CHUHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(SC)-1990-12-23
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on December 12,1990

CHUHAR SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

BHERU LAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2003-10-26] [REFERRED TO]
RAM SWAROOP VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2004-10-1] [REFERRED TO]
ROOPA ALIAS RUP SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2005-1-31] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH CHAND VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2005-5-76] [REFERRED TO]
KALU ALIAS LAXMI NARAYAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-7-84] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH DEV VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-1-13] [REFERRED TO]
RAM KISHORE ALIAS KISHORE VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-4-59] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2008-4-231] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal is directed bv Chuhar Singh canvassing the correctness of the judgment made in Criminal Appeal No. 842 of 1977 on the file of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment of the trial Court convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo further imprisonment lor two years and also to undergo imprisonment for one year for the conviction under section 27 of the Arms Act with a direction that both the sentences are to run concurrently.
(2.)Along with the appellant, there was one other appellant namely Karaj Singh who was convicted by the trial Court under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. but he has been acquitted by the High Court. The facts of the prosecution case in brief are as follows:-
On 18-1-1977 at about 5.30 p.m. while the deceased and his father (PW 1 1) were unloading the wooden planks from a tractor at their house, the two accused came there raising Changers. On hearing the noise, the deceased and his father turned round and saw the appellant coming armed with a gun while the acquitted accused Karaj Singh was armed with a gun while the acquitted accused Kehar Singh was armed with a sota. The acquitted accused raised Ialkara and exorted the appellant not to allow the deceased to escape. The father caught hold of the deceased by his arms and asked him to go home. When the deceased raised his arms, suddenly the appellant fired a shot at him with his gun which hit him in the right arm pit. On receipt of the injury the deceased fell unconscious. Both the appellants ran away from the spot. This incident, according to the prosecution was witnessed by the mother of the deceased. The motive alleged for the occurrence related to the purchase of a piece of land of the uncle of the appellant by the father and uncle of the deceased. During the course of the occurrence it is stated that one Shubegh Singh also received some injuries from the shot fired by the appellant. P.W. 2 the Medical Officer has deposed that the dead body of the deceased . as brought to the hospital at about 9.15 p.m. and the same night at about 11.24 p.m. Shubegh Singh appeared before the medical officer with injuries on his person. The medical officer sent an intimation to the police guard in the hospital regarding the incident. PW 27 who was in charge of the police guard at the hospital received the said intimation at about 9.15 p.m. and sent this information to the SHO of Lopoke Police Station. On receipt of the intimation the Sub-Inspector came to the hospital and recorded the statement EX.PT from PW 11 on the basis of which he registered the first information report. The Sub-Inspector held inquest and sent the dead body to the mortuary for autopsy. The appellant was arrested from his village on the next morning i.e. on 20-1-77. On interrogation by the Sub-Inspector, the appellant produced his licensed gun Ex.P-8 from the place of concealment. It is seen from the evidence of the medical officer, PW 3 that the appellant was medically examined by him even at 1.45 a.m. on 19-1-77. The medical officer found an incised wound measuring 6 cms x 2 cms over the right hip along with the iliac crest of right hip bone. The injury was simple in nature. On the same day the same " medical officer examined Maqbool Singh, the brother of the appellant and found on his person four injuries of which injuries Nos. 1 and 2 were incised wounds, and the third one was a lacerated wound and the forth one was a superficial cut. PW 1 conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found one gun shot injury on the right axilla of the deceased with 20 wounds of inlet and this injury in the opinion of the medical officer was sufficient to cause death. After completing the investigation the Sub-Inspector filed 'the charge sheet.

(3.)The appellant during the course of his examination under Section 313, Cr. P.C. came forward with the defence case that he and his brother were attacked by the deceased and that he in exercise of the right of private defence of his person and his brother shot at the deceased. The High Court accepted the evidence of PWs 11 and 12 and confirmed the conviction of this appellant but acquitted the other accused Kehar Singh, hence this appeal.
;


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