It does not matter that there was no intention to cause death. The incident occurred about 8 p. The State Of Punjab in India Virsa Singh. With this modification the substantive appeal of the appellants in regard to their conviction and sentence is dismissed and their challenge to the grant of compensation is accepted partly and the compensation granted by the High Court is modified, as stated above. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met in case the sentences of imprisonment awarded against the appellants are reduced to the period already undergone.
These observations of Vivian Bose, J. The appellants who are three in number with their father, Virsa Singh accused no. The above circumstances would show that the accused intentionally inflicted that injury and though it may not be premeditated one. In the opinion of the doctor the injury was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. When the three were grappling with each other appellant took out the knife and stabbed the deceased once.
Flakes of pus were sticking round the small intestines and there were six cuts … at various places, and digested food was flowing out from three cuts. There shall be no order as to costs. The question is not whether the prisoner intended to inflict a serious injury or a trivial one but whether he intended to inflict the injury that is proved to be present. In his opinion however the third clause Of Indian Penal Code applied. The High Court as per the impugned judgment, concurred with the finding of the learned Sessions Judge as to the conviction imposed on the appellants herein but came to the conclusion that the imposition of capital punishment was uncalled for since it felt that the case in hand was not one of those rarest of the rare cases and accordingly reduced the sentence to one of life imprisonment in regard to these appellants. Having perused the evidence of these witnesses, we are of the view that the High Court as well as he Trial Court were quite justified in placing reliance upon their evidence especially when their evidence is corroborated by medical evidence. The injuries caused on the deceased Kartar Kaur and Partap Singh were found to have been caused within six hours.
Jawanda, the learned counsel for the appellants, is that the hearing afforded to the appellants at the appellate and revisional stages was no substitute for the hearing required to be afforded by the Managing Officer before passing an order under Rule 102. On appeal to the High Court they were all acquitted. For the foregoing reasons this appeal is allowed though without any ordar as to costs; the orders of the Managing Officer, the appellate authority and the Chief Settlement Commissioner, are set aside, and it is left open to the appropriate Managing Officer to take up, if necessary, the question of determination and cancellation of any area allotted to the appellants in excess of their entitlement after giving due notice and adequate opportunity to the appellants to show cause against the proposed action in accordance with law. Intention is a matter of inference from the circumstances. The others, Japan and South Korea, both have de-facto moratorium i. There is provocation in Exception 4 as in Exception 1; but the injury done is not the direct consequence of that provocation.
Send your modifications to our editors for review. The High Court upheld the conviction, It was argued that the third clause Of s. State Of Punjab has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3. . It is true that in a given case the enquiry may be linked up with the seriousness of the injury. The Investigating Officer also found two empty.
It was not disputed at any stage that the notice of the proposed cancellation was issued to a dead person, that the same was not served on appellants Nos. The injury was through the whole thickness of the abdominal wall. Of course, that is not the kind of enquiry. They might have suffered simple injuries because they might have collected their arms so as to make counter attacks after seeing unarmed Kartar Kaur and Partap Singh having been seriously injured. The view of the High Court in dismissing the Writ Petition of the petitioner is unexceptionable. The appellants are directed to be released forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case. On appeal being preferred by the accused persons, High Court.
Katyal Assistant Registrar-cum-Managing Officer, Rehabilitation Deptt. The nature of the injury, whether it is on the vital or non-vital part of the body, the weapon used, the circumstances in which the injury in caused and the manner in which the injury is inflicted are all relevant factors which may go to determine the required intention or knowledge of the offender and the offence committed by him. Of course it must, and of course it must be proved by the prosecution. In theaftermath of assassination of Prime Minister Bandernaike in 1959, Ceylon hurriedlyreintroduced capital punishment for murder. He went home with the gun.
Decision: The court held that the case is covered by third clause of s. Sudden fight does not require mere absence of pre-meditation. They were further convicted under Section 148 I. In the absence of evidence, or reasonable explanation, that the prisoner did not intend to stab in the stomach with a degree of force sufficient to penetrate that far into the body, or to indicate that his act was a regrettable accident and that he intended otherwise, it would be perverse to conclude that he did not intend to inflict the injury that he did. State of Punjab 1981 , Gurmail Singh v.
For the foregoing reasons this appeal is allowed though without any order as to costs; the orders of the Managing Officer, the appellate authority and the Chief Settlement Commissioner, are set aside, and it is left open to the appropriate Managing Officer to take up, if necessary, the question of determination and cancellation of any area allotted to the appellants in excess of their entitlement after giving due notice and adequate opportunity to the appellants to show cause against the proposed action in accordance with law. He was allotted agricultural lands in village Lehra gaga, Teh. Even thereafter Tara Singh is said to have given kirpan blow on her left thigh and Virsa Singh gave two takwa blows on her both wrists. In that case, the first part of the clause does not come into play. A fight is a combat between two or more persons whether with or without weapons. On the evening of the day of the occurrence, there was a heated exchange of words. No evidence or explanation is given about why the appellant thrust a spear into the abdomen of the deceased with such force that it penetrated the bowels and three coils of the intestines came out of the wound and that digested food oozed out from cuts in three places.
For arriving at a finding as to the whether the accused persons had legitimately exercised their right of private defence, it is necessary to pass the question as to who had started the assault. Even if the evidence of Balkar Singh is held not to be reliable, as has been submitted by Mr. She was not and could not have been armed with any weapon. The intent requirement The ingredient 'intention' in that Clause is very important and that gives a clue in a given case whether offence involved is murder or not. But for that Khem Singh may perhaps not have died or may have lived a little longer.