PASHORA SINGH AND ANR. versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1992] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 924 · Decided: 09-10-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
PASHORA SINGH AND ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
OCTOBER 9, 1992 
B 
[KULDIP SINGH AND N.M. KASLIWAL, JJ.] 
Indian Penal Code, 1860: 
Sections 307, 447, 326, 324, 323 r/w S.~ccused charged with inf/ict-
C ing injuries on two person.......Convicted on some charges, but given benefit of 
probation-On appeal High Court sentencing them to 3 years rigorous im-
prisonment and fine-During pendency of further appeal one accused 
died-In respect of other accused sentence reduced to rigorous imprisonment 
for the period already undergone. 
D 
The appellant and his brother were tried for offences under S.307, 
447, 326, 324, 323 r/w S.34 IPC for lnOictlng Injuries on two persons. The 
Trial Court found that charges under Ss.307 and 326 were not established. 
The Trial Court however found the accused guilty of having committed the 
other offences charged with. Since the accused were not previous convicts, 
E they were granted the benefit of probation under S.360 Cr.P.C. Against the 
Trial Court judgment, the State preferred an appeal and the complainant 
Died a IRevlsion, and the High Court found both the accused guUty of 
having •committed offencos under S.307 r/w.S.34 IPC for inOlctlng Injuries 
on one of the two victims. It also affirmed the conviction of the two accused 
F 
under ,Sections 447 and 324 IPC. Taking Into consideration the fact that 
the ac,cused bad undergone the agony of trial for more than one year and 
that tlae appeal against their acquittal remained pending in the High Court 
for a1bout 8 years, the High Court sentenced the two accused to undergo 
rig01rous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a One of Rs.3000 each 
under Ss.307 & 34 IPC. They were also further sentenced to rigorous 
G imrprlsonment for three months and the second appellant was sentenced 
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under S.324 !PC. 
Being aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, the two accused 
•preferred the present appeal by special leave. During the pendency of the 
H appeal, the second appellant died and his appeal abated. 
924 
PASHORASINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
925 
Partly allowing the appeal or the other accused, this. Court, 
A 
HELD: 1.1. In the facts and circumstances or the case,.llll offence 
under Section 307 or the Indian Penal Code Is established against the first 
appellant. According to the statement of one or the Injured himself, the 
first appellant had first given a Gandasa blow on right knee of the other 
Injured person. The second appellant then gave Gandasa blow from the B 
reverse side. The witness further stated that be raised on alarm and tried 
to Intervene, when the second appellant gave two Gandasa blows to him. 
The first appellant also gave a Gandasa blow on his head. According to 
him two Injuries on his head were lnfilcted by the second appellant and 
the third one by the first appellant. It ls an admitted case of the prosecu· C 
lion that the accused persons had a grievance against the victim and his 
uncle for having launched some security proceedings against the accused 
persons and they had come with an Intention of taking revenge. 
[928 G-H; 929 A·B] 
1.2. Admittedly, the injuries are found to be simple in nature and D 
this clearly goes to establish that the accused persons had no intention or 
causing death of any of the two persons. In the circumstances, the High 
Court was not right in holding that the accused had an Intention to cause 
the death of one of the victims or the knowledge of his possible death. Only 
injury No.1 on the head of one of the victims has been described as 
dangerous to life and the High Court has itself recorded a finding that the E 
previous litigation between the parties had no.thing to do with that victim 
and It was not established as to which of the two accused had infticted 
injury No.1: on his Head. Thus, the first appellant had not committed any 
offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 
He can only be found guilty for an offence under Section 326 read with F 
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. [929 C·F) 
2. The appellant is a cultivator and has already suffered the agony 
of the case In the Trial Court for more than one year and for more than 
10 years in the High Court and this Court. The co-accused, the real brother 
of the. appellant, died on 30.1.1992. The burden of looking after the widow G 
and three minor children Of the CO·aCCUSed has fallen OD the shoulders of 
the appellant apart from the burden 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.