RAGHUBIR SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

Citation: [2011] 10 S.C.R. 739 · Decided: 29-08-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.S. BEDI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011) 10 S.C.R. 739 
RAGHUBIR SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. 
(Criminal Appeal Nos.82-83 of 2005) 
AUGUST 29, 2011 
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860: s. 302 - Murder on account of dispute 
'Jver land - Dispute was as to who was in possession of land, 
A 
B 
the complainant party or the accused - On fateful day, c 
complainant party started ploughing the said land - Accused 
party also reaching there and started ploughing - Fight 
ensued - Injuries sustained by both th~ sides - Accused 'K' 
attacked victim with weapon which resulted in his death -
Other accused also attacked complainant party- Trial Court o 
convicted 7 of the 9 accused including 'K' u/ss.302, 3021149, 
307, 3071149 - High Court modified_ conviction of 'K' to s.304 
Part II - Conviction of three other accused modified to s.324 
and another accused to s.325 respectively- On appeal, held: 
Injury suffered by victim was attributed by the witnesses to 
E 
accused 'K' - Medical evidence proved that the said injury 
was by the weapon used by accused 'K' and the extent and 
gravity of the injury showed that accused 'K' had the intention 
to cause death of the victim - Evidence also showed that the 
said injury was sufficient to cause death in the normal course 
F 
of nature - Injuries attributed to the other three accused were 
simple in nature and cannot be said to have been the cause 
of death - Therefore, accused 'K' held guilty under s.302 for 
having caused the murder of the victim and the judgment of 
the trial court to that limited extent restored - Appeals of other 
accused dismissed. 
G 
Criminal Jaw: Explanation of injuries sustained by the-
accused - Held: Each and every injury on an accused is not 
required to be explained and more particularly where all the 
739 
H 
740 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 10 S.C.R. 
A injuries caused to the accused are simple in nature - The 
facts of the case have to be assessed on the nature of 
probabilities - In the instant case, the injuries on the accused 
were not explained as the prosecution witness did not utter a 
single word as to how they had been suffered by them - In 
8 
this view of the matter, the defence can legitimately raise a 
suspicion that the genesis of the incident was shrouded in 
mystery - Undoubtedly, there were a large number of injured 
witnesses, some of them grievously hurt, to support the 
prosecution case, but in the instant case, this fact by itself 
C cannot preclude the accused from claiming that no case was 
made out against them. 
Appeal against acquittal: Acquittal by High Court -
Scope of interference u/Article 136 - Held: If view taken by 
High Court was plausible or possible, it would not be proper 
D for the Supreme Court to interfere with an order of acquittal -
Various circumstances when Supreme Court would interfere 
with the judgment of the High Court enumerated - Constitution 
of India, 1950 - Article 136. 
E 
The prosecution case was that the land on which 
incident took place was mortgaged to the appellant-PW-
1 several years prior to the date of incident. On the fateful 
day, PW-1 along with the victim-deceased and others 
were ploughing the land when one of the accused 
reached that place on two tractors and also started 
F ploughing the same land. PW-1 protested at this on which 
the accused attempted to run him over with their tractors. 
In the meanwhile, the other accused persons armed with 
farsis, lathis, tanchias, dantis attacked them and ran over 
victim with their tractors and when PW-1 attempted to 
G intervene, he was also given blows with their weapons. 
The trial court convicted 7 of the 9 accused under 
sections 302, 3021149, 307, 307/149 IPC. 
The convict accused filed appeals before the High 
Court. The appellant-PW-1 filed revision against the 
RAGHUBIR SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND 741 
ORS. 
acquittal of the two accused. The High Court held that the 
A 
land on which the incident took place belonged to the 
Forest Department and was adjacent to the fields of the 
accused and the complainant party had on the fateful 
day gone for the first time to cultivate the said land, 
although patwari had advised them not to do so. It further 
B 
held that the accused appeared to be in possession of 
the said land and finding that the complainant party had 
trespassed into it and had started ploughing on which a 
free fight ensued and persons from both the sides 
received injuries. The High Court concluded that in that 

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