the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. is modified to Section 304 Part-I I.P.C. = As the occurrence took place in the course of sudden fight between the deceased and the accused party the occurrence would fall under sub-section (4) of Section 300 I.P.C. The injuries inflicted on the deceased-Irfan @ Golu is on the backside piercing the left lung which shows the intention of the juvenile accused who inflicted the injury. Keeping in view the nature of the injuries and considering the fact that the appellants-accused had not taken undue advantage of the deceased and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. is modified as the one under Section 304 Part-I I.P.C. It is submitted that both the appellants have undergone imprisonment for more than ten years. In the result, the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. is modified to Section 304 Part-I I.P.C. and the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by each of

1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 1546 OF 2017
SUNNY KHANNA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondent(s)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1547 OF 2017
PRADEEP SINGH @ JUGU Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
BANUMATHI, J.:
(1) These appeals arise out of judgment dated 17th November,
2014 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in
and by which the High Court has affirmed the conviction of the
appellants under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C.
for the death/murder of deceased-Irfan @ Golu. So far as the
death/murder of Anil Chandrakar, the High Court has altered the
conviction of the appellants from Section 302 I.P.C. to Section
307 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to
undergo imprisonment for seven years.
(2) Case of the prosecution is that on 21st March, 2008 at
about 10.30 pm deceased-Irfan @ Golu and decased-Anil
Chandrakar were present near Holika dahan. An altercation took
place between deceased Irfan @ Golu and Chotu which resulted in
2
heated arguments. Thereafter, both the appellants Sunny Khanna
and Pradeep Singh @ Jugu caught hold of the deceased – Irfan @
Golu and the juvenile accused Chotu inflicted stabbed injuries
twice on abdomen and right elbow and Irfan @ Golu fell down.
At that time second deceased-Anil Chandrakar rushed to save
Irfan @ Golu and then both the appellants are alleged to have
caught hold of him and juvenile accused Chotu assaulted him by
knife and caused injuries. Complainant-Aavez Khan (PW-1) took
the deceased persons to hospital where deceased Irfan @ Golu
was declared dead. Deceased-Anil Chandrakar also succumbed to
injuries on 13th April, 2008 i.e. twenty days after the
incident. After completion of the investigation, a chargesheet
was filed against the accused under Section 302 I.P.C. read
with Section 34 I.P.C. on two counts.
(3) Upon consideration of the evidence of Salim Khan (PW-10)
and also Aavez Khan (PW-1), the Trial Court vide judgment dated
24th January, 2009 convicted the appellants-accused under
Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. for causing
murder of both the deceased – Irfan Khan @ Golu and Anil
Chandrakar, and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment.
(4) In appeal, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by
the appellants thereby confirming the conviction of the
appellants under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C.
and affirmed the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to them
for causing murder of the deceased – Irfan Khan @ Golu. So far
as the death of the deceased – Anil Chandrakar, as aforesaid in
3
para (1) the conviction of the appellants was altered from
Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. to Section 307
I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C.
(5) In his evidence Salim Khan (PW-10) has stated that the
appellants-accused, Sunny Khanna and Pradeep Singh @ Jugu held
the deceased-Irfan @ Golu and juvenile accused, Chotu, stabbed
the deceased Irfan @ Golu with a weapon like butter knife. When
the deceased-Anil Chandrakar ran to save Irfan @ Golu, the
appellants-accused caught hold of Anil Chandrakar and the
juvenile accused, Chotu, stabbed him in the abdomen. On
raising alarm, the accused fled away from the scene of
occurrence.
(6) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, learned senior counsel appearing for the
appellant-Sunny Khanna, and Mr. Dushyant Parashar, learned
counsel appearing for the appellant-Pradeep Singh @ Jugu,
submitted that Salim Khan (PW-10) is related to the deceased
person-Irfan @ Golu and, therefore, his solitary testimony
ought not to have been made the basis for conviction, unless
being corroborated. The occurrence was at the night time on
the day of Holika Dahan, a day prior to Holi and at that time
it cannot be expected of the prosecution to examine any
independent witnesses. Further, as pointed out by the Trial
Court as well as the High Court the evidence of Salim Khan (PW10)
is corroborated by the medical evidence as well as by the
recovery of weapon from juvenile accused – Chotu. When both
the courts have accepted the evidence of Aavez Khan (PW-1) as
4
credible witness, we do not find any good reason to interfere
with the said concurrent findings.
(7) So far as the conviction of the appellants under Section
302 I.P.C. regarding the death of Irfan @ Golu, from the
evidence of Salim Khan (PW-10) it emerges that when preparation
was going on to burn Holika and when they were all standing
there, juvenile accused-Chotu was using abusive language and
Irfan @ Golu asked Chotu to stop using abusive language and
there was heated arguments, scuffle and sudden fight between
them. It is in these circumstances, the juvenile accused,
Chotu, inflicted injuries on deceased-Irfan @ Golu while the
appellants herein held the deceased-Irfan @ Golu. As the
occurrence took place in the course of sudden fight between the
deceased and the accused party the occurrence would fall under
sub-section (4) of Section 300 I.P.C. The injuries inflicted
on the deceased-Irfan @ Golu is on the backside piercing the
left lung which shows the intention of the juvenile accused who
inflicted the injury. Keeping in view the nature of the
injuries and considering the fact that the appellants-accused
had not taken undue advantage of the deceased and in the facts
and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants
under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. is
modified as the one under Section 304 Part-I I.P.C. It is
submitted that both the appellants have undergone imprisonment
for more than ten years.
5
(8) In the result, the conviction of the appellants under
Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. is modified to
Section 304 Part-I I.P.C. and the sentence of life imprisonment
awarded to the appellants is reduced to the period already
undergone by each of the accused.
(9) The appeals are partly allowed. The appellants are on
bail. Their bail bonds shall stand discharged.

……………………..J.
(R. BANUMATHI)
……………………..J.
(INDIRA BANERJEE)
NEW DELHI,
OCTOBER 4, 2018.