others were performing flag 
ceremony (a religious celebration) near a temple, when inadvertently 
the stick of one of the accused persons hit PW 5 and thereby an altercation 
took place followed by a quarrel. However, the deceased intervened and 
pacified both the parties. Soon after, the complainant party was chased 
by the accused persons; they gave lathi blows to PW1 and assaulted the 
deceased with lathi and stones. Some of the accused persons trampled 
on the body of the deceased, as a result of which he died on the spot. 
First Information Report was lodged by the complainant, and the matter 
was investigated by the police. Trial Court found accused-appellants 
guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 IPC 
and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The order was affirmed by 
the High Court. Hence the present appeal. 
E 
F 
G 
It was contended for the accused-appellant that none of the injuries 
caused was by itself sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause 
death, and at best resulted on account of the unintended injury to the 
liver caused by fracture of a rib bone which punctured the liver and the 
injury was not intended by the appellants; and that the offence made H 
357 
358 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
· A out could be one under Section 326 or Section 324 IPC. 
Respondent-State submitted that since the deceased succumbed to 
the injuries inflicted on his body by the accused appellants, the Courts 
below rightly convicted them for the offence punishable under Section 
B 302 r/w Section 149 IPC. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. It is, no doubt, true that accused persons/appellants 
C assaulted the deceased in such a manner that the deceased suffered 
several fractures, but the injury which caused the death of the deceased 
was the one suffered by him on account of the rib bone puncturing the 
liver. The injury was not intended by the accused, and was accidental. 
Hence, Section 300 'thirdly' IPC is not attracted, and it cannot be said 
that the accused intended to cause any injury to the liver which proved 
D fatal. There is no evidence to suggest that any of the other injuries 
suffered by him was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of 
nature. [363-E-F-G] 
1.2. In cases like the present one, though it is possible to hold that 
E the offence will only fall under Section 326 IPC and not under Section 
304 Part II IPC be<:ause the injury caused by the appellants resulted in 
fracture of the bones. However, in the facts and circumstances ·of the 
case tlie conviction should appropriately be one under Section 304 Part 
II IPC. In any event, it would make no differ~nce to the sentence. Hence 
F 
G 
the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 IPC is set aside and 
they are convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced to five 
years rigorous imprisonment. (364-B-C-D) 
Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR (1958) SC 465 and Anda v. State 
of Rajasthan, AIR (1966) SC 151, relied on. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 
998 of 1999. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.9.98 of the Madhya Pradesh 
H High Court in Crl.A. No. 1035 of 1989. 
KHUMAN SINGH v. STATE [B.P. SINGH, J.] 
359 
Ms. Binu Tamta for the Appellants. 
R.P. Gupta, Ms. Vasudha Sharma and Ms. Kamakshi S. Mehlwal for 
the Respondent. 
A 
The judgment of the Court was delivered by 
B 
B.P. SINGH, J. : There are seven appellants in this Appeal who have 
impugned the judgement and order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh 
at Jabaipur dated 2nd September, 1998 in Criminal Appeal No. 1035 of 
1989. The H
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.