Punjab-Haryana High Court
Charanjit Singh Alias Ghola And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2011
Bench: Jasbir Singh, Sabina
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
DATE OF DECISION: December 01, 2011.
Parties Name
Charanjit Singh alias Ghola and another
...APPELLANTS.
VERSUS
State of Punjab
...RESPONDENT
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina
PRESENT: Mr. R.S.Cheema, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Sumanjit Kaur
and Mr. S.S.Rana,
Advocates, for the appellants.
Mr. Rajesh Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent.
Mr. K.L. Chaudhary, Advocate, for the complainant.
Jasbir Singh, J.
JUDGMENT
By filing this appeal, the appellants have impugned judgment and order dated February 28, 2007, vide which both were convicted for commission of an offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each with a default clause . CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -2-
It was allegation against them that they in the intervening night of 2nd and 3rd December, 2002, had committed murder of Sukhdev Singh (aged about 70 years), in the area of village Navi Abadi, Samrala Road, Khanna, by causing injuries to him with the help of sharp-edged weapons. FIR under Sections 307/452/34 IPC was registered in Police Station City Khanna on December 8, 2002. Appellants No. 1 and 2 were arrested on August 17, 2003, and October 15, 2003, respectively. In the process, by now they had undergone more than 7 ½ years of sentence.
The process of law was set in motion on a statement Ex. PD made by PW2 Kamaljit Kaur Virk (daughter of the deceased) on December 8, 2002, at 11.30 AM. Her statement was recorded by S.I. Harbhajan Singh (PW11), which led to the registration of an FIR Ex. PD/2 at 11.40 AM on December 8, 2002, under Sections 307/452/34 IPC. In the meantime, it was reported that Shri Sukhdev Singh had died at about 10 AM in Daya Nand Medical College (in short DMC) & Hospital at Ludhiana. In view of above fact, offence under Section 302 IPC was added in the said FIR. Special report reached the concerned Magistrate at Khanna at 2 PM on December 8, 2002.
Case of the prosecution as noted by the trial Judge reads thus:
"That on 3.12.2002, a secret information was received through class- IV of Civil Hospital, Khanna at P.S. City Khanna that Sukhdev Singh son of Kartar Singh Virk, Jat, r/o Navi Abadi, Khanna was brought to the Civil Hospital, Khanna in an injured condition. Since he was serious, so he was referred to District Hospital, Ludhiana. On 3.12.2002 and 6.12.2002, ASI Jai CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -3- Singh went to the New Dayanand Hospital, Ludhiana, but, the Medical Officer concerned declared the injured unfit to make the statement. During said period, no eye witness could be met who could narrate the occurrence. On 8.12.2002, SI Harbhajan Singh accompanied by ASI Jai Singh and other police officials was going to Navi Abadi, Khanna in connection with the above said case, then in front of the house of the injured, Kamaldip Kaur d/o Sukhdev Singh, r/o H.No. 966, Navi Abadi, Khanna and her brother-in-law Mohinder Singh and sister Baljit Kaur met the police. Kamaldip Kaur Virk d/o Sukhdev Singh Virk got her statement recorded before SI Harbhajan Singh. She made the statement that they were four sisters and two brothers. She was the youngest. Her elder sisters were married. Her both brothers Satwant Singh and Inderjit Singh were residing in America. Her father Sukhdev Singh was also green card holder of America. He was visiting America frequently. He went to America in Sept., 2002 and returned to India in October. A civil case with regard to land was pending in the Civil Court, Khanna between her father Sukhdev Singh and Gurcharan Singh son of Kesar Singh, Jat, r/o Purani Sarai, Khanna. In order to pursue the said case, her father had to stay at Khanna for most of the period. Their land was in front of their house. They had built boundary wall around the land. They had constructed some rooms in the land. They had installed a flour mill, cotton scotching machine and water tubewell there. Her CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -4- father had also built a hut in the land covered with Tarpauline. They had also got one bulb connection from the neighbourhood and said bulb was glowing whole night. Prior to Diwali, her father's cousin Charanjit Singh @ Ghola son of Pritam Singh, Jat, r/o Navi Abadi, Khanna who was their neighbour used to sleep in the said hut for watching the fields. After Diwali he stopped sleeping there. Her father Sukhdev Singh started sleeping in the said hut. On the intervening night of 2nd and 3rd Dec., 02, her father was sleeping in the hut as usual. It was 12.00/12.30 night time, she was about to go inside the bath room built in the courtyard of their house. She heard loud cries of her father 'Marta', 'Marta'. She hurriedly ran towards the gate. She opened the window of outer gate and saw outside in the Gali and found that Jaggi s/o Gurcharan Singh, r/o Purani Sarai, Khanna and Charanjit Singh @ Ghola son of Pritam Singh, Jat, r/o Navi Abadi, Khanna jumping out of their fields in the gali from the boundary wall. Ghola was holding unsheathed kirpan in his hand and Jaggi was holding Dah in his hand. They ran towards the bazar from the gali in front of the gate of their house. She identified them under the street lights. She immediately opened the gate of the boundary wall and was running towards her father. Then her father was coming staggering towards the house in a severely injured condition. She brought him out via room adjoining the floor mill and asked him what had happened. Her father replied that he was CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -5- half asleep. It was 12.00/12.30 mid night. Ghola and Jaggi entered inside the hut. They immediately after coming there, started giving injuries at him with the sharp edged weapons which they were carrying in their hands. Ghola and Jaggi were saying to one another that he should not be spared alive and he would be killed on that day and matter would be finished for ever. He identified them in the light of the bulb installed in the hut. Jaggi was saying to Ghola that he would get his share. She raised alarm in a loud voice that her father was killed and called the people in the neighbourhood who were hearing her to reach there immediately. On hearing her noise, their neighbour Chheena son of Pritam Singh and Kala son of Jarnail Singh came there. They put her father on the scooter of Kala. Chheena sat behind him holding him and they went towards Civil Hospital, Khanna. She also on the car of her neighbour reached at the hospital and got her father admitted there. The Doctor present there referred him to Ludhiana due to number of injuries on his person. Her brother-in-law Paramjit Singh, sister Baljit Kaur, rs/o Rajewal and Jaswant Singh Grewal, her father's friend etc. on coming to know the incident also reached in the hospital. They got her father admitted in New Dayanand Medical College Hospital, Ludhiana. Thereafter her brother in law Paramjit Singh and Jaswant Singh started asking her what had happened. She started exclaiming in pitiful voice. She could not talk to them and fell unconscious. Since that day, she CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -6- was suffering fits and was unconscious and so could not tell anything. She had regained consciousness, so they were going to lodge the report in the police. The police met on the way. The motive for the crime was that Jaggi son of Gurcharan Singh had land dispute with her father. Similarly her father had also long pending civil dispute with Pritam Singh father of Ghola who was real paternal uncle of her father. So, they in pursuance of their common intention had caused injuries at her father. Her father was admitted in New DMC Hospital, Ludhiana."
The Investigating Officer - SI Harbhajan Singh (PW11) then inspected the place of occurrence and prepared rough site plan Ex. PF with correct marginal notes. Kamaljit Kaur Virk (PW2) also produced before him items of the bed, on which the deceased was lying at the time of occurrence, i.e., one pillow, one Patka, one quilt, one mattress, one bed sheet and one Khes. The above articles were taken into possession against recovery memo Ex. PE. The Investigating Officer also recorded statements of the witnesses. On receipt of information that Sukhdev Singh had died in the hospital, the Investigating Officer went to DMC Hospital, Ludhiana, prepared an inquest report on the dead body and sent it for post-mortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. Ashok Raswant (PW1), on December 9, 2002, and he found 21 injuries on the person of the deceased. The Investigating Officer raided houses of the appellants on December 10, 2002, and on December 13, 2002, but they were not available. Investigation CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -7- was transferred to SI Baldev Singh on December 14, 2002. Thereafter investigation was handed over to Inspector Harbans Singh (PW12) on October 15, 2003. Both the appellants were arrested in the meantime.
On completion of investigation, final report was put in Court. Copies of the documents, as per provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C., were supplied to the accused. Their case was committed for trial to the Court of competent jurisdiction, where they were charge-sheeted, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
To support its case, the prosecution produced 13 witnesses and also brought on record documentary evidence. On conclusion of prosecution evidence, statements of the appellants - accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Incriminating material existing on record was put to them, which they denied, claimed innocence and false implication. Appellant No. 2 in answer to the last question put to him has stated as under:
"That Kamaldeep Kaur was fully conscious right from leaving her home on the night intervening 2/3 December, 2002 and had never falled unconscious. She had not seen any part of the occurrence and the assailants nor her father told her about anything. Mohinder Singh, Kamaldeep Kaur, Paramjit Singh, Baljit Kaur, Jaswant Singh Grewal etc. had been meeting together daily but they were not naming any person as assailants of Sukhdev Singh. Kamaldeep Kaur did not take any medicines of treatment from any Doctor or Hospital at any time. Her sister or anybody also did not get her treated from CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -8- any Doctor or Hospital, as actually she was never unwell or unconscious. Son-in-law of Sukhdev Singh had also accomapnied Sukhdev Singh and Kamaldeep Kaur from Khanna to DMC Hospital, Ludhiana.
On 3.12.2002 Khanna Police received information about this occurrence and soon visited the spot, and contacted Kamaldeep Kaur and her relatives but they pleaded ignorance about the manner of occurrence and the identity of the assailants etc. They kept interrogating people in the neighbourhood but no clue was found. After long deliberations and consultations, we were named as the assailants. Inspector Malkit Singh had found both of us as innocent after thorough investigation and even long after the registration of the case. Police continued to suspect Kamaldeep Kaur herself and Jaswant Singh Grewal etc. and despite efforts, they evaded joining the investigation even in May and June, 2003. PW Mohinder Pal Jassal has a long criminal background and is at the back and call of City Khanna Police. All of a sudden he has been falsely set up as witness against me. The most natural and crucial PWs have not been examined as they would not have supported this concocted story. I am innocent."
Similar stand was also taken by appellant No. 1 when his statement was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The trial Court on appraisal of evidence found both the appellants- accused guilty and CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -9- accordingly convicted and sentenced them as found mentioned in the earlier part of the judgment. Hence this appeal.
Counsel for the appellants has vehemently contended that it was a case of blind murder. The prosecution has failed to explain delay in getting the FIR recorded and further there is no explanation as to why after receipt of intimation on December 3, 2002, itself, from Civil Hospital, Khanna, Ex. PW5/A and DMC Hospital at Ludhiana Ex. PF, the police made no attempt to secure the evidence/ place where offence was committed and also failed to record evidence of any of the witnesses/ family members of the deceased. It is further stated that the motive to commit crime was non-existent and further due to loopholes, the story of the prosecution is not trustworthy. Besides, the appellants - accused, many others were interrogated in connection with murder of Sukhdev Singh. The appellants - accused at one stage were found innocent. Thereafter, at the instance of some high police officials, they were arrested and made accused in this case. It was further stated that the deposition made by complainant Kamaljit Kaur Virk (PW2) and Mohinder Pal (PW7) is shaky and does not inspire confidence. It is further stated that the defence version is plausible. It is prayed that the appeal be allowed, conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants be set aside and they be acquitted of the charges framed against them.
Prayer made has vehemently been opposed by the State counsel, who by making reference to the statements made by PW1 Dr. Ashok Raswant (PW1), Dr. Rahul Bansal (PW3), Dr. B.S.Bhatia (PW5), complainant Kamaljit Kaur Virk (PW2) and Mohinder Pal (PW7) and also CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -10- the deposition made by the police officials, i.e., ASI Jai Singh (PW6), SI Harbhajan Singh (PW11) and Inspector Harbans Singh (PW12) argued that the prosecution has proved its case beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt. PW2 had seen the appellants - accused running away, after committing the crime. The deceased had disclosed to her that injuries were caused to him by the appellants - accused. By stating that the investigation was done in a very prompt, fair and diligent manner, he prayed that the appeal having no substance be dismissed.
After hearing counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the prosecution is not trustworthy. There are many loopholes in the story of the prosecution, which casts doubt in the mind of the Court regarding involvement of the appellants in the alleged crime. As per admitted facts on record, the injuries were caused to Sukhdev Singh during the intervening night of December 2nd and 3rd , 2002. As per statement made by PW2 during night, she had seen the appellants - accused running away from the place of occurrence, in the street light. Sukhdev Singh was also alive and he had told her that injuries were caused to him by the appellants - accused. The injured was taken to Civil Hospital at Khanna by the neighbours, namely, Chheena and Kala (DW2) on a scooter. Police Station is situated about half a KM away from the Hospital. As per deposition, made by Dr. B.S.Bhatia (PW5), injured was brought to the Hospital by PW2 at 1.45 AM on December 3, 2002. His condition was serious and he was referred to Civil Hospital at Ludhiana for treatment. This witness has specifically stated that vide letter Ex. PW5/A, intimation was sent to Police Station City Khanna regarding the above incident. In CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -11- that letter, it is stated that Sukhdev Singh injured was resident of Navi Abadi, Khanna, where incident had occurred. As per admitted facts on record, above said place is situated at a distance of about 1 KM from Police Station City Khanna. It is also an admitted fact that the injured was not taken to Civil Hospital at Ludhiana. Rather he was shifted to DMC Hospital at Ludhiana, where he was medico legally examined by Dr. Rahul (PW3), who found 10 injuries on the person of the deceased. This witness has specifically stated that vide letter Ex. PF intimation was sent to Police Station Division No. 8, Ludhiana, which was received at 3.40 AM on December 3, 2002, by Constable Surender Singh No. 1898. In that document also, complete address/ particulars of the deceased and the informant are given. Despite receipt of above information, the police official did not go to the place of occurrence.
As per version given by ASI Jai Singh (PW6), on receipt of information from DMC Hospital, Ludhiana, he went there on December 3, 2002. The Doctor gave him a certificate Ex. PW6/B that the patient was not fit to make a statement. He repeated the same exercise on December 6, 2002. This witness has categorically stated that he did not meet any relative of the deceased and further because the address of the place of occurrence was not known, he failed to go to that place. It is admitted by this witness that from December 3, 2002, till December 8, 2002, he made no attempt to pin point the place of occurrence. The documents Ex. PW5/A and Ex. PF sent by the Hospital authorities to the police falsify the above version of this witness. Address of Sukhdev Singh is clearly mentioned in those documents and the place of occurrence is situated only one KM away from CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -12- the Police Station. Neither this witness nor any other police officer made an attempt to go to that place and secure evidence available at the spot.
PW11 S.I. Harbhajan Singh has also admitted that from 3rd to 7th December, 2002, he did not go to the place of occurrence. This witness has also admitted receipt of letter Ex. P8 in the Police Station. PW12 Inspector Harbans Singh has also admitted that upto the month of August, 2003, during investigation, nothing was found against the appellants - accused. Above act of the investigating agency gives credence to the statement of counsel for the appellants that it was a blind murder and the actual culprits were not known to anybody.
Not only as above, the statement made by Kamaljit Kaur Virk (PW2), daughter of the deceased, is not trust worthy. As per facts of the case, this witness allegedly had seen the appellants -accused running away from the spot after committing the crime. It is further averred that the injured had told this witness that the injuries were caused to him by the appellants. Injured was also taken to the Civil Hospital at Khanna by this witness with the help of Chheena and Kala (DW2). This witness has admitted that many relatives of the deceased had reached Civil Hospital at Khanna. Police Station is situated at a distance of half a KM from the Hospital. No attempt was made to intimate the police. The deceased was shifted to a Hospital at Ludhiana. Even then no attempt was made to intimate the police till December 8, 2002. To overcome above lacuna, it is stated by PW2 that on account of shock to her, she became unconscious and remained as such till December 8, 2002, when her statement was recorded. To support above version, there is nothing on record to show as to who was CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -13- the doctor, who attended her. She was looked after by whom? As per admitted facts, she remained in her house at Khanna only. The story of PW2 becoming unconscious is not believable.The delay in lodging the FIR has not been explained on record.
As per site plan Ex. PW8/A, next to the place of occurrence, many houses are situated. It is case of PW2 that on receipt of injuries, Sukhdev Singh raised a noise, which attracted her. She was at a distance from where it is not possible to see the place of occurrence and also to hear the noise. The next door neighbours were not associated in the investigation, which also casts doubt on the case of the prosecution. Despite availability of independent witnesses, none was joined in the investigation to support version given by PW2( daughter of the deceased). It is case of the prosecution that with the help of Avtar alias Kala, the injured was shifted to Civil Hospital at Khanna on a scooter. This witness, in defence has stated that Sukhdev Singh, when taken to the Hospital was not in a position to speak. It is further stated by this witness that the police had reached Civil Hospital at Khanna and had a talk with Kamaljit Kaur (PW2). The sequence of events, mentioned above, clearly demonstrate that the occurrence had come to the notice of the police immediately. However, no action was taken because as suggested by the defence, the name of the culprits was not known.
The prosecution has also relied upon the statement made by Mohinder Pal (PW7), before whom it is alleged that appellant No. 1 Charanjit Singh had made a confessional statement on August 16, 2003. Deposition made by this witness is not believable. It has come on record in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -14- the statement made by Inspector (retired) Malkit Singh (DW1) that the investigation was conducted regarding participation of the appellants - accused in the alleged crime but they were not challaned. PW7 has stated that Charanjit Singh came to him and admitted his guilt on August 16, 2003. Mohinder Pal is a Municipal Councilor from Ward No. 18, which is situated away from the residence of appellant No. 1 and the place of occurrence. This witness does not represent the people of the area, in which the occurrence had taken place. This witness has further admitted that he met Charanjit Singh only once in a marriage. It is also on record that against this witness in the year 2003, three criminal cases were pending at Khanna. Story of the prosecution that Charanjit Singh was arrested from the shop of this witness on August 17, 2003, is not believable. There was no occasion for Charanjit Singh to go to PW7 to make a confessional statement as they do not have any special confidential relationship with each other. Besides statements of PW2 and PW7, there is no other evidence available on record against the appellants. Credibility of both these witnesses is shaky and their statements are not believable.
Version of PW2 that she saw the appellants- accused scaling the wall in front of her house, in the street light, is also not believable. The place of occurrence is situated at some distance from the house of the deceased. In between, there are many residential houses. It has also come on record that next to the place of occurrence, there is a Railway line and a deserted plot. Any criminal, after committing the crime would have preferred to escape towards the Railway line and the deserted plot and is not expected to come near to the house of the deceased. Perusal of the site plan CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 315-DB OF 2007 -15- Ex. PW8/A falsifies version of the prosecution. The defence taken by the appellant - accused appears to be plausible. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the appellants - accused have been implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion alone. Merely pendency of some civil suit between the deceased and father of appellant No. 1 cannot be taken as a strong motive to commit murder of Sukhdev Singh deceased.
In view of facts, mentioned above, this appeal is allowed, conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants is set aside and they are acquitted of the charge framed against them.
The appellants, who are in custody, be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
( Jasbir Singh ) Judge ( Sabina) Judge December 01, 2011 DKC