Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. In these appeals three accused i.e. Devender, Pradeep and Parvesh were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34/452/149 IPC; the accused Satinder, Dharamvir and Gulab Rai were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 307/34 IPC and Sections for 452/149 IPC. The appellant Mahender was convicted for the offence punishable under section 452/34 IPC and acquitted of other charges. All the appellants were sentenced to undergo various prison terms; those convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 IPC were sentenced to imprisonment for life; for other offences, they were sentenced to lesser sentences. Those convicted for offences under Sections 307/34 and 452/149 IPC were sentenced for 3 years' imprisonment and other sentences. Mahender too was sentenced to undergo 3 years' imprisonment. All the sentences were directed to operate concurrently.

5. As mentioned earlier the F I R was registered at around 2:30 AM in the morning. The judicial record reveals that the special report (about the incident recorded in the F I R) was received by the Magistrate concerned in terms of Section 157 Cr. PC. at 5:30 AM in the morning.

6. After completion of investigation and on the basis of the materials collected during its course, the police charged the accused for committing various offences. They denied guilt and claimed trial. During the trial the prosecution relied on the testimonies of 23 witnesses and various exhibits including the post-mortem report as well as the MLC's (i.e. medico legal reports) of the accused as well as the injured parties. On an overall analysis of these the Trial Court concluded that the three accused mentioned previously in the judgment were guilty for having committed the offence punishable under section 302 IPC along with other offences. The other accused were variously held guilty for offences under Sections 307 IPC and sections 452/149 IPC.

32. As regards PW-3, no doubt he is an injured witness. Yet, the injuries suffered by him, were simple, according to the attending doctor, PW-4. His MLC, PW-4/D also states that there was a single sharp edged weapon injury on the arm; it was evaluated as simple. Therefore, Satender, who inflicted that injury, is guilty for the offence punishable under Section 324, IPC. The others who held PW-3 to facilitate his attack, i.e Gulab Rai and Dharambir, are guilty by association, by theory of joint responsibility, on account of common intention, under Section 34, IPC. Their conviction under Section 452/149 IPC is also affirmed. As far as Mahendra is concerned, his conviction under Section 452 IPC is left undisturbed.

33. In view of the above findings, the conviction of Devender is maintained in respect of all the offences. The conviction of Pradeep and Pravesh, for the offence under Section 302 IPC is substituted to one under Section 304-I/34 IPC. Their sentence is modified from life imprisonment to imprisonment for 10 years each. Their sentences for the offences punishable under Section 452/149 IPC are confirmed.

Crl.A. 244/2010, Crl. 317/2010, Crl.A. 162/2010 & Crl.A. 163/2010 Page 29

34. The conviction of Gulab Rai, Satender and Dharamvir, having been modified to one under Section 324, instead of Section 307 IPC, the sentence is accordingly altered to 2 ½ years. The conviction and sentence under Sections 452/149 IPC, is left undisturbed. The conviction of Appellant Mahender under Section 452/149 IPC is left undisturbed. In all the cases, the sentences of fine are left undisturbed.