Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Haryana on 3 July, 2012
Author: Rakesh Kumar Jain
Bench: Jasbir Singh, Rakesh Kumar Jain
Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
*****
Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007
Date of Decision: 03.07.2012
*****
Ranjit Singh and others
. . . .Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana
. . . . Respondent
*****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
*****
Present: Mr.Baldev Singh, Sr. Advocate, with
Mr.Dipender Singh, Advocate, with
Mr.S.S. Narula, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr.Pardeep Singh Poonia, Addl. A.G. Haryana
Mr.Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate, with
Mr.Ravinder Singh, Advocate, for the complainant.
*****
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.
All the nine appellants namely, Ranjit Singh, Dinesh, Braham Singh, Sunil, Pehlad, Manoj, Gaurav, Parveen and Ashok have been convicted and sentenced under Sections 302, 307, 323, 148 & 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC') whereas appellant Ranjit Singh has been further convicted for offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act and Dinesh for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act.
All the appellants have been sentenced for two years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each in respect of offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -2- imprisonment of two months. All of them have been further sentenced for six months and fined Rs.500/- each in respect of offence punishable under Section 323 & 149 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of one month each. All of them have been sentenced for ten years and fined Rs.2000/- each in respect of offence punishable under Section 307 & 149 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of four month. All the appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each in respect of offence punishable under Section 302 & 149 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of six months. Ranjit Singh (appellant No.1) has been further sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/- in respect of offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Dinesh (appellant No.9) has been further sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/- in respect of offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. All the sentences are ordered to run concurrently and the period of detention already undergone by them during investigation and trial was ordered to be set off towards the aforesaid sentence of imprisonment.
FIR No.1057 dated 25.12.2004, under Sections 148, 302, 307, 323 and 506 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, at Police Station, NIT, Faridabad, (Ex.P-20) was registered on the statement of Mehtab (PW1), recorded by Raghubir Singh (PW25) in Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -3- which it was alleged that Udai Singh and Shiv Narain owned a school known as Arawali International School, Faridabad, which is in the vicinity of another School known as Modern Vidya Niketan School. Some vacant land is there in between the two schools. On 25.12.2004, at about 9.30 a.m., Mehtab (PW1), his father Udai Singh (deceased), Uncle Shiv Narain (deceased) and Dharmender (PW4), were levelling portion of said vacant land. At that time, Dinesh armed with gun, Sunil armed with pharsa, Ranjit armed with revolver and the remaining appellants armed with lathies, came there. Ranjit Singh exhorted his companions to teach a lesson to them for levelling the land and fired from his revolver. The shot hit the left side of the neck of Udai Singh (deceased). Dinesh fired from his gun and the pellet hit left side of Mehtab's chest. At that stage, Dinesh took the revolver from Ranjit and exhorted that Udai Singh must be killed, fired a shot hitting Udai Singh on the right side of his chest. Dinesh then fired yet another shot from the revolver and the pellet went through the wrist bone of Mehtab (PW1). Accused Sunil gave pharsa blow on the head of Shiv Narain and on the left hand of Dharmender (PW4). Remaining accused in the course of incident kept on pelting stones. On hearing of the firearm shot, Karan Singh, Dhan Singh and Raghbir rushed to the spot and on seeing them, the accused left in their cars alongwith their weapons.
After the occurrence, injured and the deceased were initially brought to Escorts Hospital, Faridabad, Dr. Rakesh Singh (PW21), examined Shiv Narain (deceased) and found the following injury on his person:
"lacerated wound 2 cm x 0.5 cm right mid parietal region with clean margin. Bleeding Present. Injury was subjected to X-ray".
He also examined Mehtab Singh (PW1) and found the following injury on his person:
Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -4-
"(i) 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm circular wound left forearm mid dorso laternal aspect with bleeding present, Margins inverted, blacking present. 0.8 cm x 0.8 cm wound left forearm mid ventral aspect with everted margins bleeding present.
(ii) Abrasion left chest anterior aspect."
It was observed that the injuries are in the duration of six hours and are caused by firearm. He also examined Dharmender (PW4) and found the following injuries:
"Lacerated wound 4 inch x 0.5 cm skin deep left forearm. Superior dorsal aspect with red margins. Bleeding was present."
It was opined that Injury was kept under observation and caused by blunt weapon.
The port-mortem of Udai Singh (deceased) was conducted by a Board consisting of Dr. S.K. Bhagat, Dr. S.K. Manocha, Dr. A.K. Gupta. Dr.S.K. Bhagat appeared as PW17, found the following injuries on the dead body:
1. There was wound of entry stellat shaped wound of size 1x1 cm on the right shoulder middle part. Anterior aspect, margin was inverted with dark coloured contusion, looking like the dark ring. Wound was extended to the right chest wall posterior aspect in between the 9th intercostal Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -5- escape and on further dissection with view of x-ray film. There was another wound of 1.5x1 cm on the neck left part, lower area situated anteriorily obliquely placed, margin inverted.
On further dissection of both wounds there was the vassels underlying raptured blood was clotted and extending to the posterior wall in the third intercostal espace. There was lodgment of the two bullets. After dissecting the muscle viewing through the x-ray film.
There was fracture of 9th, 10th ribs in the right chest and thorix cavity was full of blood. Both lungs were ruptured and there was rupture of great vessels and paricardium and muscle of the heart, resulting into bilateral haemothorax.
Bullets were taken out from the body of Udai Singh which were sealed into parcels as Ex.P75 and P76. He opined that injuries No.1 and 2 could be caused by firearm from the close range. The other deceased Shiv Narain suffered head injury due to blow from the reverse side of pharsa by Sunil. PW5, Dr. H.S. Sohal, Consultant, Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -6- Vimhans Hospital, Nehru Nagar, New Delhi, stated that the deceased was unconscious at the time of examination and was admitted in ICU. CT scan of the brain was done which revealed multiple contusions for which he was managed conservatively. He did not show any improvement and ultimately died on 14.1.2005. Postmortem of dead body was done by PW7, Dr. M.G. Jayan, Sr. Resident Doctor of AIIMS, New Delhi, who has found the following injuries:
"1. Two stitched wound over left front region of scarp of sizes .5 cm in length and 7 cm from the mid line horizontally, 7 cm from the eye brow.
2. Five stitched wounds over an area of 5 x 5 cm on right frontal region of scalp of sizes .5 cm in length measuring 9 cm from the right eye brow and 1.5 cm from the mid line.
Surgically made tracheostomy
wound.
3. Partially healed multiple abrasions
over right leg upper 2/3rd part in the
anterior aspect."
He opined that cause of death was due to the injury by a blunt weapon.
During investigation, Raghubir Singh, SI (PW25), recovered the empty cartridges. He also picked up blood stained earth from the Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -7- spot and prepared rough site plan. The empty cartridges were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (FSL) and it was found in the test that .32 revolver of Ranjit was in working condition and the cartridge recovered from the spot and the bullets taken from the body of Udai Singh were fired from the same revolver.
After investigation, only Ranjit, Braham Singh, Dinesh and Sudesh were challaned but after the examination of PW1 Mehtab on 19.9.2005, on an application filed under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C) other accused namely, Sunil, Pehlad, Manoj, Gaurav, Parveen and Ashok were summoned and charged for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 307, 323 and 506 IPC read with Section 149 IPC., Ranjit Singh (appellant No.1) was further charged for an offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act and Dinesh (appellant No.9) was further charged for an offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. On their examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., each of the accused refuted incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evidence.
Ranjit Singh (appellant No.1) set up a defence that while taking a usual round on his land situated in between Mordern Vidya Niketan School and Arawali International School on 25.12.2004, he noticed the persons of the complainant party in his land and reminded them about the civil Court injunction order in his favour but the complainant party started pelting stones who were also armed with iron rods, therefore, apprehending danger of their lives, as the complainant party was about to snatch his revolver, he fired a shot in Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -8- the air in the exercise of right of self defence of his person and property. He has alleged that he had fired two shots towards the complainant party, which caused injuries to Udai Singh and Mehtab. The remaining accused claimed false implication being the collaterals of Ranjit. In defence they had examined 14 witnesses.
In this case, the ocular account of prosecution case has been given by the injured PW1 Mehtab and PW2 Dharmender. The presence is not denied by accused/appellant Ranjit, at the scene of occurrence, who has admitted firing from his revolver at Udai Singh and Mehtab causing death of Udai Singh and injury to Mehtab but has taken right of private defence on the ground of being in possession of the land in dispute which was being invaded by the complainant party. Dhan Singh PW3 has also deposed that he along with his two brothers namely Udai Singh and Shiv Narain, jointly used to run Arawali International School and on the fateful day, he was present on the backside of the school in the company of Raghubir Singh and Karan Singh and rushed to the spot on hearing sound of firearm shots. He also stated that he had seen the accused/appellants at the spot.
The learned Court below, after discussing the evidence led by each and every witness appearing on behalf of the complainant, as well as the accused, found all the accused guilty except for Sudesh, who has been given benefit of doubt and has been acquitted.
Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that Sunil (appellant No.3), Pehlad (appellant No.4), Manoj (appellant No.5), Gaurav (appellant No.6), Parveen (appellant No.7) and Ashok Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -9- (appellant No.8), were initially not found involved in the alleged occurrence and were kept in column No.2 and the charge-sheet was presented only against Ranjit Singh (appellant No.1), Braham Singh (appellant No.2), Dinesh (appellant No.9) and Sudesh (since acquitted). He has submitted that they have been falsely implicated as the role ascribed to them is merely of pelting of stones, which is not corroborated with the medical version as stated by Dr. Rakesh Singh PW21, who had found only one injury on the head of Shiv Narain (deceased), one injury caused by firearm another abrasion on the person of Mehtab (PW1) and one injury on the forearm of Dharmender (PW4). It has been further argued that had it been a case of pelting of stones by other accused, there would have been more injuries to them.
Hence, the prosecution story propounded by PW1, implicating the appellants is palpably false.
In reply, learned counsel for the State assisted by counsel for the complainant, has submitted that injury on the head of Shiv Narain (deceaed) has been found to be of multiple contusions in the brain which is a result of pelting of stones by other accused.
We have heard counsel for the parties in this regard and are of the considered view that appellants deserve the benefit of doubt as the ocular and medical version do not corroborate. According to the story of the prosecution the scene of crime is a rocky area and place where appellant No.1 Ranjit is stated to have fired from close range at Udai Singh (deceased) and injured Mehtab (PW1) resulting into instant death of Udai Singh and the bullet injuries piercing Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -10- through the wrist of PW1 and the pharsa blow given by Sunil on the head of Shiv Narain, indicates that assailants and complainants were closely pitted against each other and in those circumstances if other appellants who have been implicated on the allegations that they pelted stones at the complainant much less the injured and deceased they were bound to suffer lacerated wounds if the stones had landed on the uncovered area of their body. There is no detail in the FIR or seat of injuries having been suffered by the complainant or the deceased on account of the stones having been pelted at them.
In respect of Ranjit Singh (appellant No.1), Braham Singh (appellant No.2) and Dinesh (appellant No.9), it is submitted that appellant No.1 has admitted the occurrence but has stated that he had fired from his licensed revolver in private defence as complainant party had started pelting stones and were armed with lathi and iron rods. There is no medical record of the appellant No.1, indicating any injury having been suffered by him in the course of stones having been allegedly pelted at him provoking him to defend his life by firing at the deceased Udai Singh and injured Mehtab. Moreover, the alleged occurrence took place at Mustitil No.38, Khasra No.23, measuring 5 Kanals 19 Marlas of land which is not proved to be in the ownership and in possession of appellant No.1, therefore, the question of his defending the property does not arise. Admittedly, he had used his revolver, the empties recovered from the spot and the bullets recovered from the dead body of Udai Singh are the same. Crl. Appeal No.705-DB of 2007 -11-
Appellant No.2 Braham Singh was challaned by the police showing his presence at the scene of crime but the other appellants have been roped in on an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the prosecution. Accused Sunil had given pharsa blow from the reverse side on the head of Shiv Narain, who ultimately died due to the said injury. We do not accept the contention of the counsel for the appellants that the said injury could have been caused due to fall on the ground. Appellant No.9 Dinesh had also fired from his gun as well as from the revolver taken from Ranjit Singh and caused injury.
We are thus satisfied that there is no error in the order of the learned Court below in their conviction and sentence but insofar as appellants No.4 to 8 are concerned, they are being acquitted by extending that the benefit of doubt about their presence and participation of crime.
(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
JUDGE
JULY 03, 2012 (JASBIR SINGH)
Vivek ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE