LexSURESH SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A SURESH SINGH AND ORS. v. STATE OF HARYANA MARCH 31, 1999 B [G.B. PATTANAIK AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.] Criminal Law-Right of Private Defence-Indian Penal Code Ss. 97, 99, 302, 304 P,art I-Accused chased by deceased-Deceased done to death 11 Om away from his house with sharp weapons r~sulting in five incised C wounds-Held, accused exceeded their right of private defence; acquitted of charge of murder but convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Ten persons including the three appellants, (SS, MS and CP) were charged and tried for the offences of forming an unlawful assembly and D committing the murder of the deceased and injuring three others. The sessions Judge acquitted four of the accused persons. Of the remaining six persons, three more were acquitted by the High Court on appeal. However, the appellants SS and MS were convicted under s. 302 and sentenced to life imprisonment. Appellant CP was convicted under s. 304 Part I and E sentenced to 10 years RI. The appellants contended that seven out of ten of the accused having been acquitted, it would be unsafe to convict'the remaining three on the evidence of the witnesses, although injured. Further, since the High Court had found that one of the accused, R, who gave a lalkara, was being chased F by the deceased and at that point of time the three accused SS, MS and CP gave blows to the deceased, they would be entitled to plead the right of private defence. Partly allowing the appeal, this Court G HELD : The accused persons exceeded their right of private defence while giving blows on the deceased. However, in the circumstances, the conviction of SS and MS under s. 302 could not be sustained. They could be convicted under s. 304 Part I. The conviction ofCP is maintained and all the appellants are sentenced to seven years R.I. (295-F-G] H CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal Nos. . 290 - SURESH SINGHv. STATEOFHARYANA [PATTANAIK, J.] 291 336-37of1993. From the Judgment and Order dated S.11.92 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Crl.A. Nos.137-DB and 144-DB of 1991. U.R. Lalit, Ms. Kanwaljit Kochhar and J.D. Jain for the Appellants. Prem Malhotra for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A B PA TT ANAIK, J. The appellants Suresh Singh and Mohinder Singh have been convicted under Section 302 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo C life imprisonment whereas the appellant Chander Pal has been convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. These three appellants and seven others were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari for offences under Sections 148/149/324/325/302/307 IPC, D for havjng formed an unlawful assembly and committing murder of Mahipal as weltas having injured Chand Ram, Chander Deep and Rajbir, when they came to rescue Mahipal. Learned Sessions Judge acquitted four of the accused persons of all the charges after screening the prosecution evidence on a finding that those accused persons were not present at the spot but they were named later on to implicate as many persons as possible from the side of the E accused. The Sessions Judge also acquitted rest of the six accused persons of the charge under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC, but convicted them under Sections 148/302/323/324/325 read with Section 149 IPC. The convicted accused persons pref erred an appeal to the High court and the High Court by the impugned judgment acquitted three more accused persons of all the charges levelled against them an4 acquitted the present three F appellants of rest of the charges and convicted only under Section 302 and 304 Part I IPC, as already stated and hence the present appeal. The prosecution case as unfolded in the first information report given by PWS is that while deceased Mahipal was sitting on a cot in front of hi!. G house on 13.9.89 at 5.30 P.M., all the accused persons armed with different deadly weapons arrived there and accused Rameshwar having given a lalkara that Mahipal should not be allowed to go, they gave different blows on different parts of the body of Mahipal. Hearing the cries of Mahipal, when his brothers Chand Ram, Chander Deep and Rajbir rushed to the spot, they were also attacked and thereafter the accused persons left the scene of H 292 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1998] 2 S.C.R. A occurrence when the vill
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.