Punjab-Haryana High Court
Paramjit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 April, 2013
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Jasbir Singh, Inderjit Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002
Date of decision : 03.04.2013
Paramjit Singh
.... Appellant
VERSUS
State of Punjab
.... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
***
Present : Ms.Jyoti Chaudhary, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr.B.S.Bhalla, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State.
*** INDERJIT SINGH, J Appellant Paramjit Singh has preferred the present appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.03.2002, passed by the Sessions Judge, Faridkot, vide which he has been held guilty for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.
Brief facts of the prosecution case are that FIR in the present case has been registered on the statement of Inder Singh. Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [2] Complainant Inder Singh, in his statement, stated that on 23.12.1998 at about 7:30 a.m., when he was going on his motorcycle to village Hari Nau, on the road, in front of the field of Chuhar Singh, some persons were standing. He stopped his motorcycle and after parking it, he saw that a person with his face downwards, was lying dead on the berm of the road and near to him a bag, a watch and scooter were lying fallen. He identified the deceased as Harjinder Singh alias Vakil, who was his nephew by relation and was serving in cooperative Society, Surghuri. At a short distance on the road, turban, loi and pump shoe of the deceased were lying. Complainant found injuries on the left side of neck, head, face and left leg of deceased. In his opinion, the incident had happened on the previous night. He had come to know that his nephew Harjinder Singh, Paramjit Singh alias Pamma, Kaur Singh, Pritam Singh and Sanjiv alias Sanjay gathered in the cooperative bank of village Hari Nau on the previous night and went to Village Kotkapura on two scooters. As per knowledge of complainant, Pritam of Village Madhak met them near Hari Nau Railway Crossing, Kotkapura. Sanjay and Pritam of Village Madhak separated from them. Thereafter, Harjinder Singh (deceased), Paramjit Singh, Kaur Singh and Pritam Singh, Senior Clerk, took liquor in Hamraj Hotel. During this period, Harjinder Singh and Paramjit Singh brought a cylinder on the scooter from the house of his (Harjinder Singh) sister Sukhi wife of Jaswant Singh of Village Kotkapura. Then these four persons separated from each other. Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [3] While taking liquor from village Kotkapura, Pritam Singh and Kaur Singh started going for Village Hari Nau on their scooter and Paramjit Singh and Harjinder Singh followed them on another scooter for Village Hari Nau. Complainant further stated that it came to his notice that Paramjit Singh alias Pamma left the cylinder on scooter in the house of Gurcharan Singh but till now they (complainant party) have not met Pamma. The complainant has suspected that aforesaid Kaur Singh, Paramjit Singh, Pritam Singh and Sanjiv Kumar have the knowledge of the incident occurred with his nephew Harjinder Singh or they are connected with the incident. After leaving his relatives at the spot, when the complainant alongwith Balwinder Singh alias Suba was going to Police Station to lodge the report, on the way, police party met him and his statement was recorded by ASI Baldev Singh of Police Station Sadar, Kotkapura on 23.12.1998. On the basis of statement of complainant, ruqa was sent to police station, pursuant to which FIR was registered. Then ASI Baldev Singh, Investigating Officer, alongwith complainant and other police officials went to the place of occurrence where dead body of Harjinder Singh was lying on the ground with his face downwards. He inspected the dead body of Harjinder Singh. There were sharp edged injuries on the dead body. Inquest report Ex.PK was prepared. Investigating Officer lifted blood stained earth and simple earth from the place of occurrence and the same, after converting into separate sealed parcels, were taken into police possession vide Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [4] seizure memo Ex.PL. Scooter Bajaj Chetak bearing registration No.PB10-S-2810 alongwith Jhola containing registers of the Society, where deceased Harjinder Singh was employed, empty daba of gold Riband Whisky, one Loi, one turban, one ribbon like piece of cloth (under cover of turban), one mufler, broken frame of eye glasses, one wrist watch in broken condition, etc. were lifted from the place of occurrence and the same were taken into police possession vide seizure memo Ex.PM. Dead body of Harjinder Singh was sent for getting conducted postmortem examination. On 06.01.1999, accused was arrested. On interrogation, he suffered disclosure statement regarding concealing of blood stained 'kapa' and in pursuance thereof he got recovered the same. Statements of witnesses were recorded. After completion of investigation, challan against the accused was presented before the Court.
On presentation of challan, copies of challan and other documents were supplied to accused under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Finding a prima facie case against the accused, he was charge- sheeted for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution, in support of its case, examined PW1 Dr.K.K.Aggarwal, who conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Harjinder Singh on 24.12.1998 at 9:00 a.m. and found the following injuries on his person:-
1. Incised wound 16 cm x 8 cm present on front left and Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [5] back of neck. The anterior half showed irregular margins, while posterior part showed clean cut margins. The underlying platysma, sterno mastoid, vessels, nerves and veins were cut upto the vertebra. Clotted blood was present in the wound.
2. Reddish brown abrasion 5 cm x 4 cm on back of left elbow joint.
3. Reddish brown abrasion 6 cm x 3 cm on posterior lateral aspect of left thigh in upper half. Lacerated wound 3 cm x .5 cm was present on the abrasion.
4. Reddish brown abrasion 7 cm x 3 cm on back of right thigh in upper half.
5. Reddish brown abrasion 4 cm x 3 cm on back of chest in lower half over midline.
6. Reddish brown abrasion 7 cm x 6 cm on medial aspect of left knee joint. 3 lacerated wounds 1.5 cm x .5 cm present on the abrasion. There was deformity of left thigh. There was fracture of shaft of left femur in lower 1/3rd. The fractured ends could be palpated through skin. Rest of the organs were congested.
As per the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death in this case was haemorrhage and shock as a result of injury No.1 which was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The time that elapsed between injuries and death was within few minutes and between death and postmortem was within 24 to 48 hours.
PW2 Dharam Singh, Draftsman, mainly deposed regarding preparing of scaled site plan Ex.PE. PW3 MHC Roop
Chand, PW4 Head Constable Narinder Singh, PW5 Head Constable Jarnail Singh and PW6 Constable Gurbachan Singh are the formal Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [6] witnesses, who tendered into evidence their affidavits Ex.PF, Ex.PG, Ex.PH and Ex.PI respectively. PW7 Balwinder Singh mainly deposed that on 22.12.1998, he alongwith Surjit Singh, being Congress workers, was preaching for Shardha Yatra in connection of 300 years of Khalsa Panth Anniversary, in a jeep. They were proceeding from Kotkapura to Hari Nau. They started Shardha Yatra from Kotkapura at about 8:30 p.m. When they reached near the Southern phirni, Circular Road of Village Hari Nau, they saw accused Paramjit Singh alias Pamma and Harjinder Singh alias Vakil (deceased) quarrelling with each other. Paramjit Singh was saying to Harjinder Singh (deceased) that he had taken Rs.10,000/- from him for employing him in some government job. He was also saying that Harjinder Singh (deceased) had not returned the said amount. They (PW7 and Surjit Singh) persuaded them not to quarrel as they used to remain together. Harjinder Singh (deceased) was having a scooter and accused was on foot. Accused went away to Village Kassam Bhati and Harjinder Singh followed him on scooter. After the repair of the defect of the jeep, he (PW7) alongwith Surjit Singh started going for village Kasam Bhati and when they reached the place, which was about 100-150 yards away from Phirni of Village Hari Nau, they saw Paramjit Singh accused coming out of the fields having 'kapa' in his hand. Harjinder Singh was also there on the scooter. Accused Paramjit Singh gave blow from the blunt side of 'kapa' on the left leg of Harjinder Singh and he fell down on the ground alongwith scooter. Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [7] The accused dragged Harjinder Singh to the other side of the road. Accused gave 2-3 blows of 'kapa' on the neck of Harjinder Singh. When they (Balwinder Singh (PW7) and Surjit Singh) tried to rescue Harjinder Singh, Paramjit Singh declared that he would kill them if they did not run away from the spot and they would face the same consequences as the deceased had faced. This witness (PW7) further deposed that they were empty handed. Accused further declared that if they disclosed this incident to anybody, they would also face the same consequences as the deceased had faced. Then they went to Bhatinda via Kassam Bhati, Rori Kapura, Jaitu etc. On the next day, at the spot, he got recorded his statement to the police. PW8 Sikandar Singh is the witness of extra judicial confession. He mainly deposed that on 06.01.1999, he was present in his house. Paramjit Singh accused came to his house and narrated whole facts regarding occurrence and made extra judicial confession before him. Then he (PW8) produced the accused on the same day before the police in police station. PW9 Baldev Singh, who is the Investigating Officer of this case, mainly deposed regarding the investigation conducted by him in the present case. PW10 Sukhdev Singh mainly deposed regarding disclosure statement suffered by the accused and recovery of blood stained 'kapa' from near the kikkar tree in the slopes (Khetan) near Abohar Branch canal on Hari Nau Kassam Bhati Road in pursuance of said disclosure statement. PW11 Constable Bhupinder Singh is a formal witness, who tendered into Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [8] evidence his affidavit Ex.PS. PW12 Inder Singh, complainant, mainly deposed the same facts as deposed in the statement Ex.PJ, on the basis of which FIR was registered. PW13 Sub Inspector Mukhtiar Singh mainly deposed regarding entrustment of investigation of this case to him on 25.12.1998. He also deposed regarding arrest of accused, disclosure statement suffered by him and recovery of 'kapa' in pursuance of said disclosure statement. Public Prosecutor, after tendering into evidence Forensic Science Laboratory reports Ex.PV and Ex.PW, closed the prosecution evidence.
At the close of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and confronted with the evidence of prosecution. The accused denied the correctness of the evidence and pleaded himself as innocent. He also pleaded that he has been falsely implicated. The entire story propounded by the prosecution is fabricated one. He has made no extra judicial confession before Sikandar Singh PW. Neither he suffered any disclosure statement Ex.PP nor he got recovered blood stained 'kapa' Ex.P19. The recovery of 'kapa' has been foisted upon him.
No evidence was led in defence.
The trial Court, after appreciation of evidence, convicted and sentenced appellant-accused, as stated above.
At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Firstly, the version, given Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [9] by PW7 Balwinder Singh that he is the eye witness to the occurrence, cannot be believed. If he has seen the accused causing injuries to Harjinder Singh (deceased) then the natural course for him was to report the matter to the police or at least to Surjan Singh, relative of deceased Harjinder Singh, to whom he knew. His conduct by not doing so and going to Bathinda by passing through Kassam Bhati, Rori Kapura, Jaitu etc. where the police station was there shows that he has not seen the occurrence. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that statement of PW8 Sikandar Singh regarding extra judicial confession also cannot be believed because he is close relative of deceased Harjinder Singh. This witness was present on the spot on the very first day. She further contended that PW8 Sikandar Singh has been falsely introduced by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the recovery in the present case also cannot be believed. Why the accused will throw the blood stained 'kapa' in the slope (khetan) near the canal. If a canal is nearby the place of recovery of 'kapa' then the accused will definitely throw the kapa in the canal to destroy the evidence. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the version of prosecution also looks improbable. Both deceased and accused were friends and were going together on the scooter. Why the accused will kill Harjinder Singh in the open place for only Rs.10,000/- and there is no evidence that from where the accused get the said 'kapa'. Learned counsel for the appellant further Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [10] contended that prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and false evidence has been created against him. Therefore, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appeal should be allowed and appellant should be acquitted accordingly.
On the other hand, learned Addl. Advocate General, Punjab, contended that the case of the prosecution has been duly proved by PWs, especially PW7 Balwinder Singh eye-witness. Statement of PW7 Balwinder Singh, eye witness, is further supported and corroborated by PW8 Sikandar Singh, before whom the accused made extra judicial confession. Recovery of blood stained 'kapa' in pursuance of disclosure statement of accused further supports and corroborates the prosecution version. Therefore, learned Addl. Advocate General, Punjab, contended that there being no merit in the appeal, it should be dismissed.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Addl. Advocate General, Punjab and with their assistance, we have gone through the evidence on record minutely and carefully.
From the evidence on record, we find merits in the contentions of learned counsel for the appellant. As per prosecution version, PW7 Balwinder Singh alongwith Surjit Singh has seen the occurrence. Surjit Singh has not been examined by the prosecution in the present case. As regarding statement of PW7 Balwinder Singh, his conduct was unnatural and his statement cannot be Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [11] believed. If he had seen the occurrence at the evening time then the natural course for him was to report the matter to the police or to some respectable person or at least to the relative of deceased namely Surjan Singh, whose house was at a distance of about 3-4 kilometers from his house. At least, he could have informed Surjan Singh on telephone. But as per statement of PW7 Balwinder Singh, they (Balwinder Singh (PW7) and Surjit Singh) went to Bhatinda and remained there during night and on the next day, they came to the spot. The conduct of Balwinder Singh (PW7) makes his version unreliable. FIR has not been registered on the statement of PW7 Balwinder Singh, eye witness. The other fact which makes his version doubtful is that in cross-examination, he has stated that Surjan Singh told him on telephone that Harjinder Singh had been murdered and the message was conveyed at 8/9:00 a.m. If that was the case then the natural course for PW7 Balwinder Singh was to inform Surjan Singh at that time regarding the occurrence and the name of the accused. In the present case, FIR has been registered at 12:30 p.m. but till that time, version of eye witness account was not mentioned in the FIR. Therefore, from the evidence on record, we find that statement of PW7 Balwinder Singh cannot be believed. He is not a reliable witness.
As regarding PW12 Inder Singh, complainant, he is not the eye witness to the occurrence. He has not last seen accused Paramjit Singh and deceased Harjinder Singh together. He has Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [12] stated the detailed facts by saying that he has come to know regarding these facts but in cross-examination he has not given the name of the person who told all these facts to him. In cross- examination, he stated that Surjan Singh is brother-in-law i.e. sister's husband of Harjinder Singh. He also stated in cross-examination that Surjan Singh was present at the spot. If Surjan Singh was present at the spot and he had talked with Balwinder Singh (PW7) then there should be specific version given in the FIR. PW12 Inder Singh has also stated that Harjinder Singh, his friend Paramjit Singh alias Pamma, Kaur Singh etc. had taken liquor at Kotkapura together. If Harjinder Singh (deceased) and Paramjit Singh (accused) were friends then this so-called motive regarding quarrelling over Rs.10,000/- also looks improbable. Otherwise also, there is no cogent evidence on record regarding quarrel between them for Rs.10,000/- and the version given by PW7 Balwinder Singh has not been believed.
As regarding the statement of extra judicial confession, we find that Sikandar Singh (PW8) is close relative of deceased Harjinder Singh. In cross-examination, he has stated that the name of grand-father of deceased Harjinder Singh was Hem Singh. This witness also stated that his (PW8) grand father's name was Prem Singh. Hem Singh and Prem Singh are real brothers. Therefore, it looks doubtful that accused will come to Sikandar Singh (PW8) for making extra judicial confession, who is closely related to deceased Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [13] and has no sympathy for the accused. From the cross-examination of this witness, it is also clear that he was also present at the spot on 23.12.1998 at 9:00 a.m. Perusal of statement of PW8 Sikandar Singh shows that detailed facts have been given therein and the accused already knew even Surjit Singh and Balwinder Singh (PW7). As per statement of PW8 Sikandar Singh, there is no mention regarding causing injury on the leg of Harjinder Singh (deceased) from blunt side of the 'kapa'. There is also no mention regarding injuries given by the accused on other parts of the body of deceased Harjinder Singh. Though, minute details have been given regarding all the facts in the extra judicial confession. Perusal of statement of PW8 Sikandar Singh does not inspire confidence.
Again recovery of blood stained 'kapa' in pursuance of disclosure statement of accused also looks doubt. The accused had concealed 'kapa' in the slopes (khetans) near Abohar Branch canal on Hari Nau Kassam Bhati Road near kikkar tree. If the accused had to destroy the evidence or to conceal the 'kapa' then the natural course for him was not to throw the same on the slopes but in the Abohar Branch canal. He will not preserve the evidence by not throwing the 'kapa in the canal. Rather natural course for him was to destroy the evidence by throwing it into the canal. From the perusal of evidence on record, we find that eye witness account, as given by PW7 Balwinder Singh, is not believable and cannot be relied upon. The evidence of extra judicial confession made by accused before Criminal Appeal No.D-590-DB of 2002 [14] Sikandar Singh (PW8) is also not believable and this witness is not a reliable witness. Recovery of 'kapa' in pursuance of disclosure statement by accused also looks doubtful. Therefore, a reasonable doubt exists in the prosecution version. Hence, giving benefit of doubt to accused, he is held not guilty of the charges framed against him.
Resultantly, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the appellant are set aside. Appellant Paramjit Singh is acquitted of the charges framed against him. He is on bail, therefore, his bail bonds/surety bonds stand discharged.
(JASBIR SINGH) (INDERJIT SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
03.04.2013
mamta