Punjab-Haryana High Court
Daya Chand vs State Of Haryana on 2 September, 2022
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -1-
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M)
Reserved on: 29.8.2022
Date of Decision: 02.9.2022
Daya Chand ......Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT
Present: Mr. Rajinder Singh Malik, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana.
****
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.
1. The instant appeal is directed against the impugned verdict, as made on 29.10.2009, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bhiwani, upon Sessions Case No. 41 of 2008, wherethrough, in respect of the charges drawn for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 506, 216 of the IPC, and, under Section 25 of the Arms Act, he proceeded to make a verdict of acquittal, in respect of accused Mohar Singh, accused Maya Devi, and, accused Jai Bhagwan, but proceeded to record a verdict of conviction against co-accused Daya Chand, qua charges drawn against him, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 506 of the IPC, and, for a charge drawn in respect of an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Moreover, vide a separate sentencing order, drawn on 31.10.2009, the learned trial Court, proceeded to impose, upon the convict, the sentence of life imprisonment qua an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, and, also imposed upon the convict sentence of rigorous 1 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -2- imprisonment for a term extending upto two years, in respect of an offence punishable under Section 452 of the IPC, besides in respect thereof, imposed a sentence of fine of Rs. 500/-, and, in default of payment of fine, the convict became sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term extending upto a period of 15 days. Moreover, through the above drawn sentencing order, the learned trial Court proceeded to sentence the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two years, in respect of an offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC. In addition, in respect of an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, he proceeded to sentence the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and, also imposed, upon him a sentence of fine of Rs. 200/-, and, in default of payment of fine, he sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days.
2. Obviously, convict Daya Chand becomes aggrieved from the above recorded verdict of conviction, and, also, from the consequent therewith sentence(s) of imprisonment, and, of fine, as became imposed, upon him, and, hence becomes led to constitute thereagainst the instant appeal before this Court.
Factual Background
3. The genesis of the prosecution case, becomes embodied in a signatured statement, as made by Dalbir, and, to which Ex. PA, is assigned. In pursuance to the above made signatured statement of the informant Dalbir, an FIR became registered at the police station concerned, and, to which Ex. PA/1 is assigned. The genesis of the prosecution case, as embodied in the appeal FIR, is that, the informant reporting to the police, that he is working as a JBT Teacher in village Dhoka Manja, besides, he has 2 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -3- three brothers. He further echoes thereins, that they all are residing together. He makes a further ecohing thereins, that Daya Chand son of Mohar Singh had murdered Dalbir @ Billu, about 5-6 years ago, and, for which he was convicted and, sentenced for life imprisonment, however, after expiry of parole, he did not return to the prison, and, as, there were confrontations between the mother of the informant, and, the mother of the convict regarding water pipes, therefore, the convict is alleged to have threatened to kill the deceased. Furthermore, he narrates thereins, that since the convict did not, on expiry of the parole, return to the prison, hence, the police officials used to visit the abode of the convict for ensuring his retrieval to the prison concerned, and, the above aroused suspicion in the mother of the convict, that the informant is supplying information to the police about the whereabouts of the convict. On the fateful day, after the informant, and, his family members, had gone to sleep, then Triveni, wife of the informant, his deceased brother Sunil, and, his father Balwant, were sleeping on the cot in the baithak, which was having no doors, and, windows, then about 1.30 A.M., the informant heard the gun fire shot. The above fire shot led the informant, and, his wife to become alarmed, and, then there they saw that the deceased Sunil having received injuries on the left side of his head, and, that blood oozing therefrom. Moreover, he recites, that the convict was seen running away after shooting his brother Sunil, and, further he was seen to be holding a pistol in his right hand, and, while escaping, he was heard to mete threatenings to the informant. He narrates that the occurrence was also witnessed by his father.
Investigation and committal proceedings
4. After registration of the FIR (supra), the investigating officer 3 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -4- concerned, launched investigations into the appeal FIR, and after conclusion of investigations thereinto, he proceeded to institute a report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., before the learned committal Court concerned, and, the latter, through an order made on 13.3.2008, proceeded to commit the accused for facing trial to the Court of Session.
Trial Proceedings
5. Consequently, the learned Additional Sessions Judge concerned, proceeded to draw the apposite charges against the accused, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 506, 216 of the IPC, and, under Section 25 of the Arms Act, and, also put the afore charges to the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty, and, claimed trial.
6. In support of the prosecution case, 15 prosecution witnesses stepped into the witness box, and, subsequently, the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to draw proceedings, under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., but thereins, the accused claimed false implication, and, pleaded innocence. Though, the accused claimed the granting of leave to them, for leading defence evidence, but the above granted leave never became availed by them.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant
7. The learned counsel for the aggrieved convict-appellant herein, has vigorously argued before this Court, that the impugned verdict of conviction, and, consequent therewith sentence (supra), as imposed, upon the convict-appellant, both become ridden with a gross infirmity of gross misappreciation, and, non-appreciation of the evidence, as exists on record. Therefore, he has argued that the appeal be accepted, and, the verdict, as challenged before this Court, be quashed and set aside.
4 of 11
::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 :::
CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -5-
Submissions of the learned State counsel
8. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has argued before this Court, that the judgment, as challenged before this Court, is well merited, and, does not warrant any interference.
Oral Evidence
9. The star prosecution witness is PW-1. He is also the informant. PW-1, on his stepping in to the witness box, rendered in his examination-in- chief, a version qua the prosecution case, which is in complete harmony with the version, as became spelt by him in the appeal FIR. Though, thereins he has proven the motive, nursed by the convict to murder the deceased Sunil, inasmuch as, his suspecting that the police were informed by the family of the informant qua his whereabouts, given after the expiry of the period of parole, the police making a search for him, to arrest him, and, to inmate him in prison, in respect of a prior conviction, as recorded, upon him qua an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, in pursuance whereof, he was suffering the sentence of life imprisonment. The above motive has been proven, and, though it ultimately led to the crime event taking place, at the crime site, but further proof in respect of the convict murdering deceased Sunil, was also required to be forthcoming. Though, in the previous statement, recorded in writing, and, which also became with the completest corroboration rather testified in Court by PW-1, rather the informant echoes, that he did not witness the penal act of the convict firing a gun shot at the deceased from an unlicensed arm, but he has spoken with candour about his, besides his father, after the deceased being shot at by the convict, rather both witnessing the convict fleeing from the site of occurrence with crime weapon in his hand, and, also all hearing him to 5 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -6- speak intimidatory threats to the concerned. Consequently, when none other than the convict was sighted by PW-1, to flee from the crime site, and, also with his holding the crime weapon in his hand, resultantly, the above echoings, as made by PW-1, in his examination-in-chief, do support, the genesis of the prosecution case, as becomes carried in the appeal FIR. Moreover, since during the course of an exacting cross-examination, being made, upon him, he remained unscathed, and, when also he completely denied all the suggestions, as became meted then to him, and, appertaining to his not witnessing the convict, to flee from the crime site, with his holding in his hand, the crime weapon, resultantly, when his testification is not ridden with any taint, or vice of his grossly improving or embellishing, upon his previous statement, recorded in writing, and/or, it also does not suffer from any further taint of his making any intra se contradictions. In sequel, credence is to be meted to his testification.
10. Furthermore, corroboration to his testification, is also meted, by his wife, who has stepped into the witness box as PW-6, and, in her examination-in-chief, she has deposed a version qua the prosecution case, which completely corroborates the version, as spelt by PW-1 in his examination in chief. Therefore, and, also when PW-6 also remained unscathed during the ordeal of hers being put to an exacting cross- examination, besides when her testification also is not ridden with any vice of hers making blatant improvements or embellishments, upon her previously made statement, in writing, resultantly, and, also when her testification is not ridden with any taint of any intra se contradictions, rather when she completely corroborates the testification of PW-1, therefore with evident relevant inter se corroboration(s) emanating from the respectively 6 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -7- made consistent testifications by PW-1, and, by PW-6, as such, the prosecution has been able to prove the commission of the charged offence, by the convict.
Medical Evidence
11. Be that as it may, in the post-mortem report, to which Ex. PJ is assigned, the doctor, who made an autopsy on the body of the deceased, has thereins ascribed the cause of demise of Sunil, to the hereinafter extracted reasons.
"The cause of death in this case in our opinion is shock and haemorrhage due to injuries as described which are sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The injuries are ante mortem in nature."
12. Moreover, PW-8, who has proven the post-mortem report, to which Ex. PJ is assigned, has during her examination-in-chief, has also proven the opinion, as echoed thereins, and, as appertains to the cause of demise of Sunil. Though, she became subjected to the ordeal of cross- examination, and, also yet suggestion became meted to her to belie the opinion, as recorded by her in the post-mortem report, but yet the fact of hers admitting the suggestion that in case of a gun shot injury, the exit wounds get wider, and, also though, she admits the suggestion, that in case a fire arm injury is caused from close range, then blackening, and, tattooing marks rather appearing on the person of the victim/deceased, which however do not exist on the body of the examined person. Nonetheless, the admissions (supra), by PW-8, to the above suggestions, as became meted to her, do not leverage, any inference form this Court, to hence record any finding of acquittal qua the convict.
Reasons for rejecting the above submissions
13. The reason for making the above inference becomes embedded, 7 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -8- upon the factum, (a) qua this Court assigning absolute credence to the testimonies of PW-1, and PW-6, who had both seen the convict to flee from the crime site, with a crime weapon in his hand, (b) from the signatured disclosure statement made by the convict, before the investigating officer concerned. The signatured disclosure statement, as made by the convict is Ex. PC. In Ex. PC, the convict has confessed his guilt in committing the murder of deceased Sunil with an illegal pistol of .315 bore, and, has also thereins shown his willingness to effect its recovery, to the investigating officer concerned, from the place of his hiding, and, keeping it, inasmuch, as his hiding it in the house of his friend Bajrang, resident of Rampura Beri, Jat by caste at Rajasthan, a place which was obviously known only to him. In pursuance to the above made disclosure statement, the crime weapon became recovered through a recovery memo, to which Ex. PD/1 is assigned, and, which becomes signatured by the witnesses thereto. Subsequently, sketch/khaka of the crime pistol, became prepared, and, which becomes carried in Ex. PD. The effect of the signatured disclosure statement, being made by the convict, whereins he not only confessed his guilt, but also revealed to the investigating officer concerned, the factum of his using the crime weapon, besides revealed to the investigating officer concerned, the place of his hiding, and, keeping it, and, ultimately when he caused its recovery to the investigating officer concerned, through a recovery memo, as comprised in Ex. PD/1, resultantly, credence is to be assigned thereto, unless evidence emerges, that he denied his signatures, upon Ex. PC, and/or had propagated, and, also has proven that the recovery of the crime pistol, rather was false, and/or was planted onto him. However, since he does not deny his signatures, as carried in Ex. PC, and, though does through his 8 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -9- counsel, make a denied suggestion to the investigating officer concerned, that the recovery of the crime pistol, through Ex. PD/1, was false or contrived, but yet when no further evidence has been adduced by him, suggestive that earlier to the crime pistol becoming recovered, at his instance, to the police, rather the latter concealing or hiding it, at the place, from which it became ultimately recovered. Contrarily, when the crime weapon became recovered from the house of the friend of the convict, and, which would but be a place, rather only known to the convict, and, not to the investigating officer concerned, therefore, even the above made bald suggestion(s) are completely irrelevant. In consequence, the effect of the above omission, does constrain this Court to conclude, that the above ecohings support the credible ocular account, rendered qua proof of the prosecution case, by PW-1, and, by PW-6.
FSL Report
14. As unfolded by Ex. PM, one parcel of pillow, one parcel of patched quilt (gudri), one parcel containing sikka of pistol, one parcel containing, blood stained earth, one parcel containing clothes of deceased, whereons' seals impressions 'VP' became embossed, rather became carried to the FSL Madhuban. The crime weapon, as unfolded by Ex. PN, became carried to the FSL, Madhuban, by EHC Mukesh Kumar, and, which was carried in a sealed parcel, whereons seal impression RA became embossed. The ballistic expert, working at the FSL concerned, who drew an opinion in respect of the crime pistol, and, as carried in his report Ex. PH, has made an echoing thereins, that the crime pistol became received in a cloth parcel, and, in a sealed condition, with seal impression VP though existing thereons. Moreover, he has also stated that at the time of receiving the 9 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 ::: CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -10- apposite cloth parcel, the seals, as became made earlier thereons, were found to be in an untampered, and, intact condition, besides has reported, that he had tallied the impressions on the sealed cloth parcels, with the impressions, as made on the road certificate concerned. Therefore, the apposite testing of the crime pistol, as made by the ballistic expert of the FSL concerned, is, to be concluded to be made, upon the crime pistol, as became recovered through the recovery memo, preceding wherewith an evident signatured disclosure statement was made by the convict. In consequence, the opinion, as made thereons, and which becomes extracted hereinafter, when reveals that a bullet became fired therefrom, hence does obviously, not only prove the echoings, as made in the disclosure statement, as carried in Ex. PC, but also does prove its recovery, as became effected through recovery memo Ex. PD/1, besides corroborates the credible ocular account, rendered consistently by PW-1, and, by PW-6. Moreover, it also proves the opinion, as made by PW-8, in respect of the cause of demise of the deceased Sunil.
1. The countrymade pistol marked W/1 (chambered for .315" cartridges) is a firearms as defined in Arms Act 54 of 1959. Its firing mechanism was found in working order.
2. .315" fired bullet marked BC/1 has been fired from countrymade pistol marked W/1 and not from any other firearm even of the same make and bore/calibre, because every firearm has got its own individual characteristics marks.
3. A through and through hole on pillow contained in parcel No. 1 and Gadda contained in parcel No. II have been caused by bullet projectile.
4. Report in original from Serology division is enclosed herewith."
10 of 11
::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 :::
CRA-D-48-DB-2010 (O&M) -11-
Conclusion
15. Cumulatively, the effect of inter se corroboration emerging inter se the credible ocular account, medical account, and, forensic account with respect to the user of the crime pistol, at the crime site, by the convict, resultantly, no conclusion other than the one, as became drawn earlier by the learned convicting Court, rather is to be drawn by this Court.
16. The result of the above discussion, is that, this Court does not find any merit in the appeal, and, is constrained to dismiss it.
Final order
17. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned verdict of conviction, and, the consequent therewith sentence, as becomes imposed upon the convict-appellant, by the learned convicting Court, is maintained, and, affirmed. If the convict is on bail, thereupon, the sentence of life imprisonment, as imposed, upon the convict-appellant, be ensured to be forthwith executed by the learned trial Judge concerned, through his drawing committal warrants. The case property be dealt with, in accordance with law, after the expiry of the period of limitation for the filing of an appeal.
18. Records be sent down forthwith.
(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) JUDGE September 02, 2022 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No 11 of 11 ::: Downloaded on - 03-09-2022 08:43:19 :::