Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaspal Singh @ Jassa vs State Of Punjab on 20 February, 2013
Author: Ritu Bahri
Bench: Hemant Gupta, Ritu Bahri
Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: February 20, 2013
Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M)
Jaspal Singh @ Jassa ..Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. Sanjiv Sharma, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. Pavit Mattewal, Addl. A.G., Punjab
RITU BAHRI, J.
The instant criminal appeal is directed against judgment dated 13.05.2008 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bathinda convicting and sentencing the appellant for life, which reads as under:
Offence RI Fine In default
Imprisonment
302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.5000/- Two years
The First Information report was recorded on the basis of statement of Sukhwinder Kaur aged about 28 years resident of village Satipura, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan) made to Ranbir Singh Sub Inspector, P.S. Raman at about 9:10 am on 28.09.2006. She stated that on 25.09.2006, she had gone to see her husband's sister Charanjit Kaur, who was married to Jaspal Singh @ Jassa (for short 'the accused-appellant) son of Harchand Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -2- Singh at Raman Mandi for about 15/16 years. Charanjit Kaur had two sons from their wedlock. The elder son Gursewak Singh was residing at Satipura with his grand parents and the younger one, namely, Gurlal Singh was residing with Charanjit Kaur at Raman Mandi since four years. There was a family dispute between her sister-in-law and the accused-appellant because there was an apprehension that accused-appellant was visiting another lady. She further stated that on the intervening night of 27/28.09.2006 at about 12.30 o-clock, she along with her children and son of Charanjit Kaur namely Gurlal Singh was sleeping in the room of her house beside the gate, whereas her sister-in-law was sleeping ahead in the last room. Thereafter, the accused-appellant entered the house by jumping over the wall where she was sleeping and started calling for opening the door. He started giving threats to her. On hearing noise (Kharka), Charanjit Kaur also came and the accused-appellant, who was holding an iron rod in his hands, started breaking the door of the window where the cooler was fitted. Both of them took the children and went into a room where Charanjit Kaur was earlier sleeping and bolted the room. The accused-appellant entered the room after breaking the door. He was holding a Kripan in one hand and a dagger in the other hand. He caught hold of Charanjit from her hairs and after she fell on the ground, he started giving blows with the dagger on her throat (neck). Subsequently, he gave another blow with the Kripan. She after lifting her children climbed up the roof and raised noise. There was a jagrata in adjoining house. She rushed towards the side where the neighbours were present. She informed them about the incident. All of them informed her father-in-law namely Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -3- Kala Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh on telephone. She saw the dead of body of her sister-in-law Charanjit Kaur lying on the ground (smeared with blood). She had been mercilessly murdered. Blood stained kripan & socket (cover) of the sword and rod were lying there. While leaving the house, the appellant-accused took her son namely Gurlal Singh. On the arrival of her father-in-law Kala Singh, she went with him along with her Devar to inform the police.
After registration of the FIR, ASI Gursewak Singh proceeded for the investigation on the spot. On completion of investigation, the challan was presented against the accused- appellant. He was charge-sheeted under Section 302 IPC. On an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., Pal Singh and Nindo Kaur @ Manpreet Kaur were also summoned to face trial vide order dated 02.05.2007.
To prove its case, the prosecution has examined Dr. Vijay Kumar as PW-1, who conducted the post-mortem on the dead body of Charanjit Kaur. He opined that there were following three injuries on her person:
1. 3 x 1 incised wound on anterior aspect of left shoulder. Clotted blood was present.
2. 2-1/2" x 1" incised wound on upper part of chest, 1" above eternal notch. Wound extending deep into chest and cutting across trachea. Clotted blood was present."
3. Four incised wounds about 9" x 1-1/2" placed one above another extending from right side of face and neck going anteriorly between chin and lower part of neck and ending on left side of neck, underlying nerves and vessels and muscles cut.
Larynx trachea and oesophegus also cut. Clotted Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -4- blood was present."
As per opinion of Doctor, the larynx and trachea were cut through and through. The probable duration of time between injuries and death was within few minutes. In cross-examination, Doctor stated that there was no penetrate or stab wound.
PW-2 Sukhwinder Kaur - an eye witness deposed that she was resident of village Satipura, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan). Charanjit Kaur was married with Jaspal Singh @ Jassa-accused appellant son of Harchand Singh at Raman Mandi. She had two sons. The elder son Gursewak Singh was studying at Satipura and the younger one namely Gurlal Singh was residing with Charanjit Kaur at Raman Mandi about four years ago. Charanjit Kaur did not have cordial relations with the accused- appellant because the accused-appellant had illicit relations with another lady. On intervening night of 27/28.09.2006, the accused- appellant came there and knocked the door after scaling over the main gate. The accused-appellant asked them to open the door and also threatened them. The accused-appellant started breaking the window. Charanjit Kaur came there on hearing the noise. Then accused broke open the door window with the help of rod and came inside. She alongwith Charanjit Kaur went to near side bed room. The accused-appellant gave a rod blow on the door and the said door was also opened. He caught hold Charanjit Kaur from her hairs and threw her on the ground and started giving blows with the dagger on her throat (neck). Subsequently, he gave another blow with the Kripan. She deposed that she tried to intervene, but the accused-appellant also threatened her to kill along with Gurlal Singh. She Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -5- went up stairs and started raising noise. Thereafter, she went in street and started raising noise. The accused-appellant came out. His clothes were stained with blood. He was carrying Gurlal Singh with him and esteem car was parked outside. Sister of the accused-appellant namely Nindo Kaur @ Manpreet Kaur and her husband Pal Singh were present there along with two other persons.
PW-5 Gurlal Singh on 14.11.2007, deposed as child witness and corroborated the story put forward by Sukhwinder Kaur-complainant. He stated that relations of his mother were strained with his father. His father used to beat up his mother. His maternal grand-father was staying at village Satipura, where his brother Gursewak Singh was studying. His mother then shifted to Raman Mandi. His father used to live at village Fakarsar with his sister. He affirmed that Sukhwinder Kaur, his maternal aunt had come to them. He further stated that after the murder was committed by his father, he took him outside in an esteem car, where his Bua Nindo Kaur @ Manpreet Kaur and his Fuffad Pal Singh were present along with driver whose name was Babbi. The clothes of his father were stained with blood. He was told by his Bua not to disclose the occurrence to anybody. He remained at Fakarsar for 7-8 days and thereafter his maternal grand-father and maternal grand-mother took him along with the help of police.
The other statements given by the prosecution witnesses are formal in nature.
In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused-appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -6- appearing against him and impleaded false implication. He stated that he was married with Charanjit Kaur-deceased and Gurlal Singh and Gursewak Singh are his sons. His relations with his wife were cordial. On the night of incident, Kaur Singh, Mechanic of Tarkhan Wala along with his family, who was one of his tenant in first floor, where the alleged occurrence had taken place, had heard the noise of 'thief thief' and 'Marta Marta' upon which he raised Lalkara and came on the ground floor and on seeing him three unknown persons ran away from the place of occurrence. He found Charanjit Kaur was lying seriously injured. Police was informed immediately after the occurrence at Police Station Raman, which is just two furlongs away from his house and Police came on the spot after mid-night. He further stated that the case has been registered against him in order to usurp his property, as he is the only male member of his family having no brother and his parents had already died.
In his defence, the accused-appellant has also examined DW-1 Kaur Singh, who stated that he had taken the upper storey of the house of Jaspal Singh on rent in April 2006. In his cross-examination, he stated that he cannot produce any rent deed nor show any receipt regarding the payment of rent. He stated that he left the rented house on 01.10.2006 and that he was residing alone in the house.
After going through the entire evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted Jaspal Singh @ Jassa under Section 302 IPC for life, whereas acquitted Nindo Kaur @ Manpreet Kaur and her husband namely Pal Singh, as roles attributed to them were not proved.
Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -7-
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that there was inordinate delay in lodging of FIR. The incident took place in the intervening night of 27/28.09.2006 at 12:30 am and the Police Station was at the distance of two furlongs from the place of occurrence and the FIR Ex.PF/1 was registered at 28.09.2006 at 9:10 am. Sukhwinder Kaur was not present at the time of occurrence. As per the statement of the appellant under Section 313 Cr.PC., it was Kaur Singh, who was living on the first floor of the house as tenant in which Charanjit Kaur was residing on the date of occurrence and informed him about the incident on his mobile phone. He heard an alarm at mid night 'Chor Chor' and 'Marta Marta' and then he saw three persons escaping from the house. Kaur Singh while appearing as DW-1 has given statement to the same effect.
After going through the entire evidence, we find that the presence of PW-2 Sukhwinder Kaur has not been doubted by the defence during the course of her cross examination. Initially, while appearing as PW-2 on 09.01.2007, Sukhwinder Kaur has denied the suggestion that Kaur Singh alongwith his family was a tenant in the upper portion of the house. Thereafter, the prosecution moved an application to summon Gurlal son of the deceased as a witness. Such application was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge on 23.01.2007. Thereafter, PW-2 Sukhwinder Kaur was again examined on 12.09.2007 and in her cross-examination she categorically stated that the first floor of the house was not on rent at the time of occurrence. PW-2 Sukhwinder Kaur has not even been suggested that she was not present in the house of deceased-Charanjit Kaur since Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -8- 25.09.2006. While appearing in the witness-box, PW-2 Sukhwinder Kaur has remained consistent with her earlier deposition (Ex.PD), the basis of FIR, that she had come to the house of the deceased along with her two children and was an eye witness to the incident, when accused entered the house by breaking the lock of the door and had inflicted injuries on the neck of the deceased with dagger and then she had died within few minutes. Such fact corroborates the medical evidence produced by PW-1 Dr. Vijay Kumar, when he deposed that probable time between the injuries and death was within a few minutes. DW.1 Kaur Singh has deposed about the events, which were not put to the prosecution witnesses at all.
Ex.PO is the disclosure statement of the appellant in respect of concealment of dagger, which was used by him while committing the murder of Charanjit Kaur. Pursuant to such statement, the accused-appellant got recovered such dagger from the disclosed place i.e. from the market committee water works garden, by pointing out the same. Such dagger was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PR. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is Ex.PV is in respect of knife recovered from the place of occurrence soon after the incident. As per the opinion given by PW-1 Dr. Vijay Kumar, the death was caused due to injuries on the chest larynx and trachea were cut through and through. The injuries would be result of any sharp edged weapon and there was no penetrate or stab wound. As per ocular version of the eye witness Sukhwinder Kaur-PW-2 and Gurlal Singh PW-5 coupled with the medical opinion, the allegation of the prosecution that the accused-appellant had committed Crl. Appeal No. 449-DB of 2008 (O&M) -9- murder of his wife Charanjit Kaur is clearly made out. It will not be out of place to mention that evidence given by Gurlal Singh PW-5 son of Jaspal Singh @ Jassa cannot be discarded as no child will depose against his father that his father had committed the murder of his mother. The statement of the child witness is that of truthful witness deposing graphically about the manner of occurrence. The learned trial court has examined entire evidence in correct perspective and that no part of evidence has been ignored.
In view of the above discussions, we uphold the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the learned trial Court.
Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed.
(HEMANT GUPTA) (RITU BAHRI)
JUDGE JUDGE
20.02.2013
Atul/Vimal