K.P.S.Sandhu, J. - (1.) Satnam Singh appellant alias Satti son of Darshan Singh, resident of Guru Nanakpura Mohalla, Ludhiana, stands convicted under section 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to 3-1/2 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default further rigorous imprisonment for six months.
(2.) The version of the prosecution as put forth by the prosecution witnesses (P.Ws.) is that P.W. Samti Parsad was a partner of Kiran Saree Palace situated, near Girjaghar Chowk, Chaura Bazar, Ludhiana. Satnam Singh alias Satti accused used to set up a phari (stall) for the sale of goggle sand socks. On 1-7-1960, a chhabil was set up in front of the Kiran Saree Palace for serving water to the passers-by. Because of the setting up of the chhabil, the place for phari was narrowed and it affected the sale of Satnam Singh accused who felt aggrieved of it. On 4-7-1980, he put ash in the tub of water meant for chhabil in the presence of Dharam Pal P.W. Samti Pars had P.W. told Satnam Singh accused that it was not proper on his part to do so. Madan Lal, however, told his partner P.W. Samti Parshad that they would collect a gathering of shopkeepers and get the matter settled. On 5-7-1950 at about 8-00 a.m., Sampti Parshad come to the shop for storing water in the tub, followed by Madan Lal and Shiv Kumar, P.Ws. On reaching the shop, they found that the takhatposh had been moved towards the side of the shop. P.W. Samti Parshad enquired from Satnam Singh accused as to who had done so. Satnam Singh accused admitted that he himself had done so with a view to putting his plank for sale of socks and goggles. Tarsem Lal P. W. had also reached there. Satnam Singh accused gave four kirpan blows hitting Samti Parshad on his left flank, check right leg, right buttock. The accused, thereafter, ran away from the spot alongwith the kirpan. Manak Chand who had arrived at the spot removed P. W. Samti Parshad iniured to the Civil Hospital, Ludhiana. At 8-30 on the day of occurrence, Dr. Ajit Singh medically examined Samti Parshad injured and found the following injuries on his person: (1) Incised wound 1 x 1/4 x? on left side of abdomen 3' above left anterior superior iliac spine. (2) Incised wound 1/2 X 1 /4 x? on right side of Chest in anterior axillary line at level of 8th rib. (3) Incised wound 1/2' X 1/4 X muscle deep on front of upper part of right leg. (4) Incised wound 1/2X 1/4' X muscle deep on back of right buttock of lower part. On receipt of medico-legal report of Samti Parshad P. W., ASI Yug Dutt went to the hospital and after getting the opinion of the doctor as to the fitness of the injured P. W. to make a statement recorded his statement Exh. P.F. on the basis of which. F.I.R. Exh. P.F./1 was recorded. The same Police officer carried out the investigation and completed the formalities required in the investigation.
(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined Dr. Ajit Singh P.W. 1 who medically examined the injured; Dr. J. Rao Samuel P.W. 3 who conducted the x-ray examination of the injured and proved x-ray report Exh. P.E.; and Dr. C.M. Singh P.W. 12 who had operated upon the injured and made the following observations: One of the stab wounds which was in the left upper quadrant of the abdomen was explored by making a mid-line out in the upper part of the abdomen. Abdomen was explored and the following findings were noted: (1) There was 100 mIs. of blood in the peritoneal cavity. (2) There was a haematoma near the left part of large intestine. Splenic flexure flolon. (3) There was 3 cms long wound oil the anterior surface of the left kidney. The blood was removed and the haematoma was evacuated and the kidney wound was repaired and the abdomen was closed. The prosecution examined Samti Parshad injured P.W. 4, Tarsem Lal P.W. 5, Madan Lal P.W. 7 and Shiv Kumar P.W. 8 as eye-witnesses of the occurrence. When examined under section 312 Cr.P.C. the appellant took up the plea as under: Samti Prashad P.W. used to raise objection regarding the putting up of the wooden plant near his shop, since it caused obstruction in parking of the scooters. The accused further stated that P.W. Samti Pars had wanted him to remove the wooden plank, since it affected his source of livelihood. He stated that Samti Parshad had poured kerosene oil over the wooden plank and set it on fire and when he had tried to extinguish the fire, Samti Parshad aimed three knife blows and he had picked up a karad (kitchen knife) from the nearby tea-stall and wielded it in self-defence. The appellant undertook to produce defence but ultimately he did not produce any.;