Kartar Singh and anr. Vs. the State

.....of a common intention animating the accused leading to the criminal act in furtherance of such intention. the pre-arranged plan need nto be elaborate or concrete to be established by positive evidence, for the intention can only be inferred from the conduct and its consequence, nor must a given duration of time intervene between such a plan and the actual commission of the crime. common intention can and often is a matter of inference from the act and the conduct of the accused and toher relevant circumstances of the case.; that the fact that the injured and the accused are inter-related cannto always be conclusive on the question of sentence, nor that they have effected re-conciliation, for they might have settled up their differences only either to keep the accused escape punishment or in the usual routine as a matter of habit. normally speaking, if there is a sudden quarrel and the parties make peace, realizing use of force is bad for them and also for the average run of people in the larger interests of civilized and law-abiding society, re-conciliation may be a good guiding factor for the courts to reduce the sentence, but such may nto be the position when reconciliation is intended either as a matter of routine amongst parties, who are in the habit of using violence instead of arguments, or when it is done to have the sentence reduced.; on the special facts of the case, however, and in the hope that reasonably long period of imprisonment may serve to reform the accused, sentence was reduced from 4 years to 3 years imprisonment with the observations that it was nto intended to serve as a precedent to be cited in the future in any comparable circumstances. - i.d. dua, j.text is nto available