Punjab-Haryana High Court
Cra No.205-Db Of 2004 vs State Of Punjab on 2 July, 2012
Author: S.S. Saron
Bench: S.S. Saron
CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [1]
CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and
CRA No.650-SB of 2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
1. CRA No.205-DB of 2004
2. CRA No.476-SB of 2004
Date of decision : 2.7.2012
Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka
..... Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab
..... Respondent
3. CRA No.650-SB of 2004
Mukhtiar Singh and another
.... Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab
..... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. BANGARH.
Present : Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate and Ms. Harpreet
Kaur, Advocate for the appellant-Jaswinder Singh
in CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and CRA No.476-SB of
2004.
Mr. APS Deol, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Vishal Rattan Lamba, Advocate for the
complainant in CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and CRA
No.476-DB of 2004.
Mr. APS Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishal
Rattan Lamba, Advocate for the appellants in
CRA No.650-SB of 2004 and Ms. Arti Gupta,
Advocate for appellant No.2 in CRA No.650-SB of
2004.
Mr. U.S. Dhaliwal, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the State.
Amit Khanchi
2014.02.10 12:02
I attest to the accuracy and
***
integrity of this document
High Court,Chandigarh
CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [2]
CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and
CRA No.650-SB of 2004
S.S. SARON, J.
This order will dispose of CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and CRA No.476-SB of 2004 filed by Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka son of Harpal Singh (both the appeals have been filed by the same person) as also CRA No.650-SB of 2004 filed by Mukhtiar Singh son of Mohan Singh and Virsa Singh son of Bohar Singh; as these arise out of the same incident that had occurred on 3.2.1995. Mukhtiar Singh is the complainant and appeared as PW-2 in the case against Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka.
The FIR (Ex.PB) has been registered on the statement of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) (appellant No.1 in CRA No.650-SB of 2004) son of Mohan Singh. It is stated by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) that he is a resident of village Surewala and does cultivation. They were five brothers. On 3.2.1995 at about 8.00 a.m. in front of the bus-stand of village Surewala, his nephew Virsa Singh (PW-4) (appellant No.2 in CRA No.650-SB of 2004) son of Bohar Singh and Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant in CRA No.205-SB of 2004 and CRA No.476-SB of 2004) son of Harpal Singh residents of village Surewala had got into a minor altercation with each other. On their being separated, they went to their respective homes. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2), his brother Harbans Singh (PW-1) and his nephews namely Jasvir Singh (deceased) and Virsa Singh (PW-4) were standing in front of the house of Harbans Singh (PW-1). Jasvir Singh (deceased), nephew of the complainant Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) was standing at a distance of 5-6 karams from them. At about 8.15 a.m. Harpal Singh son of Kehar Singh resident of village Surewala armed with a rifle and his son Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) armed with a revolver came I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [3] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 from the street to their court yard raising 'Lalkaras'. Within their sight, Harpal Singh fired straight with his rifle which hit Jasvir Singh son of Darshan Singh-nephew of the complainant (Mukhtiar Singh PW-
2) on the right side of his chest. Jasvir Singh shouted "mar dia mar dia" and fell down. Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka also fired a shot with his revolver. Jasvir Singh died at the spot. The incident was also witnessed by Virsa Singh (PW-4), nephew of the complainant Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and his brother Harbans Singh (PW-1). Harpal Singh fired more shots with his rifle. The complainant Mukhtiar Singh (PW-
2), his nephew Virsa Singh (PW-4) with their licensed 12 bore guns also fired shots in their defence by taking shelter of the compound wall. Harpal Singh and his son (Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka) went away to their house with their respective weapons. They fired more shots from their house. The cause of the grievance was that there was a dispute between them with regard to the ridges (vatt) in the fields and they had got bails. For this reason, it is alleged that the accused nursed a grudge and they had quarrelled and fired. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) accompanied by Harbans Singh (PW-1) were going on a scooter to the police to lodge a report that Waryam Singh ASI, In charge Police Post, Kotli Ablu (PW-6) met them who recorded the statement of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2). It was requested that action be taken. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) had left his brother Darshan Singh to guard the dead body. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) later on came to know that a fire shot had also hit Resham Kaur, Teacher (mother of Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka). Left thumb impression was put by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) on his statement which was attested by Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Waryam Singh, ASI (PW-6) who also recorded police proceedings to I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [4] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 the effect that on 3.2.1995 he along with Head Constable Mukhtiar Singh, Punjab Home Guard Gurdev Singh and Punjab Home Guard Surinder Pal Singh was present at the bus-stand village Mallan in connection with patrolling. At that time, Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) accompanied by Harbans Singh (PW-1) met him. Whatever statement was made by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) was reduced into writing and read over to him. He after admitting the same to be correct put his left thumb impression which was attested by Waryam Singh ASI (PW-
6). From the statement of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) an offences punishable under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code ("IPC" - for short) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act 1959 were made out. The statement was accordingly sent to the Police Station through Punjab Home Guard Gurdev Singh for registration of a case (FIR). After registration of the case, FIR number was asked to be intimated. Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) along with other police officials and complainant Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) as also Harbans Singh (PW-1) proceeded to the spot of the incident. The higher officers were asked to be informed through special report and wireless. Gurdip Singh ASI In charge Police Station Kot Bhai on receipt of the writing (Ex.PB) registered FIR No.13 dated 3.2.1995 (Ex.PB/1) for the offences under Sections 302/34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) along with other police officials as also Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Harbans Singh (PW-1) reached the place of occurrence at village Surewala. The dead body of Jasvir Singh was lying there, which was inspected. Inquest report (Ex.PA) was prepared in the presence of Darshan Singh and Harbans Singh (PW-1) Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 who thumb marked the same. The dead body of Jasvir Singh through I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [5] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 Head Constable Mander Singh, Punjab Home Guard Shaminder Singh along with police papers and request (Ex.PF), was sent to the Civil Hospital, Gidderbaha for conducting post-mortem examination. Darshan Singh and Harbans Singh (PW-1) were also sent with the dead body for identification. The spot where the incident had occurred was inspected by Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6). He lifted blood-stained earth from the place where the dead body was lying and put the same in a small plastic box (dabbi) and its parcel was prepared. Simple earth was also lifted and was put in a small box (dabbi) and a parcel was prepared. Both the parcels were sealed by Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) with his seal bearing letters 'WS' and the same were taken in possession vide memo Ex.PC which was attested by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Virsa Singh (PW-4). Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) also lifted six empties of a 'pucca' (solid) rifle which were put in a parcel and were sealed with seal bearing letters 'WS'. The same were taken in possession vide memo Ex.PD which was attested by the aforesaid witnesses Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Waryam Singh (PW-6). Specimen seal was also prepared. The statements of the witnesses were correctly recorded. Besides, rough site plan (Ex.PH) was prepared with correct marginal notes. The Constable who had been sent with the statement to the Police Station and Constable Mander Singh who was sent with the dead had returned at the spot. Head Constable Mander Singh handed over to Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) the belongings of the deceased (Jasvir Singh) which were sealed with the seal of the doctor and he took the same in his possession vide memo Ex.PJ which was attested by Head Constable Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Mander Singh. On 4.2.1995 on return to the Police Station Waryam I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [6] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 Singh ASI (PW-6) deposited the above said sealed parcels with MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5). Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) arrested Harpal Singh in this case on 08.02.1995. From his personal search, 'pucca' (solid) rifle (Ex.P1), which was loaded, was recovered. On its being unloaded, three cartridges were recovered; besides, eight cartridges from the pocket of Harpal Singh, accused as also the licence (mark A) were recovered. The cartridges and 'pucca' (solid) rifle were put in a sealed parcels and were sealed with the seal bearing letters 'WS' of Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6). The same were taken in possession along with the licence vide memo Ex.PK, which was attested by LC Chamkaur Singh and SPO Hardip Singh. At the time of recording the statement of Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) in the trial Court i.e. on 20.8.1999, Harpal Singh accused had died. Waryam singh ASI (PW-6) recorded the statements of the witnesses. The rifle is Ex.P1, the empties are Ex.P2 to Ex.P7 and the live cartridges are Ex.P8 to Ex.P18. On return of Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) to the Police Station, he deposited the case property with MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5). The accused was put in the police lock-up.
On 13.2.1995 Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) along with Head Constable Jagdish Chander, LC Rajpal Singh and PHG Iqbal Singh were going for patrolling towards village Mallan. When they reached on the bridge of canal minor in the area of village Mallan, Jaswinder Singh accused came from the side of village Mallan. He on seeing the police party tried to turn back. On suspicion, he was apprehended. From his personal search, .32 bore loaded revolver (Ex.P19) was recovered from the right waist pocket (dab) of his pant. The revolver was Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 unloaded and six cartridges (Ex.P20 to Ex.P25) of .32 bore were I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [7] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 recovered. Jaswinder Singh accused failed to produce any licence for the possession of the revolver and the cartridges. Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) put the revolver (Ex.P19) and cartridges (Ex.P20 to Ex.P25) into two distinct parcels and sealed the same with his seal bearing letters 'WS' and these were taken in possession vide memo Ex.PL which is on the case file under the Arms Act. The said memo was attested by Head Constable Jagdish Chander and LC Azad Pal Singh. A separate case under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 was registered. Jaswinder Singh accused was arrested in this case. Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) inspected the spot and recorded the statements of the witnesses. On return to the Police Station, he deposited the case property with the MHC. After completion of the investigation, the police report (challan) was filed by SI Ranjit Singh whose signatures Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) identified on the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("CrPC" for short).
As has been noticed in the FIR (Ex.PB) it is stated by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) that they had also fired in self-defence by taking shelter of the compound wall. Besides, it is also stated by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) that later he came to know that a gun shot had also hit Resham Kaur, Teacher who is the mother of Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka. Resham Kaur, Teacher wife of accused Harpal Singh filed a private complaint in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gidderbaha on 6.7.1995 inter alia stating that she was posted as a teacher at Primary School, village Surewala. Her husband Harpal Singh was posted at Kotkapura and her son was a student of Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Barjindera College, Faridkot. The accused in the said complaint were I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [8] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh, Darshan Singh and Virsa Singh sons of Bohar Singh son of Mohan Singh residents of village Surewala. It is alleged by Resham Kaur, Teacher that on 30.2.1995 she along with her husband Harpal Singh was present in their house. Her son Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka had left her house to go to the college at about 7.45 a.m. Jaswinder Singh returned after sometime by shouting that he be saved. It is alleged that accused Virsa Singh armed with a 'kasauli' was following him. She asked her husband to save Jaswinder Singh. At this, her husband Harpal Singh raised a 'Lalkara' asking Virsa Singh to go back. Virsa Singh after that went back. Resham Kaur brought her son to the house. After sometime the accused Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh armed with guns, besides, Darshan Singh and Jagir Singh armed with sticks came to their 'haveli' and started abusing her family members. Her husband (Harpal Singh) came armed with his revolver. Accused Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh fired shots at them from their guns. Her husband took shelter against the pillar of the door and the gun shots hit the gate and the pillar. Then her husband Harpal Singh brought a rifle from inside the house. Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh fired more shots which hit the walls and the eucalyptus trees. She sent her son Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka to Faridkot on his motorcycle. Her husband Harpal Singh was going towards the door. She asked him not to go. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) accused it is alleged fired a shot at her husband (Harpal Singh) and she came in front of him to save him. The gun shot hit her. The husband of Resham Kumar namely Harpal Singh had taken shelter behind the pillar. Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Resham Kaur received injuries on her breast, throat, head, right arm, I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [9] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 right hand and left shoulder etc. She fell down at the gate of her house. Harpal Singh by taking shelter against the pillar fired shots from his rifle in self-defence. The occurrence was witnessed by Resham Kaur's husband's elder brother's wife (Jethani) namely Jasvir Kaur as also by Karnail Singh, elder brother of her husband (Jeth). Both of them had come from the back door of the house. Resham Kaur was picked up from the ground and made to lie on a cot. After making arrangements for a conveyance, she was brought to Medical College, Faridkot from where, she was referred to Dayanand Medical College (DMC), Ludhiana and was treated there. She had remained admitted in the hospital from 3.2.1995 to 25.2.1995. The accused, it is alleged, had fired after they had encircled the house. Her statement was recorded in DMC Hospital, Ludhiana. The accused were arrested for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. The accused Harbans Singh, Virsa Singh and Darshan Singh were granted bail. On 4.5.1995 a case for the offence under Section 302 IPC was registered against Harpal Singh and Jaswinder Singh husband and son respectively of Resham Kaur at Police Station Kot Bhai under political pressure. The police had challaned her husband (Harpal Singh) and son (Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka) but the accused who had caused injuries to Resham Kaur were not challaned. It is alleged that Tara Chand, Superintendent of Police (Headquarters), Faridkot held an enquiry and he found the accused to be liable. On 6.2.1995 a photographer had taken photographs of the place of occurrence. There was a dispute regarding ridges (vatt) with the accused and the accused had attacked Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 them. I attest to the accuracy and According to Resham Kaur, the accused Mukhtiar Singh (PW- integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [10] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004
2), Harbans Singh (PW-1) and Darshan Singh sons of Mohan Singh and Virsa Singh son of Bohar Singh son of Mohan Singh had committed offences punishable under Sections 307, 148 read with Section 149 IPC, besides, Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The learned Magistrate after recording preliminary evidence committed the case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot in terms of his order dated 11.1.1996 framed charges against the accused Mukhtiar Singh, Virsa Singh and Harbans Singh for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, besides, Harbans Singh, Virsa Singh, Darshan Singh and Mukhtiar Singh were charged for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC. Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh were also charged for the offence under Sections 27 and 30 of the Arms Act. The complainant Resham Kaur examined herself as PW-1, besides, Karnail Singh PW-2, Subash Chander, Clerk PW-3, ASI Gurdeep Singh PW-4, Waryam Singh ASI (PW-5), Manoj Kumar, Record-Keeper (PW-6), Dr. Manish Bansal of DMC, Ludhiana PW-7, Gagandeep PW-8 and Dr. Mrs. Rekha Goel PW-9 were examined.
The aforesaid accused in their statements recorded under Section 313 CrPC denied the prosecution case. It was stated by them that after the investigation of the case, they were held innocent by the superior police officers. It is further stated that the real brother of the injured (Resham Kaur) was a Steno in the office of Principal Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot and the injured (Resham Kaur) reached first of all. Her parental village was Koharwala from where she took her cousin brother with her who was then a Co-operative Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Inspector. I attest to the accuracy and A close relative of the injured (Resham Kaur) namely integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [11] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 Chamkaur Singh, Advocate was a junior with Sh.Inderjit Singh, Advocate. It is further stated that the husband of the complainant Resham Kaur and her son had committed day light murder of Jasvir Singh for which a case was registered at the instance of Mukhtiar Singh accused. Nephew of Mukhtiar Singh, accused was murdered at a distance of 180 feet by a rifle fire which had been fired by Harpal Singh. After murdering Jasvir Singh, Harpal Singh fired indiscriminately towards their house and they had fired in self- defence. Their firing was from a place from where the shots could not injure Resham Kaur. It is further stated that injured fabricated another case in January 1996. In defence, the accused examined LC Amrik Singh (DW-1) and DSP Balbir Singh Khera (DW-2). The learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc) Fast Track Court, Faridkot considered the evidence and material on record and in terms of the judgment and order dated 10.2.2004 held that the evidence showed that the firing was done in furtherance of common intention of accused Virsa Singh and Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2). As such both of them were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC. The evidence showed that the licensed guns were used by the said accused Virsa Singh and Mukhtiar Singh for an unlawful purpose i.e. to cause injuries to Resham Kaur. Accordingly, both of them were held guilty for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. However, it was held that there evidence was no evidence that the weapons were handed over to somebody else. As such, the charge for the offence under Section 30 of the Arms Act was held to be not proved against the said accused i.e. Virsa Singh and Mukhtiar Singh. Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 The other accused namely Harbans Singh and Darshan Singh were I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [12] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 held not guilty of the charges framed against them and were acquitted. Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each, besides, pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC. They were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh have filed CRA No.650-SB of 2004 against their conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Besides, Resham Kaur filed CRM No.321 MA of 2004 for grant of leave to appeal. This Court in terms of order dated 20.9.2004 granted leave to appeal and admitted the same and ordered it to be heard along with CRA No.650 SB of 2004. Accordingly, the application for grant of leave to appeal was numbered as CRA No.796 DBA of 2004 which is against the acquittal of Harbans Singh and Darshan Singh sons of Mohan Singh. Besides, Mukhtiar Singh filed CRR No.944 of 2004 against Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka son of Harpal Singh and the State of Punjab seeking compensation of Rs.2 lacs for the family of the victim Jasvir Singh. Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka son of Harpal Singh has filed CRA No.205-DB of 2004 against his conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC. Besides, Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka has also filed CRA No.476 SB of 2004 against his conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Virsa Singh have filed CRA No.650-SB of 2004 against their conviction and sentence for the Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 offence I attest to the accuracy and under Section 307/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [13] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 vide judgment and order dated 10.2.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, Faridkot.
In order to effectively understand the facts of the case, the following pedigree table of the complainant side may be noticed which is borne out from the cross-examination of Harbans Singh (PW-1):-
Mohan Singh Bohar Singh Mukhtiar Singh Harbans Singh Darshan Singh Banta Singh (PW2) (PW1) Dulla Singh Hamir Singh Jasvir Singh Suba (deceased) Singh Virsa Krisha Singh Singh Randhir Waqil Singh Singh A perusal of the above shows that Virsa Singh son of Bohar Singh is appellant No.2 in CRA No. 650-SB of 2004 and Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) is appellant No.1 in CRA No.650-SB of 2004. In this manner Mukhtiar Singh is the uncle of Virsa Singh. Besides, Mukhtiar Singh is PW-2 in the appeal filed by Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka.
Harbans Singh is PW-1 in the said appeal filed by Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka. He is the brother of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2). Jasvir Singh is the deceased who died in the appeal of Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka on account of fire arm injuries caused by Harpal Singh. Jasvir Singh (deceased) is the nephew of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Harbans Singh (PW-1) being son of their brother Darshan Singh.
According to the deposition of Harbans Singh (PW-1) it has Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and been alleged by him that about three years and two months earlier to integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [14] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 his deposition in Court (which was made on 6.4.1998) at about 8.00 a.m. he and Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) were present in front of the door of their house along with Virsa Singh and Jasvir Singh (deceased). Jasvir Singh (deceased) was standing about 5-6 karams away from them. Harpal Singh son of Kehar Singh armed with a rifle and Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) armed with a revolver came from their house raising lalkaras and they came to their street of 'warawala'. Harpal Singh fired from his rifle towards them which hit Jasvir Singh, nephew of Harbans Singh (PW-1), on the right side of his chest. He fell on the ground and died there and then. Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka fired from his revolver in the air. Virsa Singh and Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) went to their houses and brought their respective licensed gun and fired in self-defence by taking shelter behind the small wall. Harpal Singh and his son Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka went away from the spot with their respective fire arms. At the time of deposition of Harbans Singh (PW-1) on 6.4.1998, Harpal Singh had died. Darshan Singh (father of Jasvir Singh
-deceased) and Harbans Singh (PW-1) are brothers and they had a dispute with Harpal Singh regarding the common ridges (vatts) in the fields. Harbans Singh (PW-1) asked Darshan Singh to remain with the dead body while he (PW-1) and Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) went to inform the police of Kot Bhai. The police, however, met them at the bus stand of village Mallan and Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) gave his statement. Then they accompanied the police to the place of occurrence where the police inspected the spot and examined the dead body of Jasvir Singh (deceased). Inquest report (Ex.PA) was prepared. Harbans Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Singh and Darshan Singh (father of deceased) thumb marked the I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [15] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 same. Then the dead body was taken to Civil Hospital, Gidderbaha.
Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) who lodged the FIR has deposed on the same lines as his brother Harbans Singh (PW-1). It is alleged that at about 8.15 a.m. on the day of the occurrence Jaswinder Singh armed with a revolver and Harbans Singh (sic. Harpal Singh) was armed with a rifle came to their house and came to the street near the wall of the outer-house i.e. 'bara'. It may be noticed that the 'bara' (courtyard) abuts the lane which passes in front of the houses of Harpal Singh and Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka. Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) raised a lalkara that they would not allow them to run away. Harpal Singh fired from his rifle towards Jasvir Singh which hit him on the right side of his chest and Jasvir Singh while raising an alarm of 'mar ditta mar ditta' fell on the ground. Then Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) fired from his revolver towards them. Jasvir Singh died there and then at the spot. They also raised an alarm and he (Mukhtiar Singh -PW-2) asked his brother to bring the rifle for self- defence. Thereafter, Harpal Singh and Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka went towards their house. Harpal Singh, it is stated, had died by the time when he (PW-2) was deposing in Court. He further stated that Harpal Singh started firing from his house also. Darshan Singh brother of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Harbans Singh (PW-1) was deputed to safeguard the dead body of Jasvir Singh. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Harbans Singh (PW-1) went towards the Police Station for lodging a complaint. When they were towards Kot Bhai, the police met them at village Mallan on the way and he (PW-2) narrated the occurrence to the police. His statement (Ex.PB) was recorded which Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 was read over to him and after admitting it as correct, he thumb I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [16] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 marked the same. There was a dispute between Harpal Singh, accused and Virsa Singh on account of common ridges (vatts). They had been proceeded against in proceedings under Sections 107 and 151 CrPC. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) accompanied the police to the spot. The police inspected the spot in his presence and blood stained earth and earth without blood were lifted by the police and put separately in two tin boxes (dabbis). Parcels were prepared and sealed with the seal of the police and these were taken in possession vide memo Ex.PC, which were thumb marked by Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and other witnesses. Two empties of the revolver were lifted from the spot and six empties of the rifle were taken in possession by the police after putting the same in sealed parcels vide recovery memo Ex.PD. Supplementary statement of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) was also recorded in this regard. Site plan was prepared at his instance. In cross- examination it is denied that they were the aggressors and had fabricated the story. He had not stated in his statement (Ex.PB) that he had learnt that Resham Kaur had also received fire arm injuries. He was confronted with portion A to A of Ex.PB where the said fact was so recorded. It is also stated that Resham Kaur was not there at the time of occurrence and they had not fired at her. However, they were accused in the cross case for causing fire arm injuries to her at that time. They had not seen any empty lying at the place from where they had fired.
The facts and circumstances as have been enumerated above show that in the case that has been initiated on the statement (Ex.PB) of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2), Jasvir Singh is said to have died on Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 account of the fire arm injury caused by Harpal Singh, who has died a I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [17] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 natural death during the pendency of the appeal. Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka who is the appellant is said to have fired with the revolver. According to Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2), Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) fired towards them. However, according to Harbans Singh (PW-1), Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) fired from his revolver in the air. Virsa Singh (PW-4) a nephew of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) and Harbans Singh (PW-1) was also examined. According to him (PW-4), Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) armed with a revolver came at the place of the occurrence raising lalkaras. It is stated that Harpal Singh fired a shot with his rifle which hit on the chest of Jasvir Singh and he died at the spot due to fire arm injuries. It is further stated that Harpal Singh and Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) both fired shots towards them with their respective weapons and they saved themselves by going to the side. It is stated that after reaching the road, both Harpal Singh and Jaswinder Singh fired about 4-5 shots more with their weapons. Thereafter, they went to the spot. Waryam Singh ASI (PW-6) who is the Investigating Officer in the case prepared a rough site plan (Ex.PH) with correct marginal notes. A 'pucca' loaded rifle (Ex.P1) along with cartridges was recovered. After unloading the rifle, three cartridges were recovered and eight cartridges were recovered from the pocket of Harpal Singh along with its licence. It is also stated by ASI Waryam Singh (PW-6) that from the personal search of Jaswinder Singh, a .32 bore loaded revolver from the right waist pocket (dab) of his pant was recovered. The revolver was unloaded and 6 cartridges of .32 bore revolver were recovered. The accused failed to produce any Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 licence for the possession of the revolver and the cartridges. I attest to the accuracy and
The integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [18] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 revolver and cartridges were put in two separate parcels and sealed with his seal bearing letters 'WS' and taken in possession vide memo. A separate case under Section 25 of the Arms Act was also initiated against Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka. The revolver (Ex.P19) and the cartridges (Ex.P20 to Ex.P25) were recovered. It may, however, be noticed that the revolver (Ex.P19), which is stated to have been recovered was not sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for its examination and no report in this regard is there. It may also be noticed that Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) states that the site plan was prepared at his instance. There are two site plans in the case. One is Ex.PH prepared by ASI Waryam Singh (PW-6). In the said site plan, though various persons are stated to be standing, however, it is not mentioned as to where Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) was standing. Mark 'A' in the site plan (Ex.PH) is depicted as the place where the dead body of Jasvir Singh was lying and also from where blood-stained earth and simple earth was lifted. Mark 'B' is depicted as the place where Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) was standing. Mark 'C' is depicted as the place where Virsa Singh (PW-4) was standing. Mark 'D' is depicted as the place where Harbans Singh (PW-1) was standing. Mark 'D' is the place from where Harpal Singh is stated to have fired with his 'pucca' rifle and empty cartridges were lifted. Mark 'F' is depicted as the place where Resham Kaur is said to have been injured with the firing and blood-stained earth and simple earth were lifted. Thereafter, the distances between the places have been mentioned. The place where Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) was standing has nowhere been mentioned and neither is the place Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 from where the empty cartridges of revolver were lifted been shown I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [19] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 even though Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) stated that two empties of the revolver were lifted from the spot.
The other is the scaled site plan (Ex.PN) which has been prepared by Sampuran Singh, Draftsman (PW-8). Sampuran Singh, Draftsman (PW-8) has stated in his deposition that on 11.2.1995 he went to village Surewala and inspected the spot at the instance of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2). He prepared the scaled site plan (Ex.PN) with correct marginal notes with his hand. In cross-examination it is stated that he had shown the points at the instance of the witnesses without any addition or omission. It is stated that he could not pin point any note in Ex.PN, where Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) is said to have fired as he was unable to read. In the site plan (Ex.PN) admittedly no point has been shown from where Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) is said to have fired or the place from where the revolver and cartridges were recovered. The site plan (Ex.PN) was prepared on 11.2.1995, that is, almost after eight days of the occurrence at the instance of Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2), however, these aspects are conspicuously not mentioned. Besides, Sampuran Singh, Draftsman (PW-8) feigned ignorance of the place where Jaswinder Singh was standing by stating that he was unable to read. Therefore, the fact that Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) had fired with the revolver is not established as the recovered revolver was not sent to the FSL, besides, the place where Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) was placed at the time of the incident is not shown in the site plans (Ex.PH and Ex.PN). Moreover, the place from where the empty cartridges of the revolver were lifted has not been Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 depicted. Even otherwise, admittedly no injury was caused to anyone I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [20] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 from the fire arm alleged to have been fired by Jaswinder Singh. Primarily the allegations of firing on account of which Jasvir Singh died is attributed to Harpal Singh who died during the trial of the case.
According to Sh. APS Deol, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants in CRA No.650-SB of 2004 and for the complainant in CRA No. 205-DB of 2004 Harpal Singh was murdered and case FIR No.69 dated 7.8.1996 was registered at Police Station Kotwali, Faridkot. Be that as it may, Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) has since died. In any case, the case against Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant in CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and in CRA No.476-SB of 2004) is not made out as the revolver that is stated to have been used in the occurrence is not established to be used and in any case it has not even been established to be in working condition or that it was fired by any FSL report.
The prosecution examined Paloos Singh, Constable (PW-9) who has deposed that on 8.2.1995, MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5) handed over to him a parcel containing six empties of their file duly sealed with seal of 'WS' along with sample seal vide rod No.31/21 for depositing the same in the office of Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab. He deposited the same with the laboratory on the same day and again stated that he deposited them on 9.2.1995 and handed over the receipt issued by the laboratory to MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5) on 9.2.1995. It is further stated by Paloos Singh Constable (PW-9) that on 13.2.1995 Gurnam Singh MHC (PW-5) handed over to him two sealed parcels containing blood-stained earth and two parcels containing simple earth duly sealed with seal of 'WS' Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 along with sample seal for depositing the same. He deposited these I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [21] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 parcels in the office of Chemical Examiner, Patiala on 16.2.1995 and on return to the Police Station he on the same day handed over the receipt to the MHC. So long as the parcel remained with him, he did not tamper with the same nor did he allow anybody else to do so. There is no mention in the statement of Paloos Singh Constable (PW-
9) that he deposited the 'pucca' rifle (Ex.P1) or the revolver (Ex.P19) with the FSL. Besides, there is no mention regarding deposit of empties of the revolver cartridges. Kulwant Singh (PW-10/A) was posted as a gunman. He has stated that on 20.2.1995 he was posted at Police Station Kot Bhai. On that day, he received two parcels, one containing 'pucca' rifle and the other containing eleven cartridges duly sealed with seal of 'WS' along with sample seal from MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5) for depositing the same in the office of FSL, Chandigarh. But the same could not be deposited on that day as objections were raised. On return, he deposited the parcel with the MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5) on 22.2.1995. On 6.3.1995, MHC (PW-5) again handed over to him the above said sealed parcels for depositing the same with the FSL and on 10.3.1995, he (Kulwant Singh PW-10/A) deposited these parcels along with sample seal with the FSL Punjab, Chandigarh and on his return to the Police Station, he handed over the receipt issued by the laboratory to MHC Gurnam Singh (PW-5). There is no mention in his statement regarding deposit of revolver (Ex.P19) with the FSL. Gurnam Singh MHC (PW-5) (retired ASI) deposed that on 8.2.1995 he was posted as MHC at Police Station Kot Bhai. On that day ASI Waryam Singh (PW-6) handed over to him a parcel containing a 'pucca' rifle sealed with his seal bearing letters 'WS' and another Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 parcel containing 11 cartridges of 'pucca' bore duly sealed with seal I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [22] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 'WS' along with sample seal. On 20.2.1995 he handed over the above said parcels duly sealed along with sample seal to Constable Kulwant Singh (PW-10/A) for depositing the same with FSL Punjab Chandigarh. These were received back on 22.2.1995 due to objections raised by the Laboratory. Then on 6.3.1995 he again handed over the 'pucca' rifle duly sealed with five live cartridges of 'pucca' rifle for comparison through Constable Kulwant Singh (PW-10/A) for depositing the same with the FSL Punjab Chandigarh, but he again received the parcel of rifle and five cartridges after objections were raised by the Laboratory. Then on 9.3.1995 he again handed over the said articles for depositing them with the FSL Punjab Chandigarh. Kulwant Singh (PW- 10/A) after depositing the same with the FSL Punjab Chandigarh on 10.3.1995, handed over to him the receipt issued by the Laboratory on 11.3.1995. So long as the case property remained with him, he did not tamper with the same. It is to be noted that Gurnam Singh MHC (PW-5) nowhere states that the revolver (Ex.P19) had been deposited in the Malkhana leave alone sending it to the FSL for comparison. In the statement of Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) recorded under Section 313 CrPC it was put to him that he (Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka) fired with his revolver in the air. It is not put to him that he fired towards the complainant side i.e. Mukhtiar Singh (PW-2) etc. The recovery of revolver from Jaswinder Singh (appellant) has been put to him being recovered on 13.2.1995. However, there is no FSL report regarding the revolver. Therefore, the revolver (Ex.P19) said to have been recovered from Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka (appellant) is not clearly established and a benefit of Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 doubt is liable to be given to him in both the appeals. I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [23]
CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 Insofar as CRA No.650-SB of 2004 filed by Mukhtiar Singh son of Mohan Singh and Virsa Singh son of Bohar Singh is concerned, it may be noticed that Mukhtiar Singh (appellant) who is the complainant (PW-2) in the appeal of Jaswinder Singh has died. Sh. APS Deol, Senior Advocate, as already noticed, has submitted that he has died. Sh. Navkiran Singh, Advocate appearing for Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka has also accepts that he has died. The appeal i.e. CRA No.650-SB of 2004 filed by Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh is against the order dated 10.2.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, Faridkot. The same as already noticed has been filed on the complaint of Resham Kaur who was injured in the incident that had occurred on 3.2.1995. In terms of said order, Harbans Singh and Darshan Singh sons of Mohan Singh co-accused were acquitted. However, Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh have been held guilty for the offences under Sections 307/34 IPC. As per the allegations of Resham Kaur, it is accused Mukhtiar Singh who had fired a shot at her husband Harpal Singh and when she had come forward to save him, the fired shot hit her. Her husband Harpal Singh took shelter behind the pillar. Resham Kaur received injuries on her breast, throat, head, right arm, right hand and left shoulder etc. Harpal Singh, it is alleged, by taking shelter against the pillar fired from his rifle in self-defence. Resham Kaur in order to prove the case examined herself as PW-1, besides, she examined Karnail Singh PW-2, elder brother of her husband as also Subash Chander PW-3, ASI Gurdip Singh PW-4, Waryam Singh ASI, PW-5, Manoj Kumar, Record Keeper PW-6, Dr. Manish Bansal of DMC, Ludhiana PW-7, Gagandeep Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 PW-8 and Dr. Mrs. Rekha Goel PW-9. The accused in their statement I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [24] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 denied the prosecution case. It was stated that after investigation of the case, they were held innocent. Besides, real brother of the injured was a Steno in the office of the Principal Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot and the injured (Resham Kaur) reached first of all her parental village was Koharwala from where she took her cousin brother with her who was then a Co-operative Inspector.
It may be noticed that Mukhtiar Singh (appellant No.1 in CRA No. 650-SB of 2004) has died. Therefore, the appeal as against him would stand abated in terms of Section 394 CrPC. The appeal survives only against Virsa Singh (appellant No.2 in CRA No. 650-SB of 2004). It is to be noted that after investigation of the case, the police had held Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh (appellants No.1 & 2 in CRA No. 650-SB of 2004) to be not liable and they were not sent up for trial for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC for causing injuries to Resham Kaur. The prosecution filed an application on 3.5.1995 for their discharge. The complainant side from the complaint of Resham Kaur, i.e. her husband Harpal Singh (since deceased) and Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka were charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 302 IPC for committing the murder of Jasvir Singh son of Darshan Singh. After two months of the filing of the police report (challan), Resham Kaur filed a private complaint on 6.7.1995 against Mukhtiar Singh, Virsa Singh (appellants No.1 & 2 in CRA No. 650-SB of 2004), Harbans Singh and Darshan Singh (respondents No.1 and 2 in CRA No. 796-DB of 2004). Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate for the appellant Resham Kaur in CRA No. 796-DBA of 2004 has submitted that he does not press the said criminal appeal and he may be allowed to withdraw Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 the same. I attest to the accuracy and By a separate order passed today, the said appeal has integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [25] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 been dismissed as withdrawn as against Harbans Singh and Darshan Singh. Resham Kaur, complainant was posted as a Teacher at Primary School of village Surewala. Her husband Harpal Singh was posted at Kot Kapura and her son was a student of Barjindera College, Faridkot. The accused Mukhtiar Singh (appellant No.1 in CRA No.650-SB of 2004), Harbans Singh and Darshan Singh (respondents No.1 and 2 in CRA No.796 DBA of 2004) were real brother's sons of Mohan Singh while Virsa Singh (appellant No.2 in CRA No.650 SB of 2004) was their nephew. On the date of the incident i.e. 3.2.1995, she along with her husband Harpal Singh was present in their house. Her son Jaswinder Singh had left the house at about 7.45 a.m. for going to college. After sometime Jaswinder Singh returned shouting that he be saved. Virsa Singh (appellant No.2 in CRA No.650 SB of 2004) armed with a 'kasauli' was following him. Resham Kaur asked her husband Harpal Singh to save Jaswinder Singh. At this Harpal Singh raised a 'lalkara' asking Virsa Singh to go back. Virsa Singh (appellant No.2 in CRA No.650 SB of 2004) then went back. She brought her son to the house. After sometime Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh, and Virsa Singh armed with guns, besides, Darshan Singh and Jagir Singh armed with sticks came to their 'haveli' and started hurling abuses on her family members. Her husband (Harpal Singh) came armed with his revolver. Accused Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh fired shots at them with their guns. Harbans Singh, husband of Resham Kaur took shelter against the pillar of the door and the gun shots hit the gate and the pillar. Then her husband Harpal Singh brought a rifle from inside the house. Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh fired more shots Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 which hit the walls and the eucalyptus trees. I attest to the accuracy and
She sent her son integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [26] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka to Faridkot on his motorcycle. Her husband Harpal Singh was going towards the door. She asked him not to go. Mukhtiar Singh accused fired a shot at her husband (Harpal Singh) and she came ahead to save him and the fired shot hit her. She received injuries on her breast, throat, head, right arm, right hand and left shoulder etc. She fell down at the gate of her house. Harpal Singh by taking shelter against the pillar fired shots from his rifle in self-defence. The incident was witnessed by Resham Kaur's husband's elder brother's wife (Jethani) namely Jasvir Kaur as also by Karnail Singh (PW-2), elder brother of her husband (Jeth). Both of them had come from the back door of the house. Resham Kaur was picked up from the ground and was laid on a cot. After making arrangements for a conveyance, she was brought to Medical College, Faridkot from where, she was referred to Dayanand Medical College (DMC), Ludhiana and was treated there. She had remained admitted in DMC from 3.2.1995 to 25.2.1995. The accused had fired after encircling her house. Her statement was recorded in DMC, Ludhiana. The accused were arrested for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. The case under Section 302 IPC was registered against her husband Harpal Singh and her son Jaswinder Singh at Police Station Kot Bhai, was registered under political pressure. As has already been noticed, the police did not send the accused on the complaint of Resham Kaur for trial. They were tried on a private complaint filed by Resham Kaur. She led preliminary evidence before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gidderbaha who vide order dated 15.9.1995 summoned the Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 accused. I attest to the accuracy and Thereafter, vide order dated 3.11.1995, the case was integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [27] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot charge-sheeted the accused on the complaint of Resham Kaur on 11.1.1996. Mukhtiar Singh, Virsa Singh and Harbans Singh were charged for the offence under Section 307 IPC, besides, for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC. Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh were also charge-sheeted for the offences under Sections 27 and 30 of the Arms Act. According the charge-sheet it is alleged that Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh, Darshan Singh and Virsa Singh on 3.2.1995 at about 8.15 a.m. in the area of village Surewala, in furtherance of their common intention, Mukhtiar Singh did an act namely fired shot from his double barrel gun upon Resham Kaur with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstance that if by that act he had caused the death of Resham Kaur he would be guilty of murder. Thereby he (Mukhtiar Singh) committed an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC while Harbans Singh, Virsa Singh and Darshan Singh were liable under Section 307/34 IPC. It is further alleged that Virsa Singh and Harbans Singh did an act namely fired shots towards Resham Kaur and Harpal Singh with their guns with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if by that act they had caused the death of Resham Kaur and Harpal Singh, they would have been guilty of murder and they both committed an offence under Section 307 IPC while Darshan Singh and Mukhtiar Singh were liable under Section 307/34 IPC. It is further alleged that Mukhtiar Singh on 3.2.1995 in the area of village Surewala misused his 12 bore licensed gun for unlawful purpose by firing towards Resham Kaur and Harpal Singh and Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 thereby contravened the terms and conditions of his armed license I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [28] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 and committed an offence under Section 27/30 of the Arms Act. Lastly, Virsa Singh on 3.2.1995 in the area of village Surewala misused his DBBL gun for an unlawful purpose by firing towards Resham Kaur and Harpal Singh and thereby contravened the terms and conditions of his armed license and thereby committed an offence under Section 27/30 Arms Act. It was directed that they be tried of the said charges. The contents of the charge were read over and explained to the accused in simple Punjabi. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In their statements recorded under Sections 313 CrPC, the accused denied the incident and submitted that they were held innocent by the superior police officer. The real brother of the injured was a steno in the office of Principal Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot and the injured (Resham Kaur) reached first of all. In their defence, the accused examined LC Amrik Singh (DW1) and DSP Balbir Singh Khera (DW2) respectively. Resham Kaur (PW-
1), in her deposition stated that on 3.2.1995 she was at a7.45 a.m. she was at her house and her husband Harpal Singh was also there. Her son Jaswinder Singh had gone to the bus stand Surewala for boarding the bus for his college. After some time he returned crying asking his parents to save him. Virsa Singh armed with a 'Kasauli' was following him at that time. She asked her husband to save him from the accused. Her husband raised a 'lalkara' asking Virsa Singh to retreat. Then Virsa Singh went to his house and after 2/3 minutes, Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh armed with 12 bore guns while Jagir Singh and Darshan Singh armed with 'sotis' came in their 'bara' (compound) near their house and started abusing them. Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 They fired shots at them from their guns, which hit the pillars of their I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [29] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 house. Then her husband brought a revolver from inside the house. The accused fired more shots with their guns which hit the walls of the house as well as the eucalyptus trees. Her husband also brought rifle from the house. They sent their son Jaswinder Singh from the back door of their house on a motorcycle to save his life. Her husband then started going towards the door of the house. She tried to check him from proceeding further and in that process Mukhtiar Singh accused fired a shot which hit her on her head, chest, neck, right hand, right arm and right shoulder. Her husband was behind the pillar at that time. The entire occurrence was witnessed by Karnail Singh (PW-2) and his wife Jasvir Kaur. Her husband fired one or two shots in self- defence. She fell down on receipt of the fire arm injury and was lifted by Mukhtiar Singh and Jasvir Kaur. Karnail Singh (PW-2) who is the brother of the husband of the complainant Resham Kaur supported the version of Resham Kaur (PW-1). He stated that on hearing alarm he along with his wife Jasvir Kaur went to the house of Harpal Singh from the back door. Harpal Singh, Resham Kaur and Jaswinder Singh were present there. Harpal Singh and his wife were saying that they were not to quarrel and they sent Jaswinder Singh to his college. Harpal Singh and Resham Kaur went to close the outer door of their house. At that time, Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh, Darshan Singh and Virsa Singh were seen standing on the other side of the road. Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh were armed with 12 bore guns while Darshan Singh and Jasbir Singh were armed with 'sotis'. Jasbir Singh it is stated had since died. Mukhtiar Singh fired a shot from his gun and the pellets of the shot hit Reham Kaur. Harpal Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 Singh saved himself by going behind the door. The pellets hit on the I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [30] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 chest, arms and face of Resham Kaur. She fell down and he and his wife both lifted her and put her on the cot. The accused fired more shots with their respective guns which hit on the parts of the house. Harpal Singh brought his gun from his house but he did not fire in his presence. He took Resham Kaur injured to Harike for taking her to the hospital, but he did not accompany her thereafter. The police inspected the spot in his presence and carried out investigation. Dr. Manish Bansal (PW-7) proved the injuries on the person of Resham Kaur. According to him, there were as many as 25 injuries on her person. Most of them were entry wounds and it appeared that these were cause by pellets of the shots that were fired. According to him, the injuries were dangerous and could have been sufficient to cause death, if timely medical aid was not given to her. The injured remained in the hospital from 3.2.1995 to 25.2.1995. In cross- examination it is stated that his opinion was not sought after X-ray examination but he had seen the X-ray films. As per the X-ray films, he remembered that there was surgical emphyoema on the chest which suggested that underlying lung was injured due to pellets. As per record there was pellet removal noted on the bed head ticket file of the patient. As per operation notes dated 22.2.1995, in the bed head ticket of patient under local anesthesia one pellet was removed from the base of middle finger as it was causing pain and difficulty in moving the finger of right hand. It is stated as wrong to suggest that all injuries were simple in nature. There was no X-ray report on the file but X-ray films were there. However, his personal opinion was that the injuries on the chest were not simple in nature as there was Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 pellet in the lung.
I attest to the accuracy and
As per record, no pellet was removed from the integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [31] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 chest injury.
The learned trial Court held the ingredients of offence under Section 307 IPC had been proved by the prosecution. It is to be noticed that Darshan Singh and Harbans Singh are stated to be armed with 'sotis' and no role has been attributed to them. It is Mukhtiar Singh, Harbans Singh and Virsa Singh who were armed with guns. Harbans Singh stated that he has got no licensed gun. ASI Waryam Singh stated that he recovered 12 bore double barrel gun from the possession of Virsa Singh and another 12 bore gun from the possession of Mukhtiar Singh. No gun was recovered from Harbans Singh and it is not shown that he had any gun. The learned trial Court held that his presence at the place of occurrence was doubtful. It was also held that only with one fire arm shot, injuries were received by Resham Kaur. However, it was held that evidence was there that accused Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh fired from their guns and guns were recovered from their possessions. A number of fire shots had been fired. From the evidence it was held that it could not be gathered as to whose fire arm shot hit Resham Kaur. The evidence showed that the firing was done in furtherance of common intention. Accordingly, Mukhtiar Singh and Darshan Singh were held guilty for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC.
It may be noticed that Resham Kaur in her deposition as PW-1 as also Karnail Singh in his deposition as PW-2 have stated that Mukhtiar Singh fired a shot which hit on the head, chest, neck, right hand, right arm and right shoulder of Resham Kaur; besides, the learned trial Court has held that with one fire arm shot injuries were Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 received by Resham Kaur.
I attest to the accuracy and
Therefore, the fire arm shot with which integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [32] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 injuries were caused to Resham Kaur is attributed to Mukhtiar Singh only and not to Virsa Singh. Mukhtiar Singh has since died and the appeal against him stands abated. There is no evidence to show that any of the fire arm shot that was fired by Virsa Singh (appellant) had hit Resham Kaur. He was found innocent in the investigation. Mukhtiar Singh is the complainant in the cross case on the basis of which FIR was registered against Harpal Singh and his son Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka. It is from the fire arm shot of Harpal Singh that Jasvir Singh son of Darshan Singh had died. Harpal Singh has since died and so has Mukhtiar Singh. The respective appeals filed by them stand abated. Dr. Manish Bansal (PW-7) has stated that there were 25 injuries on the person of Resham Kaur and these were dangerous and could have been sufficient to cause death if timely medical aid was not given. However, in cross examination he accepts that his opinion was not sought after X-ray examination; besides, there was no X-ray report on the file. There is no evidence to show that there was any common intention between Mukhtiar Singh and Virsa Singh who has been held guilty by the learned trial Court. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances it would be just and expedient to give benefit of doubt to Virsa Singh (appellant No.2) in the case. Accordingly, CRA No. 650-SB of 2004 as against Mukhtiar Singh stands abated and benefit of doubt is given to Virsa Singh (appellant No.2).
For the foregoing reasons, CRA No. 205-DB of 2005 and CRA No.476-SB of 2004 filed by Jaswinder Singh alias Meeka are allowed and his conviction and sentence for the offences for which he Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 was charged are set aside and he is acquitted of the charges framed I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CRA No.205-DB of 2004 and [33] CRA No.476-SB of 2004 and CRA No.650-SB of 2004 against him.
CRA No. 650-SB of 2004 stands abated as against Mukhtiar Singh and is allowed in respect of Virsa Singh. His conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial Court are set aside and he is acquitted of the charges framed against him.
(S. S. SARON) JUDGE (S.P. BANGARH) JUDGE July 2, 2012 amit Amit Khanchi 2014.02.10 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh