SURESH versus STATE OF HARYANA

SU RESH II. ST ATE OF HARYANA (Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2007) FEBRUARY 27, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 326 and 307 rlw s. 34 – Assault c

on three persons – Eye-witnesses to the incident including injured witnesses – As per medical evidence, injuries on the victims grievous in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature –

Conviction by trial court – Confirmed by High Court – On appeal, held: In view of cogent D and credible evidence of the injured witnesses and nature of injuries on the victims, conviction justified.

Seven accused, including the appellant-accused were prosecuted for having assaulted three persons. There were four eye-witnesses including two injured witnesses. Trial court convicted four accused and

acquitted three. During pendency of appeal by the j convicted accused one of them died and his appeal abated. High Court confirmed the conviction, but reduced the sentence from 10 years to 7 years. Hence the present

appeals. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 In view of cogent and credible evidence G of the injured witnesses there is no scope for interference in these appeals. Though false implication was pleaded,

the same is without any foundation. Clearly, all persons [2009) 3 S.C.R. r· A who have suffered injuries would not shield the actual culprit and implicate an innocent person when false

implication is pleaded. The foundation has to be laid on the same. In the instant case that has not been done. [Para 5] [554-A-B] 1.2 As per the evidence of the doctor who conducted

medico-legal examination of the victims, all the injures were caused by sharp edged weapons. Injuries No.1 to 4 of one victim were declared as grievous in nature and c the same could have been caused by sharp weapon. The

injuries of the other two victims were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. As per the opinion given by the doctor, there were multiple fractures and surgical emphysema was present. So, the injuries were

D dangerous to life. [Para 4] [552-F-H; 553-A] CRIMINAL APP ELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2007. From the Judgment & Order dated 4.1.06 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal No.

493-SB/1994. WITH F Crl.A.No. 404/2009 Sanjay Rathi, Kapil Kr. Dagar, Jamshed Bey, Parmanand Gaur and Prem Malhotra for the Appellants. T.V. George for the Respondents. ,._ The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

OR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted in S.L.P (Crl.) No.2007 of 2008. [2009) 3 S.C.R. A started giving blows by their respective weapons to Ram Sarup, Sehdav and Nakul. On seeing the occurrence, the other

passengers got down and ran away to the fields. After causing serious injuries to these three persons, the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons. Thereafter, B Dharambir, driver of the tempo with the help of Sanjay (PW- 11), took the injured to Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak, in a Haryana Roadways bus. Sanjay got down at Madina and

.i= went to village Mokhra for giving information to the family members of the injured. Dharambir got the injured admitted in c the Medical College and Hospital, Rohtak. The Medical Officer attended the injured and informed the police. A message was sent to the Police Station Meham. ASI lshwar Singh came to Medical College and Hospital and recorded the statement (Ex. PN) of Dharambir on the basis of which the FIR (Ex. PN/2)

was registered. ,_ On 14.11.1991, Dr. S.P. Chugh, Casualty Medical Officer, M.C.H., Rohtak (PW-9) conducted the medico-legal examination of injured Ram Sarup, Nakul and Sehdev and

E found the following injuries on their person:- The injuries pertaining to Ram Sarup, injured:

1. An incised wound 10x4x2 cm. deep over front of the neck just above the thyrod cartilage. The trachea

was cut and exposed. Advised E.N.T. Surgeon's opinion.

2. An incised wound 16×2 cm X bone deep over right side of the scalp extending from right eyebrow to the parietal region up to the mid line. Advised

Surgeon's opinion. ,._ r 3. Incised wound 6 cm x 1 cm bone deep over left side of the scalp extending from the left eyebrow over SURESH v. STATE OF HARYANA [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]

the scalp. Advised Surgeon's opinion.

4. Incised wound 4×1 x1 cm deep over the left side of the forehead 1 cm deep over the left side of the forehead 1 cm. of mild line.

5. Incised wound 4 x 1 x 1 cm. over the anterior

aspect of left shoulder.

6. Crush injury 16 cm x 8 cm x bone deep over the right shoulder underlying bone muscles were exposed. c As per the witness, injuries No. 1 to 5 were caused by

sharp edged weapon and injury No. 6 by blunt weapon. The injuries pertaining to Nakul, injured: 1. An incised would 12 cm x 6 cm deep over the dorsal aspect of left shoulder. 2. An incised would 10 x 3 cm x bone deep over left

side of the occipital region 1 cm from_ mid line. Advised Surgeon's opinion. 3. Incised would 4 cm x 2 cm x bone deep over right side of the occipital region of the scalp 1 cm of ……

injury No.2. Advised X-ray skull. 4. An incised wound 6 x 4 x 1 cm over the right leg, 2 cm below the tibial tubrosity. Advisied Ortho Surgeon's opinion. 5. A crush injury over the palmer aspect of right hand.

Advised Ortho Surgeon's opinion. 6. Incised wound 6 x 4 cm x bone deep over the lower part of the right leg. (2009] 3 S.C.R.

7. Incised wound 3 x 2 cm x bone deep over the palmer aspect of left hand.

8. Incised wound 6 x 3 cm x bone deep over the paler aspect of left hand.

9. Incised wound 3 x 2 cm x bone deep over the left leg. As per the witness injures No. 1 to 4 and 6 to 9 were

caused by sharp edged weapon and injury No. 5 by blunt c weapon. The injuries pertaining to Sehdev, injured: 1. An incised wound 4 x 1 x cm over the palmer aspect D of right hand. Bleeding was present. Advised Ortho Surgeon's opinion.

2. An incised wound 6 x 4 x 2 cm over the right side of the chest. Advised Surgeon's opinion. 3. In incised wound 3 x 1 x 1 cm over the ventral aspect of right arm just above the elbow.

4. Multiple incised wound of verging sizes present over the right side of the face. Whole of the face was flushed with F blood. Advised Surgeon's opinion. ….. As per the witness, all the injures were caused by sharp

edged weapon. Injuries No.1 to 4 of Sehdev were declared as grievous in G nature vide opinion Ex. PS/1 given by the said witness, and the injures on the person of the injured could have been caused by sharp weapons Ex. P1 and P2. The injuries of Nakul and

Ram Sarup were sufficient cause of death in the ordinary course of nature. As per the opinion Ex. PR/1 given by the said witness, SURESH v. STATE OF HARYANA [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]

there were multiple fractures and surgical emphysema was present. So, the injures were dangerous.to life. After investigation, charge sheet was filed in respect of offence relatable under Sections 148, 307/149, 326/149, 324/ 149 and 323/149 IPC. Since the accused persons pleaded

innocence they were put on trial. 12 witnesses were examined including the alleged eye-witnesses PWs 5, 6, 8 and 9. The trial court directed convictions and imposed sentence as aforementioned. Before the High Court, the stand taken was that no offence under Sections 307, 326 read with Section 34 c IPC has been made out and prosecution has failed to prove

the specific injuries alleged to have been caused by the accused to the injured. On the other hand, the State supported i the judgment. The High Court after referring to the evidence of the witnesses held the eye-witnesses' version that the accused persons were armed with chain, gandasa and hockey sticks

and that they stopped the tempo and started causing injuries to the injured. Injuries on Ram Singh and his two sons namely Nakul and Sehdev have been clearly established. Accordingly, the conviction was maintaired. The High Court noted that the injured persons were given large number of injuries ·with sharp edged weapons and blunt weapons like hockey sticks. They

were mercilessly beaten and attack was also so severe that all the other passengers sitting on the tempo ran away from l spot and none came forward to save the injured. It was also noticed that injuries caused on Nakul and Ram Swarup were

definitely dangerous to life. Therefore, the conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced to 7 years. 5. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the witnesses have not specifically indicated about what acts attracted under Section 307, if any. The sentence in respect of Section 307 was also characterized .•I

to be heavy. Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand submitted that the injury on Ram Singh was so A severe that he lost his memory due to the injuries caused to him. The other injured witnesses PWs 6 and 8 who suffered

serious injuries were examined. In view of cogent and credible evidence of the injured witnesses there is no scope for interfer.nce in these appeals. Though false implication was B pleaded, the same is without any foundation. Clearly, all persons who have suffered injuries would not shield the actual culprit and implicate an innocent person when false implication is pleaded. The foundation has to be laid on the same. In the instant case that has not been done.

c 6. The appeals are without merit and deserve dismissal which we direct. K.K.T. Appeals dismissed.