Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 20 September, 2013
Author: Anita Chaudhry
Bench: Anita Chaudhry
Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008
DATE OF DECISION : September 20, 2013
Ranjit Singh and others ..Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY
Present: Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate
with Mr. S.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
for the State-respondent.
***
1. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? Yes
M.JEYAPAUL, J.
1. The appellants have challenged the conviction and sentence passed by by the trial court as detailed below:- Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 2
NAME OF THE CHARGE SENTENCE
CONVICT/S
Ranjit Singh, Jaswant 148 IPC Sentenced to undergo
Singh, Ranjodh R.I. for two years only
Singh, Nirmal Singh, each.
Baljinder Singh and
Ajit Singh
Ranjit Singh and 302 IPC Sentenced to undergo
Jaswant Singh life imprisonment and
to pay a fine of
`2500/- and in default
of payment of fine to
further undergo R.I.
for two months each.
Ajit Singh, Baljinder 302/149 IPC Sentenced to undergo
Singh, Ranjodh Singh life imprisonment and
and Nirmal Singh to pay a fine of
`2500/- and in default
of payment of fine to
further undergo R.I.
for two months each.
Baljinder Singh 326 IPC Sentenced to undergo
R.I. for 3 years and to
pay a fine of `1000/-
and in default of
payment of fine to
undergo R.I. for one
month.
Ajit Singh, Jaswant 326/149 IPC To undergo R.I. for
Singh, Ranjit Singh, two years and to pay
Ranjodh Singh and a fine of `1000/- and
Nirmal Singh in default of payment
of fine to further
undergo R.I. for one
month each.
Ranjodh Singh 324 IPC To undergo R.I for 1½
year only.
Ajit Singh, Jaswant 324/149 IPC To undergo R.I. for
Singh, Ranjit Singh, one year only each.
Baljinder Singh and
Nirmal Singh
Nirmal Singh 323 IPC To undergo R.I. for
one year only.
Singh Parvinder
2013.10.03 10:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 3
NAME OF THE CHARGE SENTENCE
CONVICT/S
Ajit Singh, Jaswant 323/149 IPC To undergo R.I. for 6
Singh, Ranjit Singh, months only each.
Baljinder Singh and
Ranjodh Singh
2. All the substantive sentences of imprisonment of all the convicts were ordered to run concurrently.
3. The brief case of the prosecution is that on 18.7.2007 at about 7.30 P.M. PW2 Mithu Singh was returning from his fields to the village along with his father Saun Singh (deceased), his uncle PW4 Sardool Singh and his cousin PW3 Vikram Singh after collecting fodder for their cattle from their fields. When they reached the drain bridge of the village they were stopped by the occupants of a white Maruti car and a motorcycle. All the occupants who are the accused herein alighted from their respective vehicles. Accused Ranjit Singh was armed with Kirpan, accused Ranjodh Singh was armed with Datar, accused Baljinder Singh was armed with Kirpan, accused Ajit Singh was found empty handed, accused Jaswant Singh was armed with Datar and accused Nirmal Singh was armed with Dang. All the accused encircled the complainant party. Accused Ranjit Singh declared that Gian Singh the father of Saun Singh (deceased) had not stopped the passage extended to Jagtar Singh. He had warned that if he did not stop extending such a facility to Jagtar Singh, he would face the consequences. He also disclosed that all of them had been searching for him. In case he was found, the accused would teach a fitting lesson to him. Saun Singh (deceased) encountered the Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 4 accused party and reminded them that they could not force them to do what they wanted, as the land concerned was owned by his father Gian Singh. He was informed that the family had decided to give passage to Jagtar Singh with whom the family had good relationship.
4. The accused Ranjit Singh raised lalkara that the complainant party should be taught a lesson. Accused Ajit Singh caught hold of Saun Singh. Jaswant Singh gave a Datar blow on the right hand finger of Saun Singh. Ajit Singh threw him on the ground. Ranjit Singh gave a Kirpan blow on the left knee of Saun Singh. Blood started oozing out. PW3 Vikram Singh and PW4 Sardool Singh came forward to rescue Saun Singh. Baljinder Singh gave a Kirpan blow on the right leg of Sardool Singh. Ranjodh Singh gave a Datar blow on the head of Sardool Singh. Ranjit Singh gave a Kirpan blow on the left elbow of Vikram Singh. Nirmal Singh also gave a Dang blow on the shoulder of Vikram Singh. When the accused party turned towards PW2 Mithu Singh he ran towards the village raising alarm. All the accused fled away in their respective vehicles along with the weapons. Saun Singh died due to the injuries he sustained in the occurrence.
5. A formal First Information Report was registered on the basis of the statement suffered by PW2 Mithu Singh.
6. PW7 Dr. Nirwail Singh medico legally examined PW4 Sardool Singh on 19.7.2007 at about 9.50 A.M. He found an incised wound measuring 5.5. c.m. x 1 c.m. on the front portion of the right leg. He also found another incised wound measuring 3 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 5 on the left side of the head. The first injury was found to be grievous in nature and the second injury was found to be simple in nature.
7. PW7 Dr. Nirwail Singh also medico legally examined PW3 Vikram Singh and found an incised wound measuring 2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. on the left elbow joint and a diffused swelling measuring 3 c.m. x 2.5 c.m. on the left shoulder joint. Both the injuries were declared simple in nature.
8. PW6 Dr. Satinderpal Singh conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Saun Singh on 19.7.2007 at about 3.00 P.M. He found an incised wound measuring 16 c.m. horizontally placed on the back and 8 c.m. below the knee joint. The wound was 6 c.m. deep and 40 c.m. from left lateral malleolus. The fibula was completely cut and tibia was also partially fractured. He also found another incised wound measuring 4 c.m. and skin deep obliquely placed on the dorsam of proximal phalanx on the right index finger. PW6 has opined that Saun Singh had died due to haemorahhage and shock which in the ordinary course of nature was sufficient to cause death. He has also deposed during the course of cross examination that both the injuries were found on the non vital parts of the body. None of the injuries was necessarily fatal in the ordinary course of nature. The first injury was found to be grievous and the second injury was found to be simple in nature.
9. PW16 S.I. Gurinder Pal Singh arrested the accused and recovered the respective weapons at their instance.
10. PW1 Gian Singh had chosen not to support the case of Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 6 the prosecution but PW2 Mithu Singh the complainant in this case, PW3 Vikram Singh and PW4 Sardool Singh have completely supported the case of the prosecution.
11. The trial Court having relied upon the evidence of PW2 to PW4 in the background of the recovery effected from the accused and the medical evidence on record recorded conviction as stated supra.
12. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellants would vehemently submit that the motive part of the case of the prosecution was not supported by Gian Singh. Jagtar Singh who enjoyed the passage facility allegedly extended by Gian Singh was also not examined. The motive could have been only as against Gian Singh and not against the family members who had got separate lands for cultivation. Therefore, it is his submission that the motive part of the case of the prosecution was not established. He would also submit that the presence of PW2 Mithu Singh on the scene of crime is highly doubtful as he had not intervened to save the victims. Nor had he received any injury in the occurrence. Further, his version that he had been to the village leaving the victims to fight for their life would go to show that he was not at all present at the scene of occurrence. The injuries alleged to have been sustained by PW3 Vikram Singh and PW4 Sardool Singh would have been self suffered. The very fact that they had been given treatment only at about 9.50 A.M. the following day even for the grievous injuries sustained by PW4 Sardool Singh would go to show that they had not infact Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 7 sustained any injury in the occurrence. As an alternative submission the learned Senior counsel would submit that the accused had no intention to cause the death of Saun Singh. Therefore, there was no occasion for them to share the common object. They were infact in search of PW1 Gian Singh but Gian Singh had turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. Therefore, it is his submission that no case under Section 302 was also made out.
13. We heard the submission made by learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the state of Punjab supporting the verdict of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court.
14. PW3 Vikram Singh and PW4 Sardool Singh are found to be injured witnesses. PW4 Sardool Singh had sustained one grievous injury on his leg. Further, the nature of injuries sustained by PW3 and PW4 would go to show that those injuries had not been self suffered or suffered from a friendly hand.
15. The evidence of PW3 and PW4 would go to show that they infact proceeded to the hospital for treatment immediately after the occurrence but quite unfortunately they had not been properly attended by the doctors. They were medico legally examined only in the morning at about 8.50 A.M. Such an explanation cannot be ignored by the Court of law. Even otherwise, the delay in conducting the medico legal examination would not cast any doubt on the version of PW3 and PW4 who sustained injury in the occurrence.
16. The evidence of injured witnesses will have to be given much credence. It is also found that the evidence of Mithu Singh who Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 8 was examined as PW2 also lends corroboration to the evidence of PW3 and PW4.
17. It is true that PW2, PW3 and PW4 are closely related to each other. The court has to visualise the fact situation in which all the three injured along with the deceased happened to be found at the scene of occurrence. It is the consistent version of PW2, PW3 and PW4 that they had been to collect the fodder and the occurrence took place when they were returning at about 7.30 P.M. to their village. Except the family members who had been to their field for collecting fodder, no other person could be expected at the scene of occurrence at the relevant point of time. Therefore, the evidence of PW2 to PW4 cannot also be discarded on the flimsy ground that independent witness had not been examined.
18. PW1 Gian Singh who was infact witch hunted by the accused had turned hostile to the case of the prosecution for reasons best known to him. The hostility exhibited by him does not in any way affect to the case of the prosecution. We find that he was not an eyewitness to the occurrence. At best he could speak of only the motive part of the case of the prosecution. PW2 to PW4 had consistently spoken to the motive for the crime committed by the accused. Therefore, lack of support from PW1 Gian Singh the father of the deceased Saun Singh to the case of the prosecution does not in any way cause a dent in the case of the prosecution.
19. PW2 Mithu Singh was just 19 years old when the occurrence took place. Such a young boy cannot be expected to Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 9 interfere with the murderous assault launched by the accused against his relatives. The accused were also found armed with deadly weapons. No wonder PW2 having witnessed the occurrence rushed to the village located about ½ K.M. away from the scene of occurrence to inform his grant father. The 19 years old boy would also have been gripped with fear, having seen such a cruel attack launched by the accused against his father, uncle and cousin. He had brought his grand father within a short while to the scene of occurrence. Further, we cannot expect everyone to behave in a stereo typed behavioral pattern. PW2 Mithu Singh who was 19 years old had acted in his own fashion immediately after the occurrence. Therefore, nothing could be found fault with his conduct.
20. We also found that PW16, who had proceeded to the hospital, recorded the statement Ex.P1 from PW2 who was present near the main gate of the hospital. PW2 is found to be an eyewitness to the occurrence. It is not always necessary that the First Information Report should be lodged only by the injured witness. Any person for that matter who has got some information about the occurrence can very well set the law in motion. Recording of the First Information Report from PW2 does not create any doubt on the case of the prosecution that PW3 and PW4 had already been admitted to the hospital for treatment.
21. Coming to the motive part of the case of the prosecution PW2, PW3 and PW4 have spoken in one voice that the father of the deceased who was examined as PW1 had given access of path way Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 10 in his land to Jagtar Singh. Therefore, the accused intending to attack PW1 Gian Singh encountered the complainant party at the scene of crime.
22. It is true that Jagtar Singh was not examined by the prosecution. PW1 Gian Singh also turned hostile and chose not to support the case of the prosecution. No Panchayat also was convened to thrash out the dispute between the accused party and the complainant party. But in our considered view, the motive spoken to by PW2 to PW4 is found to be credible. PW2 Mithu Singh is found to be the eyewitness to the occurrence. PW3 Vikram Singh and PW4 Sardool Singh are found to be injured witnesses. They have categorically deposed that accused Ranjit Singh who was armed with Kirpan attacked Saun Singh on his left leg and caused a very deep injury. He also attacked PW3 Vikram on his left elbow and caused simple injury. Accused Jaswant Singh attacked deceased with Datar on the right index finger and caused simple injury. Accused Ranjodh Singh attacked PW4 Sardool Singh on his head with Datar and caused simple injury. Accused Baljinder Singh attacked PW4 Sardool Singh on his left leg with Kirpan and caused grievous injury. Accused Nirmal Singh attacked PW3 Vikram on his shoulder with stick and caused simple injury.
23. It is spoken to by PW2 to PW4 that accused Ajit Singh caught hold of the deceased Saun Singh facilitating the others to attack him. Had he caught hold of him for the purpose of facilitating the attack by the other accused, he would not have released him Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 11 before ever a fatal injury was caused to the victim. Further, when the other accused were armed with weapons accused Ajit Singh would not have risked by catching hold of the deceased. Therefore, we entertain a doubt as to the role attributed to accused Ajit Singh that he caught hold of the deceased Saun Singh to facilitate the attack launched by the accused.
24. The facts and circumstances spoken to by PW2 Mithu Singh in his First Information Report would go to establish that the accused had infact intended to attack only PW1 Gian Singh. They had infact disclosed that they had been in search of PW1 Gian Singh to teach a lesson. But unfortunately the deceased Saun Singh being the son of Gian Singh encountered the accused by asserting the right of his father to give way in his land to Jagtar Singh who was close to their family. If at all the accused party had attacked PW1 Gian Singh, we can easily come to a conclusion that the accused had shared the common object. But at the scene of crime the accused had to deal with a situation which was created by deceased Saun Singh. The nature of attack launched by the accused and the number of injuries caused to the complainant party would also demonstrate that no common intention was infact shared by all the accused at the spur of the moment when attack was launched as against the complainant party. Therefore, neither Section 149 nor Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code could be banked on to fix the joint liability of the accused for the crime committed by the individual accused. Therefore, we have proposed to punish the accused only for the individual overt acts Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 12 committed by them.
25. Accused Jaswant Singh had caused only a simple injury on the deceased Saun Singh. He had chosen only the right index finger to cause the injury with Datar. PW6 Dr. Satinderpal Singh has deposed that an incised wound with skin deep was found on the dorsam of proximal phalanx of the right index finger. He had not repeated any attack on the deceased Saun Singh. Had he intended to cause the death of Saun Singh there was no reason for him not to repeat his attack. Therefore, accused Jaswant Singh is liable to be convicted only under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code for having caused simple injury on the deceased with the lethal weapon Datar.
26. Accused Ranjodh Singh had caused simple injury on PW4 Sardool Singh with the lethal weapon Datar. Therefore, he is also liable to be convicted under Section 324 IPC.
27. Accused Baljinder Singh had caused grievous injury on PW4 Sardool Singh with Kirpan. Therefore, he is liable to be convicted under Section 326 IPC.
28. Accused Nirmal Singh has caused simple injury on PW3 Vikram Singh with stick. Therefore, he is liable to be convicted under Section 323 IPC.
29. Coming to the role of Ranjit Singh who attacked the deceased Saun Singh with Kirpan on his left leg, we find that he had caused a very deep incised wound measuring 16 c.m. deep. The fibula was completely cut and the tibia was also partially fractured. The nature of weapon held by accused Ranjit Singh and the depth Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 13 and width of the injury caused by him of course on the left leg would demonstrate the vehemence with which he had launched the attack. It is all the more clear that Ranjit Singh had intended to cause a deep injury on the leg of the deceased which in the ordinary course of nature, as per the testimony of post mortem doctor, was sufficient to cause his death. It is true that he had not repeated the attack on him. Quite probably he had chosen not to repeat his attack, as such a deep cut injury would bleed him to death in no time.
30. The seat of injury alone cannot be the determining factor to assess the nature of offence committed by the the assailant. The other facts and circumstances will have to be properly weighed before ever coming to a conclusion as to whether murder was committed or culpable homicide not amounting to murder was committed. In the instant case the accused Ranjit Singh having proclaimed to teach a lesson to Gian Singh who had chosen to rationalise the act of his father attacked him with all vehemence at his command with the lethal weapon Kirpan and caused very deep injury which completely cut fibula and partially fractured tibia. In our considered view, accused Ranjit Singh had infact intended to cause bodily injury to Saun Singh which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause his death. Therefore, he is liable to be convicted under Section 302 IPC.
31. In view of the above, we acquit the accused Ajit Singh from all the charges framed as against him. All the accused are acquitted of the charge under Section 148 IPC. They are also not Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No. 908-DB of 2008 14 found liable to be convicted with the aid of Section 149 IPC. Consequently, the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court is modified and the accused Ranjit Singh is convicted under Section 302 IPC and he is sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of `2500/- and in default to undergo a further period of two months rigorous imprisonment. Accused Jaswant Singh is acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC, instead he is convicted under Section 324 IPC and is sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment which period he had already undergone. Accused Ranjodh Singh is convicted under Section 324 IPC and is sentenced to undergo the period already undergone by him. Accused Baljinder Singh is convicted under Section 326 IPC and is sentenced to undergo the period already undergone by him. Accused Nirmal Singh is convicted under Section 323 IPC and is sentenced to undergo the period already undergone by him. With the above modification in the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court, the appeal is allowed in part.
(M.JEYAPAUL) JUDGE (ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE September 20, 2013 p.singh Singh Parvinder 2013.10.03 10:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document