CHANDER GIANI Vs. STATE
LAWS(P&H)-1957-7-1
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on July 01,1957

CHANDER GIANI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE appellants are two brothers, Chandar aged 19, and Pearey aged 24, and they have come up in appeal to this Court from their conviction under Section 201, indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge, Rohtak, has sentenced them to undergo seven years' rigorous imprisonment each.
(2.) THE facts of this case are that the two-accused appellants of village Khewra were sent up to stand their trial under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of one Teku, Brahman of the adjoining village Chauhan Joshi. On the early morning of 8th October, 1956 P. W. 2 Yad Ram of village Rai noticed a dead body wliich had on it injuries caused by a sharp-edged weapon lying by the side of the Grand Trunk Road between miles 21 and 22. He reported the matter to the police and the Sub-Inspector recorded Exhibit P. A-, the first information report, and proceeded to the spot where he prepared the injury statement, Exhibit P. S. , and the inquest report, Exhibit P. T, and sent the dead body for post mortem examination. As on account of the rains the land where body was bound, was soft, footprints were also-noticed and the police took care to lift them by means of moulds which are Exhibits P. 1 to P. 3. The body had been identified by Yad Ram to be that of teku. Inquiries during the course of the investigation led the Sub-Inspector on 10th October, to Giani, a chowkidar. The information received from him brought the Sub-Inspector into contact with P. W. 10 Ram Sarup and P. W. 11 Sri Chand.
(3.) ACCORDING to Ram Sarup, he was cutting his jowar crop, four or five days previous to his being examined by the Sub-Inspector, when he noticed that chandar accused along with his brother Santu brought their goafs which trespassed the fields of Teku deceased- Teku abused them and gave slaps to santu and snatched a dau, which was a sharp-edged instrument, from him and did not return it despite their requests. Ram Sarup P. W. 10 was asked to use his good offices in getting the return of the dau, but Teku despite the requests from Ram sarup declined to return it as he felt that the flock of the accused had damaged his crop. Some hours later when they were about to-leave for their village, Ram Sarup P. W. 10 stopped for some time with Sri Chand P. W. 11 and his brother Kali Ram in the nearby field where Teku also joined them. The latter did not accompany his three companions, as he wanted to-keep watch for some lime more, lest further damage was done to his crop by the goats of Chandar and his brother. While the three persons named above were returning to their village, they came across Chandar and Pearey accused who told them that they were proceeding to get their dau back from Teku. Two days later P. W. 10 learnt of the death of Teku and told Giani chow-kidar about having witnessed the quarrel between Chandar and his brother on the one side and Teku on the other. P. W. 11 Sri Chand supported the story given by Ram Sarup in all material particulars.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.