TMI Blog1964 (11) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eeping on a Tiwaria (terrace), the assailants entered the place and Ramhans shot Gabde dead with a gun and fired two shots at Ramchandra with intent to kill him but only succeeded in injuring him and that all this time the appellant was standing there armed with a gun and the other persons were also there armed variously and that all had entered the place with the common intention of committing the offences. 2. Ramhans had absconded and so the appellant and the other six alleged assailants were put up for trial for offences under sections. 302 and 307 read with sections 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Gabde and the attempt to murder Ramchandra. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant of these offences bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en that both Ramhans and Karan Singh had gone inside the Tiwaria armed with guns and that Karan Singh throughout the incident standing by the side of Ramhans armed with a gun. On these facts section 34 I.P.C. would clearly apply to the case against the present appellant Karan Singh. In this view of the matter the High Court convicted the appellant Karan Singh under sections 302 and 307 both read with section 34 of the Code instead of the earlier sections read with sections 148 and 149 as had been done by the learned Sessions Judge. The appellant has come to this Court in further appeal. 4. The only question argued in this appeal is whether in view of the acquittal of Ramhans by the learned Sessions Judge from which there had been no app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt did not in this Court rely on Pritam Singh's case 1956CriLJ805. 5. Mr. Misra contended that the decision of this Court in Krishna Govind Patil v. State of Maharashtra showed that the High Court was wrong in ignoring the fact of the acquittal of Ramhans. We are unable to accept that contention. The point there considered really was whether when four persons had been charged with the commission of an offence of murder read with section 34 and the trial Court had acquitted three of them, it was legal to convict the remaining accused of the offence of murder read with section 34. The High Court had held that that could be done. This Court set aside the judgment of the High Court mainly on the ground that such a decision would result i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
