Skip to content


Kundan Singh Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 444 of 1981
Judge
Reported inAIR1982SC62; 1982CriLJ626; (1982)3SCC213
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 307 and 324
AppellantKundan Singh
RespondentState of Punjab
Excerpt:
- indian penal code, 1890.sections 304 part ii & 201:[dr.arijit pasayat, dr.mukundakam sharma & h.l. dattu,jj] culpable homicide - deceased who was addicted to alcohol, picked up quarrel, assaulted main accused and tried to pull her sari - main accused dealt fatal blow with iron rod on head of deceased and other accused buried his body - extra judicial confession by main accused and circumstance of recovery of dead body established guilt of accused persons held, conviction of accused persons is proper. however, effect and relevance of section 360 cr.p.c. vis--vis main accused, a woman, was not considered by trial court and high court. matter therefore remanded for deciding said issue. .....in the courtyard of their house when the appellant fired gun shots and he could not, therefore, have intended to injure them, the conviction of the appellant under section 307, i.p.c. was not justified. we think that the conviction of the appellant could be maintained only under section 324 of the i.p.c. since p.w. 6 and p.w. 7 received simple injuries. we accordingly allow the appeal and alter the conviction of the appellant to one under section 324 of the for causing simple injuries to p.w. 6 and p.w. 7 and since the appellant has already suffered imprisonment for about 16 months, we direct that the sentence imposed on the appellant be reduced to that already undergone by him and ha may be set at liberty forthwith.
Judgment:

P.N. Bhagwati, J.

1. We are of the view that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case and particularly in view of the fact that P.W. 6 and P.W. 7 were in the courtyard of their house when the appellant fired gun shots and he could not, therefore, have intended to injure them, the conviction of the appellant under Section 307, I.P.C. was not justified. We think that the conviction of the appellant could be maintained only under Section 324 of the I.P.C. since P.W. 6 and P.W. 7 received simple injuries. We accordingly allow the appeal and alter the conviction of the appellant to one under Section 324 of the for causing simple injuries to P.W. 6 and P.W. 7 and since the appellant has already suffered imprisonment for about 16 months, we direct that the sentence imposed on the appellant be reduced to that already undergone by him and ha may be set at liberty forthwith.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //