Punjab-Haryana High Court
Cra-D No.558-Db Of 2011(O&M) vs State Of Punjab on 16 January, 2014
Author: Kuldip Singh
Bench: Satish Kumar Mittal, Kuldip Singh
CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
1. CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011(O&M)
Jagdish @ Mohinder Singh and others .... Appellants
vs.
State of Punjab .... Respondent
2. CRA-D-621-DB of 2011 (O&M)
Vijay @ Laddi .... Appellant
vs.
State of Punjab .... Respondent
3. CRA-D-644-DB of 2011 (O&M)
Baghera .... Appellant
vs.
State of Punjab .... Respondent
4. CRA-D-649-DB of 2011 (O&M)
Date of Decision: January 16, 2014
Sanjay @ Papri .... Appellant
vs.
State of Punjab .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH
Present: Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Rana, Advocate
for the appellants in CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011.
Mr. B.S. Saroha, Advocate for the appellant in
CRA-D No.621-DB of 2011.
Ms. Monika Thakur, Advocate for the appellant in
CRA-D No.644-DB of 2011
Mr. J.S. Thind, Advocate for the appellant in
CRA-D No.649-DB of 2011.
Mr. A.S. Jattana, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab.
***
Kuldip Singh J.
Vide this judgment, four criminal appeals No.CRA No.D- Rani Sarita 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -2- 558-DB, CRA No.D-621DB, CRA No.D-644-DB and CRA No.D-649- DB of 2011 shall be disposed of, vide which the accused have filed separate appeals, challenging their conviction and sentence under Sections 460, 461, and 302 IPC, vide which they were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of ` 10,000/- each and in default thereof, further rigorous imprisonment for 10 months for the offence under Section 460 IPC. All the accused were also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of ` 10,000/- each and in default thereof, further rigorous imprisonment for 10 months for the offence under Section 302 IPC and also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of ` 2,000/- each and in default thereof, further rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 461 IPC. It was further directed that out of fine, if realized, an amount of ` 1,50,000/- shall be paid to the complainant Sukhvir Kaur as compensation.
Sukhvir Kaur along with her husband Hardev Singh, two sons, namely, Simrandeep Singh and Sumit Singh, her mother-in-law Jarnail Kaur were living happily in her house at Jassran Road, Subhash Nagar, Street No.2, Mandi Gobindgarh. On 23.07.2001 at about 8.00 p.m. after taking the meal, Sukhvir Kaur, her husband Hardev Singh and son Sumit Singh slept in the first floor of the house, whereas, her mother-in-law Jarnail Kaur along with her son Simrandeep Singh and servant Babbu @ Baba Bhaiya slept in the courtyard. At about 1/1.30 a.m., 7-8 unknown persons, who were armed with iron rods and two of them were carrying double barrel Rani Sarita guns entered her house. They started inflicted injuries to Hardev 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -3- Singh, Jarnail Kaur and Babbu @ Baba Bhaiya. They also caused injuries to Sukhvir Kaur, her two sons, namely, Simrandeep Singh and Sumit Singh and injured them and thereafter, looted the household articles, consisting jewellery, cash and other things. The occurrence was witnessed by both the sons of complainant-Sukhvir Kaur. The complainant claimed that she can identify the accused, if they are brought before her. Then her neighbourer Mohinder Singh came there. The complainant accompanied by her neighbourer Mohinder Singh went to the police station to report the matter. She made the statement Ex.PF before the police party, headed by Inspector Devinder Singh and ASI Kashmir Singh. Accordingly, Inspector recorded the police proceedings and send it to the police station, where formal FIR was registered. Complainant-Sukhvir Kaur further stated that she will check all the articles and report later about stolen articles. Hardev Singh, husband of the complainant, her mother-in-law Jarnail Kaur and servant Babbu @ Baba Bhaiya succumbed their injuries. Their post-mortem was got conducted. The Police swung into action and, immediately, visited the place. The site plan of the occurrence was prepared. S.I. Gurmeet Singh, who is finger expert was called at the spot and the finger prints from the door and glass table were lifted and sent to Finger Print Bureau, Phillaur. On 14.11.2003, all the eight accused were arrested by Inspector Jaswinder Singh, Incharge, CIA Headquarter, Ludhiana in FIR No.299 of 2002, P.S. Basti, Jodhewal, Ludhiana. All the accused were interrogated. Accused Baghera, Sanjay @ Papri suffered their disclosure statements that they have kept concealed some gold Rani Sarita 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -4- ornaments in their rented house in Borian ki colony in a room, wrapped in polythene paper, buried under the earth in the corner of their room. Accused Dharminder Kumar @ Kala, Amritpal @ Foni, Arjan @ Jasbir also suffered different disclosure statements under Section 27 of the Evidence Act that they have kept concealed gold ornaments in the residential Jhugi, viallage Kuhara, District Ludhiana, after digging earth on the western side. They , accordingly, got recovered the said gold ornaments. Accused Rajesh @ Tunda, Bikram @ Bachi @ Tatri, Vijay @ Laddi also suffered disclosure statements that they have kept concealed gold ornaments in the residential Jhugi, Anaj Mandi, Bahadar Ke Road, Police Station Salem Tabri, District Ludhiana, buried under the earth and can get the same recovered. They also got the gold ornaments recovered. The gold ornaments were bearing inscription like PK, SK, MS, GS, GK, KK, JS, RK, Brar, Sukhvir. The said articles were found to be stolen articles and were taken into possession vide various memos under Section 102 Cr.P.C. During interrogation by CIA Headquarter, Ludhiana, accused admitted that they had committed the present crime in the house of Sukhvir Kaur. Therefore, the Ludhiana police sent the information to Mandi Gobindgarh police about the same, on which, S.I. Vijay Kumar took Sukhvir Kaur and one Municipal Councilor Krishan Chand to police post Basti, Jodhewal, Ludhiana. There some gold ornaments were produced before Sukhvir Kaur and she identified one gold kara bearing inscription H.S., one gold ring on which Sukhvir was inscribed, two gold bangles bearing inscription Rani Sarita SK, two other gold bangles inscribed SK, one gold chain on which 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -5- Dhaliwal was written and one gold chain on which Shine was written and another gold bangle on which SK was written. These gold ornaments were got identified after mixing the same with other gold ornaments. The said ornaments were taken into possession by Mandi Gobindgarh Police vide Ex.PW4/A, which was signed by Krishan Chand M.C. and Sukhvir Kaur. The accused were then taken into custody in the present case. During the course of investigation, the finger prints of the accused were also obtained and sent for comparison to the Finger Prints Bureau, Phillaur with the finger prints lifted from the place of occurrence. Vide report Ex.PX, the Finger Prints Bureau, Phillaur reported that the finger prints of the present accused matched with those taken from the spot.
After completion of the investigation, the challan was presented in the Court. Accused were charge sheeted under Sections 459, 460, 302, 323 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act, to which they pleaded not guilty.
In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses, including the complainant, her son Kiratpreet Singh as well as other police officials and closed its evidence. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused pleaded false implication.
After hearing the prosecution and accused and going through the evidence, learned Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, convicted and sentenced the accused aforesaid, which has been challenged by the accused through different appeals.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have Rani Sarita 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -6- also carefully gone through the file.
In this case, three persons, namely, Hardev Singh, husband of the the complainant, Jarnail Kaur, mother-in-law of the complainant and Babbu @ Baba Bhaiya, servant of the complainant were murdered. The post-mortem report shows that brutal injuries were inflicted on their heads, which resulted in their death. Accused were 7-8 in numbers and the possibility is that some of their accomplishes might be standing outside. In her statement before the Court, Sukhvir Kaur has fully supported the prosecution case, stating that on the intervening night of 23-24.7.2001 at about 1.30 a.m., 7-8 persons entered her house. They were armed with iron rods and two of them were carrying guns. They caused injuries to her sons, namely, Simrandeep Singh and Sumit Singh, her husband Hardev Singh, mother-in-law Jarnail Kaur and servant Babbu @ Baba Bhaiya. They took away gold ornaments, consisting of bangles, kara, two rings, one lady and one gents, two gold chains. She identified the accused present in the Court. The case property was also produced in the Court. Her cross-examination reveals that FIR was lodged promptly. According to her, the accused remained in her house for about half an hour. They searched the house and looted the gold ornaments. She stated that she identified the accused in identification parade conducted by CIA Staff, Ludhiana. She cannot tell as to which accused caused which injury, which is natural in the circumstances. She further asserted that she has seen all the accused in the Court, who had entered her house. Her statement is supported by her son Kiratpreet Singh, who is mentioned as Sumit Rani Sarita 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -7- Singh by Sukhvir Kaur. It appears that Sumit Singh is known by two names. He stated that in the occurrence, his elder brother Simrandeep Singh, servant and grandmother were injured. Accused caused injuries to all of them and then looted the house. He further stated that he could not tell the exact number of the accused but they were 8-10 persons. He also stated that accused remained in his house for 30-40 minutes. Naturally, when the accused are committing robbery, they cannot do so in dark. There must be some light, giving an opportunity to Sukhvir Kaur and her son to identify the accused. Accused were arrested about 2 years and 10 months later by CIA Staff, Ludhiana and Inspector Jaswinder Singh interrogated them in FIR No.299 of 2002, P.S. Basti, Jodhewal, Ludhiana. Accused suffered different disclosure statements and got recovered certain gold ornaments bearing certain inscriptions, which make them identifiable. It appears that inscription is either of the name of the owner or of the maker of the gold ornaments. The said gold ornaments were taken into possession under Section 102 Cr.P.C. The making of the disclosure statements is also corroborated by the statement of ASI Dulla Singh, PW11 and S.I. Swaran Singh PW16. During interrogation, accused admitted their involvement in the present crime. Ludhiana Police did not know that the accused have committed the present crime. Therefore, they informed Mandi Gobindgarh police. Then Sukhvir Kaur accompanied by ASI Vijay Singh and Municipal Councilor Krishan Chand visited Police Station Basti, Jodhewal, Ludhiana and identified her gold ornaments, which were having specific inscriptions.
Rani Sarita2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -8-
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has vehemently argued that in this case, no identification parade was held. Identification in the CIA staff and in the Court, is of no consequence.
We are of the view that leaving aside the identification in the CIA Staff, the identity of the accused is established beyond all reasonable doubts. Sukhvir Kaur and her son Kiratpreet Singh @ Sumit Singh saw the accused, committing the crime for about 30-40 minutes. They had lost two members of their family and a servant and the faces of the accused were imprinted deep in their memory. Therefore, they were in a position to identify the accused whenever they again saw them. In addition to this, the identity of the accused is further established from scientific evidence collected immediately after the crime. The finger prints of the assailants were lifted from the spot by an expert, S.I. Gurmeet Singh PW12 on 24.07.2001 itself. Subsequently, finger prints obtained after the arrest of the accused and the finger prints lifted from the door and glass table were sent for comparison. The finger prints of all the accused matched with the finger prints lifted from the spot on 24.07.2001. It also proved the presence of the accused on the spot at the time of crime.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has further argued that accused were falsely involved in this case. They were already in custody of Ludhiana police and different cases were planted on them. It has been further argued that the identification by Sukhvir Kaur, complainant and her son after two years, 10 months cannot be relied upon and further that their identification in the Court Rani Sarita 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) -9- when Sukhvir Kaur was examined in the year 2010 i.e. 10 years later cannot be relied upon.
We are of the view that Sukhvir Kaur had no enmity with the accused. She had lost her husband and mother-in-law at young age and she has stated in her cross-examination that she had gone to various Police Stations like Ludhiana, Sirhind, Patiala and Mandi Gobindgarh to find out the culprits. The anxiety of the complainant can be well understood to find out the culprits as she had lost her husband and mother-in-law in the crime, in which her house was ransacked and looted. Her servant was also killed in the occurrence. It comes from her cross-examination that there was no residential house on the back of her house. Accused targeted a house, which is easily accessible and can be easily targeted. When such crime is committed with such consequences, a person can remember the face of the criminal even after many years. The police had also no reason to falsely implicate the accused in the crime. When gold ornaments were recovered and accused failed to explain its possession, the same were taken into possession under Section 102 Cr.P.C. The gold ornaments were having inscriptions to connote the name of the owner or the maker. The gold ornaments identified by the complainant were bearing inscription of Sukhvir, H.S. (Hardev Singh) etc. Accused have not explained, how these gold ornaments looted from the house of the complainant came in their possession.
Since, the doctor who had medico-legally examined Sukhvir Kuar and other injured could not be examined, therefore, simple injuries caused to them were not proved before the trial Court. Rani Sarita 2014.02.04 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-D No.558-DB of 2011 (O&M) - 10 - The same has no effect on the merits of the case.
From the foregoing discussion, we come to the conclusion that the guilt of the accused in the present occurrence has been proved beyond reasonable doubts and that they were rightly convicted and sentenced by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the aforesaid appeals and the same are, accordingly, dismissed.
(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) (KULDIP SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
January 16, 2014
sarita
Rani Sarita
2014.02.04 16:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh