- (1.) On April 19, 1973, the respondent Om Prakash (hereinafter to be described as the accused) inflicted as many as five stab wounds on the appellants Suraj Bhan. The injuries were very severe as will be found from the description given below:- "1. Incised wound 5 cm x 2 cm x oblique spindle shape on the left side of the front of abdomen, 8 cm below the xiphisternum and 6 cm to the left of the mid line. Depth not probed, edges were fresh. 2. Incised wound 2 1/2 cm x 1 cm oblique, 6 cm on the left and 2 cm above injury No.1, spindle shaped. Edges were fresh and depth was not probed. 3. Incised wound 2 1/2 cm x 1 cm horizontal, spindle shaped 6 cm above the left anterior superior iliac spine. Depth was not probed and edges were fresh. 4. Incised wound 1 cm x 1/4 cm x 2 mm deep, horizontal 5 cm inner to end at the level of left anterior superior iliac spine, edges were fresh. 5. Penetrating wound 5 cm x 2 1/3 cm x cavity deep, horizontal on the front of abdomen 2 cm to the right of midline 10 cm below the level of xiphisternum, edges were clean cut and fresh, the coils of small intestine protruding through the wound." The appellant had also to undergo an operation. There is no doubt that prompt and proper medical attention alone saved the appellant from death.
(2.) The accused was convicted under Section 307, I.P.C. by the trial court by its judgment dated February 26, 1974 and sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and also to a fine of Rs.200/-, in default rigorous imprisonment for one year. Although the accused gave his age as 19 years, according to the trial court he appeared to be aged about 23 years.
(3.) The accused appealed to the High Court against his conviction and sentence. The appeal was numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 442 of 1974. The injured Suraj Bhan also filed a Criminal Revision Application being numbered as 606 of 1974 for enhancement of the sentence passed on the accused. The appeal was decided by a learned single Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on January 10, 1975. It appears from the judgment of the High Court in that appeal that conviction of the accused was not challenged. The only point that was urged was that the accused was entitled to set off the period of his detention as an under trial prisoner against the period of imprisonment imposed upon him under Section 428 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 (Act No.2 of 1974) which came into force from April 1, 1974. It appears also from the judgment that the State did not oppose the aforesaid submission on behalf of the accused. The learned single Judge, therefore, passed the order in the following terms:- "There is force in this submission of the learned counsel which is not opposed by the State counsel. I am of the view that the ends of justice will be met if the term of imprisonment of the convict appellant is reduced to that already undergone by him". Having said so the learned single Judge dismissed the appeal maintaining the conviction and reduced the accused's term of imprisonment to that already undergone by him and also maintained the sentence of fine. Including the pre-conviction detention the accused served only one year and eight months of the sentence.;