Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sat Paul And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 9 March, 2010
Author: T.P.S. Mann
Bench: T.P.S. Mann
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999
Date of Decision : March 09, 2010
Sat Paul and others
....Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN
Present : Mr. K.D.S. Hooda, Advocate
Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
for respondent No.1.
T.P.S. MANN, J.
The appellants were tried by Additional Sessions Judge, Nawanshahr for offences under Sections 143/341/506/313/323/149 IPC. Vide judgment and order dated 3.8.1999, learned trial Court convicted and sentenced them as under :-
Name of Convicted under Section(s) Sentence
Convict
Santosh Under Section 313 IPC 3 years' RI and fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default, 3
months' RI.
Under Section 323 IPC 6 months' RI
Under Section 143 IPC 4 months' RI
Under Section 341 IPC 1 month's RI
Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -2-
Name of Convicted under Section(s) Sentence
Convict
Rajesh @ Under Section 313 IPC 3 years' RI and fine of
Toni Rs.1,000/-, in default,
3 months' RI.
Under Section 323 IPC 6 months' RI
Under Section 143 IPC 4 months' RI
Under Section 341 IPC 1 month's RI
Devinder Under Section 313 IPC 3 years' RI and fine of
Gogna Rs.1,000/-, in default,
3 months' RI
Under Section 323 IPC 6 months' RI
Under Section 143 IPC 4 months' RI
Under Section 341 IPC 1 month's RI
Sat Paul Under Sections 313/149 IPC 3 years' RI and fine of
Rs.1,000/-, in default,
3 months' RI
Under Sections 323/149 IPC 6 months' RI
Under Sections 143/149 IPC 4 months' RI
Under Sections 341/149 IPC 1 month's RI
Mohan Under Sections 313/149 IPC 3 years' RI and fine of
Lal Rs.1,000/-, in default,
3 months' RI
Under Sections 323/149 IPC 6 months' RI
Under Sections 143/149 IPC 4 months' RI
Under Sections 341/149 IPC 1 month's RI
All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -3-
The case had originated from a private criminal complaint dated 11.10.1996 instituted by respondent No.2 against the appellants wherein she had prayed for summoning them for offences under Sections 312, 313, 323, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. She had alleged in her complaint that accused Sat Paul and Mohan Lal filed a civil suit for declaration in respect of house/property bearing khasra No.67 khewat No.24 khatuni No.36 situated at village Bhan Mazara. She was impleaded as one of the defendants in the aforementioned suit as she had purchased the suit property vide sale deed dated 13.8.1996 which was registered on 23.8.1996. Upon her appearance in the suit, the ad interim injunction was vacated on 28.9.1996. It was further alleged that all the accused were closely related to each other besides being also related to her. All the accused nursed a grudge against her for having purchased property against their wishes and due to pendency of above referred litigation, they conspired together to cause bodily injuries to her, knowing fully well that she was pregnant at that time and the injuries could result in miscarriage of her three months' old pregnancy. On 17.9.1996, the aforementioned civil suit was fixed for hearing in the Court of Civil Judge, Nawanshahr. The complainant, alongwith her father, attended hearing on that date. After the case was adjourned, the father of the complainant started for the village on a bicycle whereas the complainant boarded a three wheeler/tempo for Langroya. After reaching Langroya, she started walking towards her village which was about two kilometers from Langroya. When she reached midway, all the Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -4- accused were found sitting there. They blocked her passage and did not allow her to proceed towards the village. They restricted her movement of going towards the village. Accused Sat Paul and Mohan Lal forcibly caught hold of her from her arms whereas accused Santosh gave knee blows in her abdomen. Accused Rajesh and Devinder Gogna gave fist blows in her abdomen. Accused Santosh, Rajesh and Devinder Gogna also gave shoe blows on her arms as well as on the hands, while she was trying to ward off the kick blows. The accused proclaimed that they would kill the complainant as well as her unborn child. They also threatened the complainant of her elimination in case she reported the matter to the police. She started bleeding at the spot and was rescued by her father, who had reached there on a bicycle and witnessed the occurrence. She was got admitted in Civil Dispensary, Jadla on 18.9.1996 but her condition deteriorated and, therefore, referred to Civil Hospital, Nawanshahr on 20.9.1996. Even at Nawanshahr she could not recover from the injuries. The doctors advised termination of her pregnancy so as to save her life. The pregnancy was, accordingly, terminated. Hence, the complaint.
After recording preliminary evidence, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawanshahr, vide order dated 18.8.1997, summoned the appellants for being proceeded against under Sections 312/313/323/506 and 341 read with Section 34 IPC. The presence of the appellants was procured and vide order dated 3.4.1998, the case was Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -5- committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. On 20.4.1998, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar found a prima facie case against the appellants under Sections 143/313/323/341/506/149 IPC and charged them, accordingly, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In support of its case, the prosecution examined six witnesses. PW1 Dr. Inder Singh, Medical Officer, Jadla deposed about the medico legal examination of complainant Anita Rani on 18.9.1996 at 8.00 A.M. and found the following injuries :
1. As a history of two months pregnancy, bleeding per vagina. On examination, external OS one finger dilated. Blood clots were present. There was fresh bleeding per vagina. She complained of pain over lower abdomen.
2. Multiple abrasion about 4 over anterior surface of right hand fore-arm and 3 on the back measuring 4 cm x ¼ cm to 6 cm x ¼ cm in size.
3. Abrasion 6 cm x ¼ cm on the left upper arm 1/3rd level horizontally placed.
4. Abrasion 3 cm x ¼ cm over lower 1/3rd level of left fore arm anterior surface.
5. Abrasion 3 cm x ¼ cm of left hand in between the thumb and index finger Injury No.1 was kept under observation while injuries No.2 to 5 were declared simple. Probable duration of injury No.1 could not Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -6- be ascertained while rest of the injuries were within 24 hours. All the injuries were caused by blunt weapon. The patient was referred to Gynaecologist on 19.9.1996 for opinion and treatment. On 20.9.1996, the patient was referred to Civil Hospital, Nawanshahr. In cross-
examination, he stated that the patient had given history of pregnancy of two months at the time of her examination.
PW2 Dr. Usha Kiran, who at the relevant time stood posted as Medical Officer, SHC, Karyam, testified that she was called by the Medical Officer of Civil Hospital, Nawanshahr for the treatment of the complainant, who was pregnant and bleeding (incomplete abortion). She did dilation and curratage.
PW3 Dr. Amarjit Kaur, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Nawanshahr proved the bed head ticket Ex.PB pertaining to the complainant who was admitted as an indoor patient on 20.9.1996 at 8.00 P.M. and discharged from the hospital on 28.9.1996. According to her, the possibility of termination of pregnancy of about three months could be on account of causing of fist and kick blows on the abdomen of the complainant.
PW4 Dr. Pawan Kumar proved various notes made by him in the bed head ticket. He had given direction regarding treatment of the complainant by referring her to Dr. Usha Kiran, Medical Officer, SHC, Karyam. The complainant was discharged from the hospital after the Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -7- treatment on 28.9.1996.
Complainant Anita Rani herself stepped into the witness box as PW5 and deposed on the lines as stated by her earlier in her complaint Ex.PG.
The complaint's father Rajinder Pal appeared as PW6 and corroborated her statement.
The prosecution also tendered in evidence mark 'A', certified copy of the plaint, mark 'B', certified copy of written statement, besides certified copies of orders Ex.PM, PN and PO passed on 6.11.1996, 28.9.1996 and 4.4.1996, respectively.
When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., all the accused stated that it was a false case and the prosecution witnesses who had deposed against them were interested witnesses. According to them, neither any such occurrence had taken place nor any of them caused any injury or given beatings to the complainant. The complainant was not pregnant and no miscarriage had taken place. In fact, the complaint had been filed only because of the previous suits filed by them so as to put pressure upon them. However, none of the accused examined any evidence in defence.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence, the trial Court held that the accused had the knowledge about the pregnancy of complaint Anita Rani. The accused, Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -8- five in number, had waylaid the complainant and caused injuries on her abdomen and other parts of the body knowing fully well that she was pregnant and, thus, committed offences under Sections 313/341/143/323/ 149 IPC. They were, accordingly, held guilty of the said offences and sentenced, as mentioned above. However, all the accused were acquitted of the charge under Section 506 IPC as evidence in that respect was found to be contradictory.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned State counsel and perused the evidence with their able assistance.
Both the parties were closely related to each other. Manoj Kumar, husband of complainant Anita Rani, was brother of accused Sat Paul and Mohan Lal. Rajesh accused is son of Sat Paul while Devinder Gogna is son of Mohan Lal. Surinder Kumar, another brother of accused Sat Paul and Mohan Lal, was husband of accused Smt. Santosh. Keeping in view their close relationship inter se as well as the fact that both the parties were residents of the same village, it can safely be concluded that the accused were well aware of the fact that the complainant was pregnant at the time of the occurrence in question. None of the accused pleaded that he or she did not know that the complainant was pregnant. Their stand was that she was not pregnant. From the medical evidence, it stands established that the complainant was having a pregnancy of 2/3 months at the relevant time. Due of the Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -9- injuries received by her, the complainant had started bleeding. Attempts were made by the medical authorities to treat her but finding that her life would be in danger if the pregnancy was not terminated, Dr. Usha Kiran PW2 went ahead with termination of the pregnancy. The said doctor had categorically stated that the abortion was possible in view of the kicks and fist blows received by a pregnant woman, i.e. the complainant on her abdomen.
Civil Suit Mark 'A' was filed by Sat Paul and Mohan Lal against Ajit Singh and others. Complainant Anita Rani was one of the defendants in the said suit. According to the complainant, she had attended the hearing of the suit on 17.9.1996 and at that time she was accompanied by her father. After hearing, the suit was adjourned. Then, she alongwith her father started for the village. She boarded a three wheeler/tempo. Reaching Langroya, she started walking towards her village but when she had covered half the distance, she was waylaid by the accused who caused injuries to her. Sat Paul and Mohan Lal caught hold of her from her arms whereas Smt. Santosh gave knee blows in her abdomen. Rajesh and Devinder Gogna gave fist blows in her abdomen. Santosh, Rajesh and Devinder Gogna also gave fist blows on her arms and hand. All the accused proclaimed that they would kill the complainant and her unborn child. Even while appearing before the trial Court as PW5, the complainant stated that she was waylaid by the accused at about 4.00 P.M. whereafter Mohan Lal and Sat Paul caught Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -10- hold of her from her arms and stated that either she should leave her claim to the disputed house or she would be killed. Upon this, Santosh gave knee blows on her abdomen whereas Rajesh and Devinder Gogna gave fist blows on her back and abdomen and threatened to teach her a lesson for having purchased the disputed house. Similarly, PW6 Rajinder Pal deposed before the trial Court that when he reached the canal between Langroya and Bhan Mazara, he saw all the accused having waylaid the complainant and preventing her from proceeding towards village Bhan Mazara. Mohan Lal and Sat Paul had caught hold of her from her arms while Santosh was giving knee blows in the abdomen of the complainant. The remaining accused were giving fist blows in her abdomen on her back. Her clothes got torn from some places. The complainant was pregnant at that time and this fact was known to all the accused. They were holding out threats to put an end to her life. After the occurrence, the complainant became unconscious and started bleeding from her private parts. He took her to village Bhan Mazara, from where her husband shifted her to Civil Dispensary, Jadla. On 20.9.1996, she was referred to Civil Hospital, Nawanshahr where she remained under treatment. The child in her womb died due to the injures received by her on her abdomen.
All the accused had been specifically attributed roles in the occurrence. Two of them had caught hold of her from her arms while other three had caused injuries, including knee and fist blows in her Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -11- abdomen. On account of the injuries received by the complainant she started bleeding which led to the termination of her pregnancy later on.
In view of the above, the findings arrived at by the learned trial Court in convicting the appellants for the various offences do not call for any interference.
The appellants have been facing the agony of criminal proceedings for the last about 13 years. When the accused were heard by the trial Court on the quantum of sentence, Devinder Gogna had stated that he was married but issueless, his parents were alive and he was a poor person. Mohan Lal had stated that he was 58 years of age, he had two children, who were married, his wife was alive and he himself was a poor person. Smt. Santosh had stated that she was 50 years of age, her husband was not alive, she was having three children and she was a poor person. Sat Paul had stated that he was 50 years of age, he was a poor person, he was having a daughter and a son and his wife was alive. Similarly, Rajesh @ Toni had stated that he was married, he was having a child aged about 7/8 months and his parents were alive.
Taking into consideration all the attending circumstances, this Court is of the view that the sentences of three years' rigorous imprisonment imposed upon all the appellants for the charge under Sections 313 and 313/149 IPC is on the higher side.
Resultantly, the conviction of the appellants under Sections Criminal Appeal No. 756-SB of 1999 -12- 313/143/341/323/149 IPC is maintained. The substantive sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment imposed upon Smt. Santosh under Section 313 IPC is reduced to nine months while in the case of Rajesh @ Toni and Devinder Gogna under Section 313 IPC and in the case of Sat Paul and Mohan Lal under Sections 313/149 IPC it is reduced to 1½ years each. The fine of Rs.1,000/- imposed upon all the appellants along with its default clause is maintained and so also the sentences of imprisonment for the offences under Sections 323/143/341/149. All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
(T.P.S.MANN)
March 09, 2010 JUDGE
satish