Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harinder Paul Singh vs State Of Punjab on 10 September, 2010
Author: Jora Singh
Bench: Jora Singh
Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999
Date of decision: 10. 8.2010
Harinder Paul Singh
... Appellant
versus
State of Punjab
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH.
Present: Mrs. Baljit Kaur Mann, Advocate, with
Mr.A.P.S.Mann, Advocate,
for the appellant.
Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab.
...
JORA SINGH, J.
Harinder Paul Singh preferred this appeal to impugn the judgment of conviction dated 1.6.1999 and order of sentence dated 2.6.1999 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, in Sessions Case No.28 dated 24.8.1998 arising out of FIR No. 65 dated 7.8.1995 under Sections 304/34 IPC, PS Mehal Kalan. By the said judgment, he was convicted under Section 304 Part-II IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for six months.
Co-accused SI Gamdoor Singh, ASI Gurbax Singh and Constable Karamjit Singh were acquitted of the charge levelled against them. Against acquittal, appeal was preferred but the same was dismissed. State had also filed appeal for enhancement of sentence, but the same was also dismissed, as per submission of learned counsel for the appellant and State counsel.
Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 2
Prosecution story, in brief, is that FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 under Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act was registered for the murder of Gurdial Singh. Piara Singh (deceased) son of Sher Singh, resident of Village Kirpal Singhwala was wanted in the above said FIR. On 317.1995, SI Harinder Paul Singh, SHO of Police Station Mehal Kalan, had arrested Piara Singh in FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 and at 6.30 PM, he was lodged in the police lock up. At about 7.00 PM, Piara Singh suffered from fits. Then appellant along with police party was taking Piara Singh from Police Station Mehal Kalan to Civil Hospital, Barnala, but on the way, Piara Singh had died. Dead body was sent to Civil Hospital, Barnala, at 10.40 PM. Postmortem examination was conducted on the dead body of Piara Singh. Viscera was sent to the office of Chemical Examiner to know the cause of death. After postmortem examination, dead body was cremated. As per direction of SSP, Barnala, FIR was registered and investigation of the case was entrusted to DSP, Barnala. Magisterial enquiry was also held by Additional District Magistrate, Sangrur.
Ranjit Kaur wife of Piara Singh filed Civil Writ Petition No.12843 of 1995. In the writ petition, direction was issued that matter be got investigated from a responsible officer not below the rank of Inspector General of Police. Then enquiry was held by Shri S.C.Jain, I.G. Police (Railways), Punjab. After investigation, challan was presented against SI Harinder Paul Singh, who was the SHO of Police Satation Mehal Kalan, SI Gamdoor Singh, who was posted as Incharge of Police Post Chhapa, ASI Gurbax Singh and Constable Karamjit Singh, who were posted in Police Station Mehal Kalan at the relevant time.
Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 3
Case was committed to the Court of Session by the Committing Magistrate.
Accused were charged under Sections 304/34 IPC. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined PW1 Dr.Bhalinder Singh, who had conducted postmortem examination on the dead body of Piara Singh on 1.8.1995 and found the following injuries on his person:-
"1. Bruise 8''x5'' on the lateral side of left shoulder of dark reddish blue colour.
2. Bruise three x three inch on the anterior and lateral part of both upper arm and stains bluish in colouration.
3. Bruise 2''x1-1/2'' on the lateral aspect of left arm, 4'' above the wrist joint.
4. Bruise 7''x3'' swelling with blue coloration on the front of left thigh.
5. Bruise on the left knee of interior aspect of patella, 3''x4''.
6. Bruise 7''x3'' along swelling on the ankle joint area on left foot extending from superior, lateral to posterior aspect of the foot and joint.
7. Clotted blood was present on the front of left big toe, nail conture was normal.
8. Bruise on the right thigh 8''x3'' on the front of right thigh.
9. Lacerated wound 1''x1/4'' on the above injury of right Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 4 thigh. It was dark in colour at the base.
10. Bruise on the inferior aspect of right patella 3''x4''.
11. Lacerated wound 1''x1/8'' on the front of right leg 2'' below the joint of right knee, base was dark.
12. Bruise 8''x4'' on the lateral side of right ankle joint area.
13. ¼'' x1/10'' superficial lacerated wound on the superior aspect of right foot.
14. 1/10''x1/10'' superficial wound on the superior aspect of right foot, below the above injury.
15. Clotted blood was present on the front of right big toe nails bluish in colour."
All the injuries were found to be ante mortem in nature. As per report of Chemical Examiner (Ex.PA/2), cause of death was neurogenic shock due to the injuries. In view of police request (Ex.PE), doctor opined vide his opinion (Ex.PE/1) that both the testicles and other injuries were sufficient to cause death. As per request (Ex.PG), doctor gave opinion (Ex.PG/1) as under:-
"1. In postmortem report No.BS/10/97, no word as `deceased' is written and viscera were sent to Patiala for analysis.
2. Injuries are mentioned in the postmortem report in lateral (side) and posterior (back) surface also.
3. The swelling mentioned are around the bruise on the side of ankle joint and not ankle joint, as the swelling is on the three sides, superior to ankle joint and extending from lateral to posterior side on left foot and on right Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 5 side, the ankle joint area around the bruise of right side.
4. Injuries are contradicting the opinion given in injury No.3.
5. Conture of the nail was normal,as mentioned in the postmortem report, with no injury of soft tissue of both toes, so stumbling was not possible.
6. The crush injury was only possible if it was crushed between two hard objects."
Injuries No.1, 3 to 6, 8, 10 and 12 to 14 were the result of hit by hard material; injury No.2 was the result of tying of both arms at the back with soft material; injuries No.9 and 11 were the result of electric burns, whereas injuries No.7 and 15 were the result of pulling the nails away from its bed. Injury on the right testy was the result of crushing between two hard surfaces.
PW2 Ranjit Kaur is the widow of Piara Singh and stated that about four years back, police officials had raided her house. Her husband was present in the courtyard and on seeing the police officials, ran away after scaling over the wall. Due to fall, he received injuries and later on, he was arrested by the police. Ranjit Kaur failed to identify the accused facing trial. She stated that her husband was suffering from fits and was not tortured by the police. Death was due to fits. Ranjit Kaur was declared hostile and was cross-examined by learned PP for the State.
PW3 Ranjit Kaur is the neighbourer of the deceased, but she did not support the prosecution story and was declared hostile.
PW4 Gurjant Singh is the son of Piara Singh (deceased) and stated that about 3- 1/2 years back, his father had died due to fits. He had Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 6 received the dead body of Piara Singh after postmortem examination. After that, dead body was cremated. Gurjant Singh was also declared hostile.
PW5 Surjit singh is the brother of Piara Singh and stated that one Gurdial Singh of his village was murdered and on 31.7.1995, Piara Singh was arrested by SI Harinder Paul Singh. He had contacted number of persons in the village and on the next day, he along with many persons was going to the Police Station on the tractor trolley, then on the way, met the police party while bringing dead body of Piara Singh in a vehicle. Dead body was not handed over to them. Dead body was cremated by the police officials. Piara Singh was hale and hearty. He was murdered by the police in police custody. Later on, they had demonstrated against the police officials regarding the death of Piara Singh in police custody. Then present case was registered.
PW6 Nihal Singh stated that Subedar Gurdial Singh of Village Kirpal Singhwala was murdered on 16.7.1995 and in that case on 31.7.1995, five persons were arrested from his village. Piara Singh was one of them. He was member of Jabar Virodh Action Committee, Mehal Kalan. Some people of Village Kirpal Singhwala contacted him in the evening on 31.7.1995. Then he along with Jagan Nath, Ex.BDO, and Bant Singh, had gone to Police Station, Mehal Kalan, but they were not allowed to enter the police station. They heard shrieks from inside. On 1.8.1995 at 10.00 AM, he came to know about the death of Piara Singh in police custody. They were going to police station, then had seen police party while bringing dead body of Piara Singh in tractor trolley with fire wood. Police officials were requested for getting postmortem examination conducted in the presence of family members of the deceased, but they did not agree. Dead body was Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 7 cremated forcibly by the police officials. Piara Singh was a vegetable seller. He was carrying good health and was having no problem. Later on, there was demonstration because death was in police custody. After that, case was registered against SI Harinder Paul Singh and others.
PW7 SI Nachhatar Singh, on receipt of report (Ex.PK) by Sh. Pritpal Singh, DSP, Mehal Kalan, had registered formal FIR (Ex.PK/1).
PW8 ASI Harbans Singh stated that on 31.7.1995, on receipt of wireless message from SI Harinder Paul Singh regarding death of Piara Singh with a request to inform the family members of Piara Singh, he had gone to the house of Piara Singh, but no one was present in the house. He came to know that relatives of Piara Singh had gone to Police Station Mehal Kalan.
PW9 SI Surinder Pal Singh had prepared report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and challaned the caccused.
PW10 HC Jagtar Singh was MHC, Police Station Mehal Kalan, on 31.7.1995. As per DDR No.15 at 2.10 PM, SI Harinder Paul Singh, the then SHO of Police Station Mehal Kalan, along with SI Gamdoor Singh, ASI Gurbax Singh and Constable Karamjit Singh had left police station in connection with the investigation of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 under Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act. Ex.PL is the copy of DDR No.15. As per DDR No.21 dated 31.7.1995, SI Harinder Paul Singh along with Piara Singh came to police Station. Piara Singh was lodged in police lock up of PS Mehal Kalan. Vide DDR No.22 dated 31.7.1995, at 7.05 PM, SI Harinder Paul Singh had left for Civil Hospital, Barnala, along with Piara Singh, who was arrested in FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995. On 1.8.1995 vide DDR No.9 at 11.00 AM after conducting the proceedings Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 8 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. of Piara Singh, case property was deposited by SI Harinder Paul Singh. Ex.PO is the copy of DDR No.9. Constable Darshan Singh was on sentry duty on 31.7.1995 from 6.00 PM to 9.00 PM. Further stated that on 31.7.1995, SI Sita Ram had lodged Amarjit Singh in police lock of Police Station Mehal Kalan, arrested under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C.
PW11 Constable Balbir Singh tendered his affidavit (Ex.PR). PW12 ASI Harbans Singh brought record regarding trnasfer and posting of police officials including SI Harinder Paul Singh. On 30.7.1995, SI Harinder Paul Singh was transferred from CIA Staff, Barnala, to Police Station Mehal Kalan as SHO. Ex.PS is the copy of order.
PW13 Constable Bashir Mohd. tendered his affidavit (Ex.PT). PW14 Bant Singh @ Balwant Singh was declared hostile when he failed to support the prosecution story.
PW15 Pritpal Singh stated that on 1.8.1995, he was DSP, Mehal Kalan and as per order (Ex.PU) from SSP, Barnala, he had conducted enquiry and submitted enquiry report (Ex.PK) regarding death of Piara Singh. After registration of FIR, he had gone to the spot and prepared rough site plan with its correct marginal notes.
PW16 Constable Darshan Singh stated that on 31.7.1995 from 6.00 PM to 9.00 PM, he was on sentry duty in Police Station Mehal Kalan. Amarjit Singh was lodged in police lock under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C. At 6.30 PM, SI Harinder Paul Singh lodged Piara Singh in police lock up, arrested in FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995. After five minutes, Amarjit Singh informed that Piara Singh be shifted to hospital because he was beating his legs and arms on the ground. Information was given to MHC and SHO. Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 9 SHO Harinder Paul Singh had shifted Piara Singh to Civil Hospital, Barnala, but on the way, Piara Singh had died. Dead body of Piara Singh was brought to Civil Hospital, Barnala, where postmortem examination was conducted.
PW17 S.C.Jain, I.G. Police (Railways) stated that as per direction of Hon'ble High Court, he had conducted enquiry and after investigation, he had submitted report.
After close of the prosecution evidence, statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied all the prosecution allegations and pleaded to be innocent.
Defence version of appellant SI Harinder Paul Singh was as under:-
"I am innocent, I jointed as SHO/PS Mehal Kalan on 30.7.1995 at about 9.00 P.M. On the next day, I received a secret information about the involvement of Piara Singh in the murder of Gurdial Singh in case FIR No. 60/95 U/s 302/32 IPC of Police Station Mehal Kalan. I directed some police officials to bring Piara Singh in connection with that case. They brought him to the police station at about 6.30. P.M. On 31.7.1995 and told me that Piara Singh had tried to escape and ran away after jumping over the walls of the kotha and that he had also fallen some times Piara Singh may have sustained some injuries in that process. Piara Singh was lodged in the police lock up and in the meantime his wife Ranjit Kaur, his son Gurjant Singh, his cousin Balbir Singh,Manjit Singh Sarpanch and Sadhu Singh came in the police station. I retired to my quarter and Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 10 after about 20 minutes, MHC Jagtar Singh informed me that Piara Singh had suffered fits in the police lock up. I went there and found Piara Singh throwing his legs and arms forcefully on the ground and Amarjit Singh, who was in the lock up, was taking care of. We took out Piara Singh out of the lock up and took him to Civil Hospital, Barnala in the official canter immediately to save his life. On the way Piara Singh breathed his last due to fits. Immediately flashed wireless message to my senior officials and to Police Post Kalal Majra, to inform the relatives of the deceased Piara Singh. In the meantime, wife, son and others of Piara Singh, who had reached the police station, came at the spot where Piara Singh breathed his last. Piara Singh was brought by me to Civil Hospital Barnala for post mortem examination. I was ordered to see SSP Barnala and in my absence, SDM, Barnala and DSP Pritpal Singh reached and MHC Jagtar Singh prepared the inquest report under their direction and supervision, but in my absence, and I was forced to sign the same. I had made a request for Magisterial enquiry, but later on A.D. M. Sangrur Sh. Mehtab Singh conducted the Magisterial enquiry and found myself and others innocent. After post mortem examination, dead body of Piara Singh was handed over to his son Gurjant Singh and others for cremation. Human Rights Authorities were also informed about the incident. Nobody tortured Piara Singh while in police custody. He did suffer some injuries at the time of his escape from his arrest and at that time he received fits. Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 11 Police authorities registered the case against us under political pressure. MHC Jagtar Singh prepared the DDR reports falsely under pressure."
Defence version of other co-accused, who were acquitted by the trial Court, was that they did not accompany SI Harinder Paul Singh. DDRs were fabricated by SI Harinder Paul Singh through MHC Jagtar Singh.
In defence, DW1 Dr.J.S.Dalal stated that he was summoned by I.G. Police (Railways). Postmortem report of Piara Singh was shown to him to opine about the cause of death. After going through the postmortem report, he had submitted his opinion (Ex.DY).
DW2 AMHC Gurbachan Singh brought record and proved copy of DDR No.2 dated 31.7.1995 (Ex.DB), according to which, SI Gamdoor Singh, who was Incharge of Police Post Chhapa, was present in the Police Post at 8.05 AM. He also proved copy of DDR No.15 dated 31.7.1995 (Ex.DC).
DW3 SPO Hardeep Singh stated that DDR No.2, copy of which is Ex.DB, was written by him on the dictation of SI Gamdoor Singh.
After hearing learned Public Prosecutor for the State, learned defence counsel for the appellant and from the perusal of evidence on the file, appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated aforesaid.
I have heard learned defence counsel for the appellant and the State and gone through the evidence on file.
Learned defence counsel for the appellant argued that PW2 Ranjit Kaur widow of Piara Singh, PW3 Ranjit Kaur, neighbourer of deceased, PW4 Gurjant Singh, son of deceased, PW6 Nihal Singh and PW14 Bant Singh did not support the prosecution story. If unnatural death Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 12 was due to torture in police custody, then close relations of the deceased should have supported the prosecution story. One Amarjit Singh was also lodged in police lock up under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C. Constable Darshan Singh was the sentry. Amarjit Singh reported to the sentry that Piara Singh was not feeling well. As per information supplied by Amarjit Singh, matter was brought to the notice of SHO and MHC. Immediately Piara Singh was being shifted to the hospital, but unfortunately, on the way he had died. Co- accused were acquitted. Evidence against the appellant and the co-accused, who were acquitted, is the same. With the acquittal of co-accused, prosecution story becomes doubtful and very difficult to opine that Piara Singh was tortured by the police. After unnatural death, enquiry was conducted by ADM, Sangrur, but report of ADM, Sangrur, is to the effect that death was not due to torture in police custody. Report of ADM, Sangrur, falsifies the prosecution story. Dr. J.S.Dalal appeared in defence and reported that injuries noted could be suffered by fits. Widow and son of the deceased stated in Court that Piara Singh was suffering from fits. No witness was produced to state that appellant was seen while torturing the deceased. Case is based on circumstantial evidence. Only one day earlier to the present occurrence, appellant had joined as SHO of Police Station Mehal Kalan. Service record of the appellant is neat and clean. Appellant had served the nation with honesty when terrorism in Punjab was at peak. Appellant was directed to undergo RI for one year. He has already undergone 10 months and 2 days as on 2.7.2010. Appellant has 18 years' old daughter of marriageable age. If the appellant is directed to undergo imprisonment as ordered by the trial Court or sentence is reduced, then he is to lose his job. If the Court is of the opinion that crime was committed by Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 13 the appellant, then a lenient view may be taken. Appellant may be ordered to be released on probation so that no threat of losing the job.
Learned State counsel argued that FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 was registered qua the murder of Gurdial Singh and in that FIR, Piara Singh was arrested by the police. This fact is clear from the statement of MHC Jagtar Singh. Defence version of the appellant is that police officials were sent to bring Piara Singh in connection with the investigation of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995. Piara Singh was brought to Police Station Mehal Kalan at 6.30 PM, but no documentary evidence on the file as to which officials were sent to bring Piara Singh. When any police official leaves the police station to bring any accused wanted in any case, then entry is made in the roznamcha. Entry in roznamcha rather shows that appellant had gone in connection with investigation of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 and brought Piara Singh to police station. 15 injuries were noticed on the person of Piara Singh. Some of the injuries were on the testicles and some of the injuries were the result of electric shock. No question to the doctor that all injuries were possible by fall and that the injuries could be self suffered or self inflicted. Already a lenient view was taken by the trial Court. Unnatural death due to torture by the police officials, then keeping in view the nature of offence, appellant be not released on probation.
Evidence on file shows that FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 under Sections 302/34 and Section 25 of Arms Act was registered and this fact is clear from the statement of PW10 Jagtar Singh Appellant was transferred to Police Station, Mehal Kalan, as per transfer order dated 30.7.1995 (Ex.PS). On 31.7.1995, appellant was serving as SHO, Police Station Mehal Kalan. This fact is clear from the Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 14 statement of PW12 ASI Harbans Singh.
In connection with investigation of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995, appellant had left Police Station, Mahal Kalan. Entry was made in the roznamcha. DDR No.15 was recorded at 2.15 PM. This fact is clear from the statement of PW10 Jagtar Singh, who was the MHC, Police Station Mehal Kalan, at that time.
At 6.30 PM, appellant along with Piara Singh (deceased) came to police station after investigation of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995. Entry was made in the roznamcha. DDR No.21 dated 31.7.1995 was recorded at 6.30 PM, in view of the statement of HC Jagtar Singh. Appellant when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., then stated that some police officials were sent to bring Piara Singh (deceased) in connection with FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995, but no entry of DDR as to which police officials were sent to bring Piara Singh. No official appeared in defence to state that appellant had not gone to bring Piara Singh in connection with FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995. In fact, some other police officials had left the police station to bring Piara Singh. One thing is clear from documentary evidence that after registration of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995, appellant while serving as SHO, Mehal Kalan, had left Police Station at 2.15 PM in connection with investigation of FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 and at 6.30 PM, he along with Piara Singh came to the police station.
Evidence further shows that as per DDR No.22 dated 31.7.1995, at 7.05 PM, appellant had left police station for Civil Hospital, Barnala, with Piara Singh. According to defence version, when Piara Singh was apprehended by the police officials, then he tried to escape and while fleeing from the spot by scaling over the wall, suffered injuries. If this fact Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 15 is correct, then injury report should have been prepared by the police officials, who had apprehended Piara Singh in FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995. After arrest before lodging Piara Singh in police lock up, he should have been produced before the doctor for medical examination, in case Piara Singh had received injuries on his person suffered while scaling the wall. But no explanation why injury report was not prepared at the time of arrest and why Piara Singh was not produced before the doctor for examination.
According to prosecution story, while in police lock up, Piara Singh was tortured. Piara Singh was being shifted to Civil Hospital, Barnala, but on the way, he had succumbed to his injuries. Defence version of the appellant was that Piara Singh was suffering from fits. While he was in police lock up, then he suffered fits. One Amarjit Singh, who was also in the police lock up, reported to the police officials to shift Piara Singh to the hospital. But no evidence on the file that earlier to the arrest of Piara Singh, he was not mentally sound. In fact, he was suffering from fits.
PW16 Constable Darshan Singh stated that on 31.7.1995 from 6.00 PM to 9.00 PM, he was on sentry duty. Amarjit Singh lodged in police lock up reported that Piara Singh arrested in FIR No.60 dated 17.7.1995 was beating his legs and arms on the ground. Then intimation was given to MHC and SHO. Appellant had shifted Piara Singh to Civil Hospital, Barnala, but on the way, Piara Singh had died. At 6.30 PM, Piara Singh was lodged in police lock up. As per prosecution story, after five minutes, Amarjit Singh, who was also lodged in police lock, informed Constable Darshan Singh, who was on sentry duty, that Piara Singh was not feeling well. At 7.05 PM, appellant with Piara Singh had left police station for medical aid. Death was on the way. That means, within 30 minutes, Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 16 unnatural death. No suggestion to the doctor that if a person was suffering from fits, then injuries noted were possible. 15 injuries were noticed on the person of deceased. Cause of death was neurogenic shock due to the injuries. Some of the injuries were on the testicles. Some of the injuries were the result of electric burns and some of the injuries were the result of pulling the nails away from its bed.
As discussed earlier, in the absence of MLR or injury report, before lodging the deceased in police lock up, injuries noted were not possible as per defence version. If Piara Singh had suffered fits and was beating his legs and arms on the ground, then question is how injuries on the testicles and some of the injuries with electric burns. Appellant was the Incharge of Police Station. He had brought the deceased to police station and was to explain how some of the injuries were the result of electric burns and some of the injuries were the result of pulling the nails away from its bed or some of the injuries were the result of crushing between two hard surfaces.
PW2 Ranjit Kaur is the widow of Piara Singh but she did not support the prosecution story. But her statement shows that Piara Singh was brought to the police station. She further stated that her husband was suffering from fits and was not tortured by the police, but her statement has no evidentiary value because she was not the eye witness. No report of the doctor that death was due to fits. In case, Ranjit Kaur failed to support the prosecution story, then story is not to be ignored.
PW3 Ranjit Kaur is the neighbour of the deceased but her statement is not helpful to the appellant because she was not the eye witness.
Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 17
PW4 Gurjant Singh is the son of deceased and stated that his father had died due to fits. He was also declared hostile, but his statement is also not helpful to the appellant because he was not the eye witness. According to PWs, deceased was brought to the police station by the appellant and within half an hour, 15 injuries were noticed on his person. Appellant being the Incharge of Police Station was to explain how number of injuries figured on the person of Piara Singh.
PW5 Surjit Singh is the brother of deceased and supported the prosecution story by saying that his brother was murdered by the police. Dead body was cremated by the police.
PW6 Nihal Singh stated that in the murder case of Subedar Gurdial Singh, Piara Singh was brought to the police station. On 31.7.1995, he along with other respectables had gone to police station, but they were not allowed to enter the police station. Shrieks were heard from inside. On the next day, he came to know about the death of Piara Singh in police custody. Dead body was cremated forcibly by the police officials. Piara Singh was carrying good health and was having no problem.
PW8 ASI Harbans Singh stated that after the death of Piara Singh, he was sent by the appellant to inform the family members of Piara Singh but no one was present in the house and he came to know that family members had gone to Police Station Mehal Kalan.
After the death of Piara Singh, Prit Pal Singh, the then DSP, Mehal Kalan, was directed to hold an enquiry and submit report. Ex.PK is the enquiry report. Later on, as per order of Hon'ble High Court, S.C.Jain, I.G. Police (Railways), was also directed to hold enquiry. Inquiry report shows that death of Piara Singh was in police custody. Death was unnatural Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 18 due to torture.
In defence, Dr. J.S.Dalal was examined to opine about the cause of death. After going through the postmortem report, he had submitted his report but statement of Dr. J.S.Dalal is without any evidentiary value because he had not conducted postmortem examination. After occurrence when death was unnatural while in police custody, then very easy to contact one doctor and get opinion that after going through the postmortem report, injuries were not due to torture by the police. Dr. J.S.Dalal in examination-in-chief did not state a word that all the injuries could be self suffered or self inflicted. Specifically he has not stated that if a person suffers from fits and starts beating his legs and arms on the ground, then injuries noted at the time of postmortem examination were possible. The doctor rather stated that he gave opinion after going through the postmortem report that injuries on the testicles sometimes are sufficient to cause death. If a person suffers from fits and starts beating his legs and arms on the ground, then injuries on the testicles not possible. Nature of injuries shows that Piara Singh was tortured while in police custody. Evidence on the file was rightly scrutinized by the trial Court.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that if the Court is of the opinion that crime was committed by the appellant, then lenient view may be taken by releasing the appellant on probation because occurrence is dated 31.7.1995 and out of one year, appellant has already undergone 10 months and 2 days as on 2.7.2010. In support of this contention, learned counsel cited (i) 1993 Crl.L.J. 544, Susil Kumar Parida vs. The State, and
(ii) 2000(1) AICLR 282, State of Karnataka vs. Muddappa.
In Susil Kumar Parida's case (supra), conviction was under Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 19
Sections 353/506/294 IPC- On appeal, petitioner was acquitted of the offence under Section 506 IPC but maintained conviction under Sections 353/294 IPC.
In Muddappa's case (supra), accused were convicted under Section 302 IPC but on appeal, conviction was altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part-II IPC. Allegation of the prosecution was that blow was inflicted by the accused on the deceased.
No doubt, appellant is the first offender and occurrence is dated 31.7.1995 but offence is very serious. Already lenient view was taken by the trial Court.
File shows that appellant was convicted vide judgment dated 1.6.1999. In view of conviction, appellant preferred appeal in this Hon'ble High Court and also made a prayer for suspension of sentence. After sentence of imprisonment was suspended and appellant was ordered to be released on bail, then appellant preferred Crl. Misc.19252 of 1999 seeking suspension of execution of sentence during the pendency of appeal on the allegation that appellant was serving as Sub Inspector and was suspended from service at the time of his arrest. Vide order dated 9.7.1999, sentence of appellant was ordered to remain suspended. Again appellant filed application under Section 389(1) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for suspension of the order of conviction on the allegation that on 16.2.2001, SSP, Patiala, had directed to review the case of the appellant on the ground that appellant had been wrongly reinstated in service because his conviction had not been stayed by the Hon'ble High Court and he was required to be dismissed under the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Copy of memo dated 16.2.2001 was attached with the application. Request was that if conviction Crl.Appeal No.558-SB of 1999 20 of the appellant was not stayed during the pendency of appeal, then he would be dismissed from service, but request of the appellant was declined vide order dated 13.3.2001. Meaning thereby, despite order of the High Court not to stay conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC, appellant managed to get himself reinstated in service. Within 30 minutes, unnatural death of poor vegetable seller on account of torture by the police while in police custody. Authorities cited by learned counsel for the appellant are not applicable to the facts of present case, because facts of present case differ from the facts of authorities cited by learned counsel for the appellant. If the appellant is ordered to be released on probation, then order is to instigate the police officials to torture innocent persons. Police officials are the custodial of law. They are to maintain law and order and are not to violate the same. Police officials while interrogating the accused, have no respect for human rights. Already a lenient view was taken by the trial Court. No reason to give benefit of probation of good conduct.
For the reasons recorded above, appeal without merit is dismissed.
Appellant is on bail. He is directed to surrender before the concerned authority to undergo imprisonment as ordered by the trial Court, failing which CJM, Barnala, to issue re-arrest warrant of the appellant for undergoing the remaining imprisonment as ordered by the trial Court.
10.8.2010 ( JORA SINGH ) pk JUDGE