Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ravi Kant vs State Of Punjab on 11 October, 2013
Author: Anita Chaudhry
Bench: Anita Chaudhry
Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M)
Date of Decision: October 11, 2013.
Ravi Kant ...Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? No
Present: Mr. S.S. Siao, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent-State.
*****
ANITA CHAUDHRY, J.
1. The appellant has been convicted in FIR No.57 dated 05.04.2003 registered at Police Station Rampura for commission of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years along with a fine of `2,000/- by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bathinda vide judgment of conviction dated 11.07.2006 and order of sentence dated 13.07.2006. In default of payment of fine he was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.
2. The facts are unfolded in the complaint lodged with the police on 02.04.2003 Gursewak Lal was a B.Sc. student and in the 6th semester. He along with his friend Raja Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -2- Malli had gone to Pushpanjli Marriage Palace to meet Amrik Singh in the car owned by Raja Malli. Ravi Kant accused was present at the marriage hall and was under the influence of liquor. He asked Gursewak Lal to drop him home. Gursewak Lal and Raja Malli made him sit in Raja Malli's car and took him to his house. On reaching the house, Gursewak helped him out of the car and took him inside the house. Raja Malli stayed in the car. When Gursewak and Ravi Kant entered the house, Ravi Kant asked him for a sum of ` 200/- to purchase more liquor. Raja Malli by then had followed them. Ravi Kant was left inside and both of them came out. Ravi Kant followed them and started abusing Raja Malli. Gursewak tried to stop Ravi Kant from abusing but Ravi Kant took out a Kirch which was concealed underneath the socks worn on the left foot and inflicted a kirch blow on Gursewak's abdomen and went inside the house. Raja Malli helped Gursewak into the car. At that point Ravi Kant again came out and attacked Gursewak and inflicted another Kirch blow on the window of the car, however, Gursewak snatched the Kirch from his hand. Raja Malli brought the injured to the hospital. His condition deteriorated and he was referred to D.M.C. Ludhiana. Ruka was sent to the police. The statement of Gursewak was recorded after he was declared fit to make a statement. The police completed the formalities and laid a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the accused in the Court for commission of offence under Section 307 IPC. Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -3-
3. Charge was framed against accused under Section 307 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. Dr. Krishan Gopal, Medical Officer - PW1 had conducted the MLR and found the following injuries on the person of injured Gursewak:-
"Incised punctured wound 5 cm x 1 cm on the front of abdomen. 2 cm below the umblicus. Depth could not be measured. There was corresponding cut in the T-Shirt. Patient was kept under observation."
The injury was declared dangerous to life.
Dr. Kuldeep Singh, DMC, Ludhiana - PW7 also deposed about the injuries suffered by Gursewak and reported the following injuries on the person of Gursewak:-
"There was incised wound 5 cm in size present about 4 cm below emblicus and extending towards right side. On probing the wound it was going upto the sheeth and the rest of the examination could not be possible because of pain."
Gursewak - PW2 and Rajinder Deep Singh @ Raja Malli - PW3 supported the prosecution version in all respects.
Besides these witnesses, Dr. Ripan Kumar Miglani PW6 proved his report Ex.PW6/C. He had declared the patient fit to make the statement. Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -4-
5. In the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused pleaded false implication. He deposed that Yogesh was his brother-in-law and Gursewak Lal had taken a loan from him in his presence and a pronote was executed but Gursewak Lal did not return the amount and a recovery suit had been filed. He further stated that Gursewak suffered injury at the hands of some other person when he was drunk but since he was nursing a grudge against him, therefore, he falsely implicated him by framing a concocted version.
6. The trial court accepted the evidence and convicted the appellant and sentenced him to the imprisonment mentioned here-in-before.
7. I have heard the submissions made on behalf of both the sides and have perused the record with their assistance.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant had submitted that there was inordinate delay in lodging the FIR and it assumes importance and no explanation has come as to why Rajinder @ Raja Malli did not lodge the FIR when according to the prosecution version he had taken Gursewak to the hospital. It was contended that the patient was conscious as disclosed by the medical officer and there was no reason why he could not make a statement. It was contended that the injury was stated to have been caused with a Kirch but it was not sent to the FSL and if it was smeared with blood, the Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -5- prosecution would have got support from it. It was urged that the investigation was not properly carried out and the injured himself was under the influence of liquor and this fact is clearly mentioned in the admission history in the records of Dayanand Medical College, Ludhiana. It was contended that the police station is at a distance of 1½ kilometer and after admitting the patient Rajinder could have gone to the police station. It was urged that the delay has been used to supply a name as an unknown person had caused the injuries. It was contended that they have led evidence to show that litigation was going on between the complainant and the appellant and there was a motive to falsely implicate him.
Per contra, the submission on behalf of the counsel appearing for the State was that the presence of Rajinder is mentioned in the MLR and the medical officer had sent the Ruka and the police officer also visited the hospital but by then Gursewak's condition deteriorated, therefore, he was referred to another hospital and there are documents which would show that ASI Gulab Singh had visited the Civil Hospital Rampura but he came to know that the injured had been referred to some other hospital and then he went to DMC, Ludhiana and contacted the doctor but Gursewak was declared unfit to make a statement. It was urged that delay has been properly explained and motive was also proved on record.
Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -6-
9. The incident took place at about 11:30 P.M. on 02.04.2003. Gursewak was admitted in the hospital at 12:20 A.M. i.e. on 03.04.2003. Gursewak's condition became serious, therefore, he was referred to Rajindra Hospital. The family took him to Dayanand Medical College, Ludhiana where he remained till 13.04.2003.
10. The main argument put forth by the appellant was that there was a delay in lodging the FIR and that makes the whole case doubtful.
11. It is settled proposition of law that delay in reporting the incident is not considered fatal if a reasonable explanation is given. Reference can be made to Amit Singh Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2011(3) CCC 780 (SC). In the present case, there was involvement of only one person who was already known to the injured and the eyewitness. No doubt, there is a delay but reasonable explanation has been given. There was no delay in taking the injured to the hospital. The injured was admitted in the hospital within an hour. Ruka was sent to the police by the medical officer but by the time, the police officials arrived in the hospital, the injured had been taken to another hospital. The police official had visited D.M.C. Hospital, Ludhiana but Gursewak was not in a condition to make a statement. The official went back and later again contacted the doctor and after the injured was declared fit, his statement was recorded. The delay has been satisfactorily explained. Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -7-
12. Gursewak has spoken about the incident and his statement gets support from the statement made by Rajinder Deep Singh @ Raja Malli as well as the medical evidence. The injured would not leave the real culprit and name a wrong person. There was no dispute regarding the identity. Merely because the Kirch recovered from the appellant was not sent to the FSL would not be a ground to dis-lodge the prosecution case. This Court can understand that irregularities occur but it is not fatal to the case.
13. The prosecution was not required to prove the motive as the case was based upon an eye-witness account In the admission record, there is some reference to the fact that the injured could be under the effect of alcohol but a question mark had been put against the entry. That would not mean that the injured was heavily drunk. It could be said that he had consumed liquor but was not under its effect. The history records the case of assault by his friend, the appellant was not a stranger. He was a friend. There is no reason to doubt the testimony of injured and the medical evidence. There is no infirmity in the judgment passed by the trial court and it is affirmed.
14. As a result, the appeal is dismissed. The appellant is on bail. He is directed to surrender before the Court of CJM Bathinda within a period of 20 days to receive and undergo the remaining part of sentence awarded to him. The Registry is directed to call for the compliance report from Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Appeal No.1393-SB of 2006 (O&M) -8- the CJM concerned regarding the surrender of the accused. Lower Courts record be sent back after due compliance.
(ANITA CHAUDHRY) JUDGE October 11, 2013 'sunil sehgal' Sunil 2013.10.31 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document