Jagran State Bureau, Chandigarh | A dispute that began over a dog approaching a buffalo after it gave birth to a calf has ended after nearly three decades in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court upheld the convictions of two accused in the 1996 attack, but, considering their age, the length of time they had already served in jail, and the nearly 18-year review petition, limited their sentences to the length of their imprisonment. It also ordered that the accused pay a total fine of Rs 4,250 each as compensation to the injured.
What Happened On October 12, 1996?
The fight took place in the Pehowa police station area of Kurukshetra district, Haryana. According to the prosecution, on the morning of October 12, 1996, the buffalo belonging to complainant Om Prakash gave birth to a calf. The placenta was hanging out, and the pet dog of neighbour Labh Singh started eating it. Prakash asked the neighbours to stop the dog, but they ignored him. Around 1 pm, when he returned home from harvesting paddy, his mother asked the accused, Raju and Deva, to stop the dog. This angered them. Raju and Deva attacked Prakash with the sickle. When he tried to defend himself, he was struck on the left arm. Deva then attacked his left leg with the stick.
He was taken to hospital. An X-ray revealed a fracture in his hand, following which Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code was added to the case. The trial court convicted both of them in 2006 and sentenced them to three months' rigorous imprisonment under Sections 323/34 and three years' rigorous imprisonment under Sections 326/34. In 2008, the Additional Sessions Judge also dismissed their appeal. The case then reached the High Court.
In the High Court, the accused did not challenge their convictions and only sought commutation of their sentences. The court noted that Raju had served approximately two months and seven days in jail, and Deva one month and 25 days. They were 22 and 26 years old at the time of the incident, while they are now approximately 52 and 56 years old. The review petition had been pending since 2008.
What The Court Said In Its Verdict
Justice Mandeep Pannu said that the conviction recorded by the trial court did not warrant interference. However, considering the lengthy trial and the current age of the accused, it would be justified to limit the original jail sentence to the period already served. The fine of Rs 4,250 imposed on both had already been deposited. The court directed that this amount be given to the injured Om Prakash as compensation.
(With Dayanand Sharma Inputs)