{"id":178103,"date":"2009-10-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009"},"modified":"2019-02-25T19:50:13","modified_gmt":"2019-02-25T14:20:13","slug":"mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009<\/div>\n
Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                          (1)\n\n IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                                    Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001\n\n\nMohd. Yunus & Ors.                               ..........Appellants\n\n                          Versus\n\nState of Haryana                                 ..........Respondent\n\n\n                                    Crl. Revn. No. 418 of 2005\n\n\n\nDeenu                                            ..........Petitioner\n\n                          Versus\n\nState of Haryana & Anr.                          ..........Respondents\n\n\n                                    DATE OF DECISION: 26.10.2009\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH\n        HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY\n\n\n\nPresent:-   Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate\n            with Mr. Deepender Brar and Mr. Swaran\n            Tiwana, Advocate for the appellants.\n\n            Mr. H.S. Sran, Additional Advocate\n            General, Haryana.\n\n\n\n                          ****\n\n\nDAYA CHAUDHARY, J.\n<\/pre>\n
            This order shall dispose of Crl. Appeal No.437-DB of 2001 and<\/p>\n
Crl. Revn. No. 418 of 2005. Criminal Appeal has been filed by Mohd.<\/p>\n
Yunus, Mohd. Jamil and Ghasita against the judgment and order dated<\/p>\n
25.7.2001 and 26.7.2001, respectively, passed by Additional Sessions<\/p>\n
Judge, Gurgaon in Sessions Case No.12 of 15.4.1999, whereby, the<\/p>\n
accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                         (2)<\/p>\n
imprisonment and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs.20,000\/- each under<\/p>\n
Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and in default of payment of fine to<\/p>\n
further undergo RI for two years each. They have also been convicted and<\/p>\n
sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine in the sum of<\/p>\n
Rs.1000\/- each under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and in default<\/p>\n
of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months each.<\/p>\n
            Criminal Revision No. 418 of 2005 has been filed by<\/p>\n
complainant-Deenu against the judgment dated 5.10.2004, whereby,<\/p>\n
Akhtar Hussain, respondent No.2 was acquitted by granting benefit of<\/p>\n
doubt. For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from Crl. Appeal<\/p>\n
No. 437-DB of 2001.\n<\/p>\n
            FIR No. 10 dated 9.1.1999 was registered against the<\/p>\n
accused-appellants at Police Station Nuh for the offences punishable<\/p>\n
under Sections 323, 325, 302 read with section 34 IPC on the basis of<\/p>\n
statement made by Deenu (PW-1) to the effect that on 9.1.1999 at about<\/p>\n
9.10 pm he along with his brother Akbar (since deceased) and Harun (son<\/p>\n
of Deenu) were sitting together warming themselves in front of fire. When<\/p>\n
Akbar was going to his house, accused-Ghasita, his son Akhtar Hussain<\/p>\n
armed with Pharsa, accused-Jamil armed with kulhari and accused Yunus<\/p>\n
armed with lathi reached there and told to teach a lesson for the fight<\/p>\n
occurred day before yesterday. Ghasita gave a Pharsa blow on the head<\/p>\n
of Akbar. Second blow was given by Akhtar Hussain with his Pharsa on his<\/p>\n
head. Third blow was given to Akbar by accused-Jamil with his Kulhari on<\/p>\n
his head. After receiving injures, Akbar fell down on the ground. Yunus<\/p>\n
still gave lathi blows on the legs of Akbar and accused-Ghasita also gave<\/p>\n
another Pharsa blow on his head. Ahmad (PW-2) tried to rescue Akbar<\/p>\n
from the accused persons.        Accused-Yunus gave lathi blows on the<\/p>\n
shoulder and Hasli of Ahmad. Complainant-Deenu and Harun rescued<\/p>\n
both the injured persons from the accused party otherwise they would have
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                            (3)<\/p>\n
given more injuries.      After sending both the injured to the hospital,<\/p>\n
complainant-Deenu went to the Police Station to report the matter, on the<\/p>\n
basis of which FIR Ex. PA was registered. After registration of aforesaid<\/p>\n
FIR, Sub Inspector\/Station House Officer Daya Nand (PW-10) visited Civil<\/p>\n
Hospital, Nuh and moved an application Ex. PE\/1 to the Medical Officer<\/p>\n
seeking opinion regarding fitness of injured Akbar for his statement.<\/p>\n
Doctor vide opinion Ex. PE declared him unfit to make statement. Sub<\/p>\n
Inspector Daya Nand then moved another application Ex. PF\/1 to the<\/p>\n
doctor for seeking his opinion for second injured Ahmad (PW-2) and doctor<\/p>\n
declared him fit to make statement. After the fitness report, statement of<\/p>\n
Ahmad (PW-2) under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded. A ruqa was sent<\/p>\n
to the Police Station by Doctor regarding admission of injured Akbar and<\/p>\n
Ahmad in the hospital at 12 noon.\n<\/p>\n
            Dr. M.S. Ranga (PW-3) of CHC, Nuh, medico legally examined<\/p>\n
Akbar and following injuries were found on his person:-<\/p>\n
            (1)Incised wound 2.5 cm x 2 cm x bone deep placed over the<\/p>\n
              scalp frontal region in the midline transversely with profuse<\/p>\n
              bleeding.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (2)Incised wound 4 cm x 2 mm x bone deep placed over the<\/p>\n
              frontal region of the scalp with profused bleeding placed just<\/p>\n
              paralled and behind the injury no.1.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (3)Incised wound 1 cm x .2 cm placed over the frontal region of<\/p>\n
              the scalp just lateral to injury no. 1 & 2 placed vertically with<\/p>\n
              profused bleeding.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (4)Incised wound 2 cm x .1 cm x bone deep placed over the<\/p>\n
              frontal region of the scalp just behind the injury no.3<\/p>\n
              anteroposteriorly.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Xray of the skull was advised and Surgeon’s opinion was sought. Duration<\/p>\n
of injuries were within six hours and kind of weapon used was sharp. Due
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                              (4)<\/p>\n
to the serious condition of Akbar, he was referred to Government Hospital,<\/p>\n
Gurgaon, from where he was referred to Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi.<\/p>\n
            Dr. M.S. Ranga (PW-3) also medico legally examined Ahmad<\/p>\n
(PW-2) and noted following injuries on his person:-<\/p>\n
            (1)Contused abrasion 2 x 3 cm placed over the right shoulder<\/p>\n
                 joint. 7 cm lateral to joint line towards medial side i.e. in the<\/p>\n
                 plane of mid clavicular line posterior aspect with bright red<\/p>\n
                 colour and associated swelling with restriction of the joint<\/p>\n
                 movements.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (2)Contusion 2 x 1 cm placed over the right hip joint lateral<\/p>\n
                 aspect with no significance swelling of tenderness and no<\/p>\n
                 restriction of movement.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Injury No.1 was advised for X-ray and injury No.2 was simple. Both were<\/p>\n
caused by blunt weapon within duration of six hours.<\/p>\n
            SI Daya Nand(PW-10) visited the place of occurrence and<\/p>\n
prepared rough site plan Ex. PM. He picked blood stained earth from the<\/p>\n
spot and sealed it in a parcel with seal ‘DN’, which were taken into police<\/p>\n
possession vide memo Ex. PN.          Blood stained clothes of Akbar produced<\/p>\n
by Harun were also taken into police possession vide memo Ex. PO in a<\/p>\n
sealed parcel.      Condition of Akbar was serious and he was sent to Civil<\/p>\n
Hospital, Gurgaon, from where he was referred to Safdarjang Hospital,<\/p>\n
New Delhi. SI Daya Nand recorded DDR Ex. PU at about 5.40 pm and<\/p>\n
converted the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34<\/p>\n
IPC.\n<\/p>\n
            On 11.1.1999, Akbar succumbed to his injuries in Safdarjang<\/p>\n
Hospital, New Delhi. Complainant-Deenu recorded this fact with Police<\/p>\n
Station Nuh, on the basis of which DDR Ex. PV at 4.00 pm was recorded<\/p>\n
for conversion of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section<\/p>\n
34 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                             (5)<\/p>\n
            On receiving information regarding death of Akbar due to<\/p>\n
injuries on his person, ASI Siri Niwas (PW-8) of Delhi Police, reached<\/p>\n
Safdarjang Hospital, Delhi and prepared inquest report Ex. PL. He also<\/p>\n
sent the dead body for post-mortem examination.\n<\/p>\n
            Doctor Chander Kant (PW-7) of Safdarjang Hospital, New<\/p>\n
Delhi, conducted the post-mortem examination and found following injuries<\/p>\n
on the person of the deceased-Akbar:-\n<\/p>\n
            (1)One transversly placed stitched wound on right fronto<\/p>\n
                 temporal region.     Total length 12 cm.    Total number of<\/p>\n
                 stitches 12.    On removal of the stitches the wound was<\/p>\n
                 partially surgical in nature.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                     (A)   One incised wound on right fronto region at the<\/p>\n
                     junction of frontal region with anterior aspect of right<\/p>\n
                     parietal region size 3 cm x 1.3 cm x bone deep. Margins<\/p>\n
                     were clean cut except at the places of stitches both<\/p>\n
                     angles accute.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                     (B)   One incised wound parallel to injury No. (a) size<\/p>\n
                     2.1 cm x 1.4 cm x bone deep, both margins clean cut<\/p>\n
                     except at the place of stitches.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                           Underneath right fronto-parietal bones were in<\/p>\n
                     pieces in irregular shape and size, already removed in<\/p>\n
                     an area of 8 cms x 5 cms.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            2(c)     One incised wound vertically placed middle of fronto-<\/p>\n
            parietal region 2.6 cm x 2 cm x bone deep.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            3.       Abrasion on back of left shoulder region size 4 cms x 3<\/p>\n
            cms.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            4.       Abrasions on occipital region left side size 2 cm x 1 cm.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            5.       Contusion left eye.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
During internal examination of the dead body, he noted following injuries:-\n<\/p>\n
 Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                              (6)<\/p>\n
              1. There was extravasation of blood under scalp in the frontal<\/p>\n
                both parietal and temporal, left occipital region, right<\/p>\n
                frontoparietal bone places already removed as described<\/p>\n
                above. Fracture of left frontal, left parietal, right temporal,<\/p>\n
                right frontal bones.    Contusion and lacerations of under<\/p>\n
                surface, superior surface of right frontal, right parietal lobes.<\/p>\n
                Brain was 1480 gms. in weight, conjested and oedematous<\/p>\n
                with    petechael      haemorrhages.          Intra     medullary<\/p>\n
                haemorrhages present.\n<\/p>\n
              2. Both lungs were congested and oedematous.\n<\/p>\n
              3. Stomach was empty.\n<\/p>\n
              4. Liver kidneys and spleen were congested.\n<\/p>\n
              As per opinion of the doctor, death was within 48 hours and<\/p>\n
the cause of death was shock and head injuries which were ante mortem in<\/p>\n
nature. Injuries No.1, (B) and 2 (c) were caused by heavy cutting weapon<\/p>\n
and other injuries by blunt force from blunt object. All the injuries were<\/p>\n
sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature.<\/p>\n
              On 14.1.1999, SI Daya Nand (PW-10) arrested accused-<\/p>\n
Yunus and Jamil, who produced their lathi Ex. P1 and Kulhari Ex.P2<\/p>\n
respectively used in the crime, which were taken into police possession.<\/p>\n
Accused-Ghasita was arrested on 20.1.1999               and on the basis of<\/p>\n
disclosure statement made by him on 22.1.1999, blood stained Pharsa<\/p>\n
used in the crime was recovered and taken into police possession.<\/p>\n
              Accused-Akhtar     Hussain    was     found    innocent     in   the<\/p>\n
investigation by the police, who was reported to be present at the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
              After completion of investigation and necessary formalities,<\/p>\n
accused-Ghasita, Jamil and Yunus were sent for trial for offences<\/p>\n
punishable under Sections 302, 325, 323 read with section 34 of IPC,
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                             (7)<\/p>\n
placing the name of accused-Akhtar Hussain in the column No.2 of report<\/p>\n
under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. The case was committed to the Court of<\/p>\n
Additional   Sessions     Judge,    Gurgaon.        Accused-appellants   were<\/p>\n
chargesheeted under Sections 302, 323, 325 read with Section 34 IPC, to<\/p>\n
which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.\n<\/p>\n
             In order to prove the charges, the prosecution first examined<\/p>\n
complainant\/eye witness Deenu (PW-1). An application under Section 319<\/p>\n
Cr.P.C. for summoning accused-Akhtar Hussain was filed to face trial along<\/p>\n
with other accused persons, which was allowed vide order dated<\/p>\n
2.11.1999. Accused-Akhtar Hussain filed Crl. Revn. No. 1458 of 1999 and<\/p>\n
this Court vide order dated 29.11.1999 stayed further proceedings only qua<\/p>\n
Akhtar Hussain.    Proceedings against other accused persons were not<\/p>\n
stayed. Out of three, two accused persons were in custody and further<\/p>\n
proceedings in the trial against them were taken by the trial Court.<\/p>\n
             The prosecution examined complainant\/eye witness-Deenu<\/p>\n
(PW-1), injured eye witness Ahmad (PW-2), Dr. M.S. Ranga (PW-3),<\/p>\n
Draftsman Constable Sarwan Kumar (PW-4), Head Constable Sunil Dutt<\/p>\n
(PW-5), Constable Raj Kumar (PW-6), Dr. Chander Kant (PW-7), ASI Siri<\/p>\n
Niwas (PW-8), Head Constable Hari Kishan (PW-9) and SI Daya Nand<\/p>\n
(PW-10).      However, prosecution gave up PW Harun, Abdul Rashid,<\/p>\n
Mozam Khan, Rati Mohd. And Fattu being unnecessary.<\/p>\n
             After closure of prosecution evidence, statements of accused-<\/p>\n
appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein, they denied<\/p>\n
every circumstance appearing against them and pleaded innocence.           It<\/p>\n
was also stated by them that they were in illegal custody of the police since<\/p>\n
13.1.1999 and had falsely been implicated in this case due to party faction<\/p>\n
in the village and on account of their old enmity.\n<\/p>\n
             In defence, accused-appellants tendered Ex. DB certified copy<\/p>\n
of complaint of accused-Ghasita against deceased Akbar, PW Harun and
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                            (8)<\/p>\n
others for offence punishable under Sections 379, 380, 411, 406, 407, 452,<\/p>\n
120-B, 506 427 and 403 IPC, for illegal cutting and removal of 13 trees<\/p>\n
belonging to the Panchayat; Ex. DC copy of pedigree table to show that<\/p>\n
PWs Deenu and Ahmad are colaterals related to each other by 4th degree<\/p>\n
and Ed. PD certified copy of statement of Ghasita as prosecution witness in<\/p>\n
trial “State Vs. Tundal etc.” under Section 304 IPC.<\/p>\n
            The trial Court after hearing both the parties and perusing the<\/p>\n
evidence available on record convicted accused-appellants Mohd. Yunus,<\/p>\n
Modh. Jamil and Ghasita for offence under Sections 302 and 323 read with<\/p>\n
Section 34 IPC and were acquitted of the charge framed under Section 325<\/p>\n
IPC. However, accused-Akhtar Hussain was acquitted by the trial Court<\/p>\n
by giving benefit of doubt.\n<\/p>\n
            Mr. R.S. Rai, learned senior counsel for the accused-<\/p>\n
appellants argued that the FIR is ante-timed and the delay has been used<\/p>\n
to cover up the time gap. FIR was recorded at about 11.00 am and as per<\/p>\n
medical record, the injured arrived in the hospital at noon.         As per<\/p>\n
statement of Deenu (PW-1) he reached the Police Station after getting the<\/p>\n
injured admitted in the hospital. The delay in registration of the FIR is the<\/p>\n
result of consultations and deliberations.\n<\/p>\n
            It is also the argument of learned counsel for the accused-<\/p>\n
appellants that the conviction of the accused-appellants has been based on<\/p>\n
testimony of interested witnesses, who are closely related to the deceased<\/p>\n
and their statements do not inspire confidence.        Ahmad and Deenu are<\/p>\n
closely related to each other being collaterals to the 4th degree and Deenu<\/p>\n
is the real brother of the deceased. The prosecution has failed to examine<\/p>\n
the independent witnesses, namely, Harun and Deenu S\/o Kalu, in whose<\/p>\n
house eye-witness and deceased were earlier warming themselves before<\/p>\n
fire. The presence of Deenu (PW-1) at the spot is also doubtful as Ahmad<\/p>\n
(PW-2) in his statement made under Section 161 Cr.P.C. did not mention
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                           (9)<\/p>\n
that Deenu was present at the spot and his clothes were not smeared with<\/p>\n
blood of deceased-Akbar. As per statement of Deenu (PW-1) and Ahmad<\/p>\n
(PW-2), Deenu lifted Akbar in an injured condition and put him in the<\/p>\n
tractor. As per statement of Deenu, his clothes were not smeared with<\/p>\n
blood inspite of the fact that he lifted the injured person. Similarly, Ahmad<\/p>\n
(PW-2) has stated that their clothes were slightly smeared with blood of<\/p>\n
Akbar. There is no consistency in the statements of Deenu (PW-1) and<\/p>\n
Ahmad (PW-2). Not only this, there are discrepancies and contradictions<\/p>\n
in their statements but their statements are self-contradictory also. As per<\/p>\n
statement, Ahmad (PW-2) received two lathi injuries on his shoulder which<\/p>\n
were given by Yunus whereas as per FIR Yunus had given one lathi blow<\/p>\n
on his right ‘shoulder’ and another on his ‘hasli’. As per medical evidence,<\/p>\n
he received two injuries on his right hip joint lateral aspect. As per opinion<\/p>\n
of the Doctor that injury on his shoulder could be self-suffered or could be<\/p>\n
suffered with friendly hand.\n<\/p>\n
            Mr. Rai further argued that accused-Yunus has been attributed<\/p>\n
only simple injuries on the legs of deceased-Akbar and on the shoulder and<\/p>\n
hasli of injured-Ahmad, for which at the most it can be a case punishable<\/p>\n
under Section 323 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
            Mr.   H.S.   Sran,   learned    Additional   Advocate   General,<\/p>\n
appearing for the State of Haryana has argued that the prosecution has<\/p>\n
fully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and it is a case of eye<\/p>\n
witness account. Minor discrepancies and contradictions in the statements<\/p>\n
of prosecution witnesses are bound to occur due to passage of time. The<\/p>\n
ocular evidence has also been corroborated by medical evidence.<\/p>\n
            We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also<\/p>\n
gone through the evidence and other documents available on record.<\/p>\n
            The argument of learned counsel for the accused-appellants<\/p>\n
that there is a delay in registration of FIR and the same has been used for
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                            (10)<\/p>\n
consultations and deliberations, has no force as the place of occurrence<\/p>\n
i.e. village Tai, which was at a distance of about 4-5 Kms from police<\/p>\n
station.   Complainant-Deenu reached to police station              at about<\/p>\n
10.30\/11.00 am and remained with the police for about half an hour. The<\/p>\n
hospital was also adjoining to police station and the injured remained in the<\/p>\n
hospital for about 15-20 minutes. It has also come in the evidence of<\/p>\n
Deenu (PW-1) that he reached to the Police Station after getting the injured<\/p>\n
admitted in the hospital. As per record of the hospital, the injured arrived in<\/p>\n
the hospital at noon. Immediately thereafter complainant-Deenu went to<\/p>\n
the police station to register the FIR. The statement recorded is prompt<\/p>\n
and without any delay. It cannot be said that the FIR was ante-timed.<\/p>\n
Moreover, the FIR was got recorded for minor offences i.e. under Sections<\/p>\n
323, 324 read with Section 34 IPC, which was later on converted to Section<\/p>\n
302 IPC. This view has been supported by the judgment of Hon’ble the<\/p>\n
Apex Court in Gurnam Kaur Vs. Bakshish Singh and others 1981<\/p>\n
Criminal Law Journal 34, wherein, it has been held that when FIR is<\/p>\n
prompt, medical and expert evidence fitting in with version given in the<\/p>\n
FIR, then implicit reliance should be placed on it.<\/p>\n
            The next argument of the learned counsel for the accused-<\/p>\n
appellants that there are contradictions and discrepancies in the<\/p>\n
statements of prosecution witnesses, has also no substance as the same<\/p>\n
are minor in nature, which are bound to occur with the passage of time.<\/p>\n
Minor discrepancies here and there do not materially affect the reliability<\/p>\n
and trustworthiness of the witnesses. Ahmad (PW-2) is the stamp injured<\/p>\n
witness. Injuries on his person cannot be said to be self-suffered or with<\/p>\n
friendly hands. Two injuries were there on his person, which are as under:-<\/p>\n
                   1. Contused abrasion 2 x 3 cm placed over the right<\/p>\n
                      shoulder joint. 7 cm lateral to joint line towards medial<\/p>\n
                      side i.e. in the plane of mid clavicular line posterior
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                           (11)<\/p>\n
                     aspect with bright red colour and associated swelling<\/p>\n
                     with restriction of the joint movements.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                  2. Contusion 2 x 1 cm placed over the right hip joint<\/p>\n
                     lateral aspect with no significance swelling or<\/p>\n
                     tenderness and no restriction of movements. X-ray<\/p>\n
                     was advised for injury No.1 and injury no.2 was found<\/p>\n
                     simple.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Injury No.1 was x-rayed and as per opinion of the Doctor, it<\/p>\n
was a fracture in specular body and spine right shoulder giving rise to the<\/p>\n
conversion of the FIR for offence punishable under Section 325 read with<\/p>\n
Section 34 IPC. The injuries suffered by Ahmad (PW-2) at the time of<\/p>\n
occurrence has established the occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
            The further argument of learned counsel for the accused-<\/p>\n
appellant that Ahmad (PW-2) and Deenu (PW-1) were closely related to<\/p>\n
the deceased and their statements cannot be relied upon, is also not of<\/p>\n
much importance. As per case of the prosecution, prior to the occurrence,<\/p>\n
complainant-Deenu (PW-1) and his brother Akbar (deceased) and his son<\/p>\n
Harun were sitting together before the fire for warming themselves and<\/p>\n
when Akbar was going to his house, all the accused-appellants armed with<\/p>\n
their respective weapons reached there and caused injuries to Akbar.<\/p>\n
Their presence at the spot was natural as it was month of January and it is<\/p>\n
a normal practice in the village that in winter people sit before the fire to<\/p>\n
warm themselves. Their presence at the spot was not unnatural and as<\/p>\n
such their testimony cannot be disbelieved.\n<\/p>\n
            Argument of learned counsel for the accused-appellants that<\/p>\n
accused-Yunus has only been attributed simple injuries to deceased-Akbar<\/p>\n
and injured Ahmad and he can at the most be convicted under Section 323<\/p>\n
IPC, is of some substance. As per the FIR, accused-Yunus gave lathi<\/p>\n
blows on the legs of deceased-Akbar and on the shoulder and Hasli of
\n Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001                           (12)<\/p>\n
injured-Akbar.     As per opinion of Dr. M.S. Ranga (PW-3), possibility of<\/p>\n
injury No.1 on the person of Ahmad having been caused by a fall on a hard<\/p>\n
uneven surface cannot be ruled out. Accused Yunus was only armed with<\/p>\n
lathi and caused injuries to deceased-Akbar as well as injured Ahmad,<\/p>\n
which were not proved to be fatal and caused death of Akbar.<\/p>\n
             For the reasons mentioned above, we are of the view that<\/p>\n
accused-Ghasita and Mohd. Jamil have rightly been convicted and<\/p>\n
sentenced by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 302<\/p>\n
read with Section 34 IPC. As far as accused-Yunus is concerned, he has<\/p>\n
only been attributed simple injuries, therefore, his conviction under Section<\/p>\n
302 IPC is set aside and he is convicted under Section 323 IPC and<\/p>\n
sentenced for the period already undergone by him. He shall also pay<\/p>\n
compensation of Rs. 15,000\/- as per provisions of Section 357 Cr.P.C. to<\/p>\n
the legal heirs of deceased-Akbar.\n<\/p>\n
             Accordingly, appeal qua Ghasita and Mohd. Jamil is<\/p>\n
dismissed.    They are directed to surrender to custody to serve the<\/p>\n
remainder of sentence. Appeal qua accused-Yunus is allowed partly. He is<\/p>\n
acquitted of the charges framed against him under Section 302 IPC and<\/p>\n
convicted under Section 323 IPC and sentenced for the period already<\/p>\n
undergone.\n<\/p>\n
             Crl. Revn. No. 418 of 2005 filed by the complainant is<\/p>\n
dismissed.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                            (DAYA CHAUDHARY)\n                                                  JUDGE\n\n\n\n\nOctober 26, 2009                              (JASBIR SINGH)\npooja                                             JUDGE\n\n\n<\/pre>\n
Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter …….Yes\/No\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No. 437-DB of 2001 Mohd. Yunus & Ors. ……….Appellants Versus State of Haryana ……….Respondent Crl. Revn. No. 418 of 2005 Deenu […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-178103","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-25T14:20:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-25T14:20:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3300,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-25T14:20:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-25T14:20:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-25T14:20:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009"},"wordCount":3300,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009","name":"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-25T14:20:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-yunus-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-on-26-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mohd. Yunus & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 26 October, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178103","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178103"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178103\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178103"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178103"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178103"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}