REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 807 OF 2007

JAGGA SINGH & ANR.                            Appellant (s)

                VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB                               Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This  Appeal  has  been  filed  against  the  impugned  

judgment  of  the  High  Court  of  Punjab  and  Haryana  dated  

04.12.2006.

The facts have been set out in the impugned judgment  

and hence we are not repeating the same here except where  

necessary.

In brief, the prosecution case is that on 24.4.92 at  

about 8.30 p.m., the 3 accused came to the house of Raja  

Singh.  Later, one of them fired at Baggar Singh on his  

right thigh.  Baggar Singh fell down.  Then the accused  

took  away  the  deceased  Hoshiar  Singh  towards  village  

Heerawala.  After about 20 minutes the sound of 3 or 4  

shots was heard.  Next morning the dead body of Hoshiar  

Singh was found.

The trial Court convicted Jagga Singh to 7 years R.I.  

and a fine under Section 307 IPC.  Jagtar Singh and Kaka  

Singh were also sentenced to 7 years R.I. and a fine.  The  

appeals of the accused to the High Court were dismissed,

but  the  appeal  of  the  State  regarding  acquittal  of  the  

accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 was allowed,  

and they were convicted under Section 302.  Hence, this  

appeal.   

On the facts of the case, we are of the opinion that  

the appellants are entitled to get the benefit of doubt so  

far  as  offence  under  Section  302  Indian  Penal  Code  is  

concerned  because  the  prosecution  case  was  that  Hoshiar  

Singh was taken away by the accused and after 15/20 minutes  

gun shots were heard.  However, the post mortem examination  

on the dead body of the deceased found that there were only  

lacerated wounds. There was no gun shot wound on the body  

of the deceased.   Hence, some doubt is created in the  

prosecution version regarding the charge under Section 302  

IPC  whose  benefit  will  go  to  the  accused.   Thus  the  

appellants are entitled to get the benefit of doubt on that  

charge and consequently they are acquitted of charge  under  

Section 302 IPC.

However, we are of the opinion that the appellants are  

guilty  under  Section  325  IPC  read  with  Section  34  IPC  

because admittedly a gun shot was fired at Baggar Singh  

which  hit  him  in  the  leg.  On  that  count  we  award  the  

sentence of the period already undergone by the appellants.  

The impugned judgment of the High Court is modified to  

the  extent  stated  above.  The  Appeal  is  disposed  of  

accordingly.   

On 14.09.2007 this Court had ordered that the sentence

of  imprisonment  imposed  on  the  appellants  shall  remain  

suspended during the pendency of the Appeal provided each  

of them furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/-  

(Twenty  Thousand  Only)  with  two  sureties  in  the  sum  of  

Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction  

of the trial court. Their bonds are discharged accordingly.

.......................J.  (MARKANDEY KATJU)

........................J.          (GYAN SUDHA MISRA) NEW DELHI; FEBRUARY 03, 2011.