Supreme Court of India
SURESHversusSTATE OF HARYANA
- Citation
- 2009 INSC 279
- Decided
- 27 February 2009
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- ARIJIT PASAYAT
Holding
The conviction under Sections 326 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC is justified and the appeals are dismissed.
Summary
Seven persons, including the appellant, were charged with assaulting three victims (Ram Sarup, Nakul and Sehdev) using sharp-edged weapons, causing grievous injuries that were medically certified as dangerous to life. Four accused were convicted by the trial court under Sections 326 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC; three were acquitted. The High Court upheld the convictions, reducing the sentence from ten to seven years. On appeal before the Supreme Court, the appellants argued that the prosecution failed to prove the specific injuries and raised a false implication plea. The Court examined the credible testimony of the injured eyewitnesses and the medico‑legal report confirming the nature and cause of the injuries, and found no basis for the false implication claim. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, confirming the convictions and sentences.
Issues considered
- Whether the evidence of injured eyewitnesses and medical examination establishes the elements of offences under Sections 326 and 307 IPC read with Section 34.
- Whether the plea of false implication by the accused is substantiated.
- Whether the conviction and sentence imposed are sustainable on the record.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 148, s. 149, s. 307, s. 323, s. 324, s. 326, s. 34
Subjects
assaultgrievous hurtattempt to murdercommon intentionfalse implicationeyewitness testimonymedical evidenceconvictionsentencing
Judgment
[2009] 3 S.C.R. 547
-'!
A
SU RESH
II.
STATE OF HARYANA
(Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2007)
FEBRUARY 27, 2009 B
[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. E
There were four eye-witnesses including two injured
, witnesses. Trial court convicted four accused and
"' j
acquitted three. During pendency of appeal by the
convicted accused one of them died and his appeal
abated. High Court confirmed the conviction, but reduced F
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
547
H
548 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [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]
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 ELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 16 of 2007.
From the Judgment & Order dated 4.1.06 of the High
E 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.
G ,._
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
OR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted in S.L.P (Crl.)
No.2007 of 2008.
H
550 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [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)
D 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
F was cut and exposed. Advised E.N.T. Surgeon's
opinion.
2. An incised wound 16x2 cm X bone deep over right
side of the scalp extending from right eyebrow to
G 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 ~
H
SURESH v. STATE OF HARYANA 551
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
...
the scalp. Advised Surgeon's opinion. A
4. Incised wound 4x1 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.
B
5. Incised wound 4 x 1 x 1 cm. over the anterior
- 6.
aspect of left shoulder.
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: D
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. E
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. F
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. G
Advised Ortho Surgeon's opinion.
6. Incised wound 6 x 4 cm x bone deep over the lower
part of the right leg.
H
552 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 3 S.C.R.
A 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.
B
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.
E 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,
H
SURESH v. STATE OF HARYANA 553
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
there were multiple fractures and surgical emphysema was A
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 8
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
the judgment. The High Court after referring to the evidence of
i
the witnesses held the eye-witnesses' version that the accused D
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 E
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 F
--- 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 G
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
to be heavy. Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the
.•I
other hand submitted that the injury on Ram Singh was so H
,
\.
554 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 3 S.C.R.
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.
. '
I
\
•
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "assault"Sign in to search