- (1.) The appellant, on his conviction by the learned Additional Judge, Special court, Bhatinda for an offence under Section 326 Indian Penal Code, was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default three months rigorous imprisonment. He has challenged his conviction and sentence through this appeal under Section 14 of the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special courts) Act 1984. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, we have gone through the evidence on the record and also perused the Judgement of the trial court.
(2.) That on 16/1 1/1984, at about 6/6.30 p.m. an occurrence took place in which Karnail Singh PW2 received an injury is not in dispute. The case of the appellants, however, is that the injury was caused to Karnail Singh. PW2 by the appellant with a Kirpan in self defence, after the appellant had been attacked, with a gandassa, by Karnail Singh. PW2. Both Karnail Singh, PW2 and Balbir Singh, pw 3, however. denied having caused any injury to the appellant during the occurrence. The trial court dis-believed the defence version and found that though injuries had been caused to the appellant by Karnail Singh, PW2, in spite of the denial by him, but, it was the appellant who was the aggressor. The appellant had been examined by Dr. M. S. Choudhary, Prosecution Witness 1 on the date of the occurrence itself at about 11.30 p.m. He had found the following injuries on the appellant: "1. Incised wound 4" x 3/4 " on the right side of the face and forehead extending from 1 " lateral to the right eye up to the forehead vertically placed. Fresh bleeding was present. Injury was subjected to X-ray. 2. Incised wound 2.5 cm x 0.3 cm skin deep on the palmer aspect of the left index finger, at the base obliquely placed. Fresh bleeding was present." In so far as the injuries on the appellant are concerned, the trial court observed: "Here I am inclined to agree with this plea of the defence also that two incised wounds one on the forehead and other on the palmer aspect of the left index finger of Mehar Singh accused remained unexplained inasmuch as both Karnail Singh and Balbir Singh (PWs) have deposed that they were not caused in the occurrence," and went on to say that, "Of course the injuries on the person of accused and not explained by the prosecution and a doubt could arise against its own version. The accused must have received injuries during the occurrence at the hands of karnali Singh. Although he tried to conceal the manner in which the injuries were caused to Mehar Singh."
(3.) Pw1 had also found the following injuries on Kamail Singh. PW2. when he examined him on the same date at about 10.00 p.m. "1. Incised wound 8 cm x 2 cm x bone deep underlying bone cut obliquely placed on the left side of the occipital region. Profuse bleeding was present. 2. An abrasion 2 cm x 2 cm on the anterior aspect of right knee. Fresh bleeding was present.";