Punjab-Haryana High Court
Onkar Singh Etc vs State Of Pb.Etc on 5 April, 2019
Author: Harinder Singh Sidhu
Bench: Harinder Singh Sidhu
CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(1) CRA-D-786-DB of 2003
Onkar Singh and another
.... APPELLANTS
Versus
State of Punjab
..... RESPONDENT
(2) CRR-177 of 2004
Varinder Mann Singh
.... PETITIONER
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..... RESPONDENTS
Reserved on : 03.04.2019
Date of decision : 05.04.2019
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU
Present: Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, with
Ms. Kanika Ahuja, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr. S.P.S. Tinna, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Ms. Simranjeet Kaur, Advocate,
for the petitioner in CRR-177 of 2004.
***
RAJIV SHARMA, J.
1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in CRA- D-786-DB of 2003 and CRR-177 of 2004, therefore, these are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment.
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 1 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 2-
2. The appeal and criminal revision are instituted against judgment and order dated 20.09.2003, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Hoshiarpur, in SC No. 74/FTC/2002/2003 dated 29.04.2002/29.05.2003. Appellants Onkar Singh and Piare Lal, along with co-accused, namely Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh were charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants were convicted and sentenced as under :-
Onkar Singh U/s 302 IPC To undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of ` 1,000/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.
U/s 323/34 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
Piare Lal U/s 302/34 IPC To undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of ` 1,000/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.
U/s 323 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Appellant No.2 Piare Lal died during the pendency of this appeal. Copy of his death certificate has been taken on record. Appeal qua him stood abated vide order dated 03.04.2019.
3. Co-accused Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh were acquitted of the charges framed against them.
4. CRR-177 of 2004 has been filed by the complainant seeking enhancement of sentence imposed upon appellants Onkar Singh and Piare For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 2 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 3-
Lal, and also for grant of compensation to the legal heirs of deceased Gaupal Singh. Acquittal of accused Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh has also been challenged.
5. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 27.12.2001 at about 1.30 PM, Varinder Mann Singh (PW.1) and his father Gaupal Singh were present in their house. They received a message that accused Harjit Singh and Onkar Singh along with their servant Anil, Roshan and Piare Lal mason were laying a lentil on the wall of their haveli. Complainant Varinder Mann Singh along with his father and mother Surinder Kaur (PW.2) went to their haveli. They tried to restrain the accused from laying lentil on their wall. The accused attacked them with common intention. Accused Onkar Singh gave a kirpan blow on the head of Gaupal Singh. He fell on the ground. Thereafter, Onkar Singh gave another kirpan blow on the right hand of Gaupal Singh. Then accused Harjit Singh, Anil and Roshan caught hold of complainant Varinder Mann Singh. Accused Piare Lal gave a spade blow on the head of the complainant from the blunt side of the spade. The complainant and his mother Surinder Kaur raised alarm. Manjit Singh came on the spot. The injured were removed to Civil Hospital, Hoshiarpur. Gaupal Singh was referred to DMC, Ludhiana. The motive behind the occurrence was stated to be that the accused were laying a lentil on the wall belonging to the complainant. Statement of complainant Varinder Mann Singh was recorded vide Ex.PA. Gaupal Singh died. The body was sent for post-mortem examination. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.
6. The prosecution has examined a number of witnesses. The For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 3 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 4- accused were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the case of the prosecution.
7. The appellants were convicted and sentenced, as noticed above. Co-accused Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh were acquitted. Hence, this appeal has been filed by the appellants against their conviction and sentence. Complainant Varinder Mann Singh has filed the criminal revision seeking enhancement of sentence of the appellants and grant of compensation, as well as against acquittal of co-accused Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Onkar Singh has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. Learned counsel appearing for the State has supported the judgment and order of the learned Court below. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has argued that the sentence of appellant Onkar Singh be enhanced and family of the deceased be awarded adequate compensation. She has further argued that the learned trial court has erred in acquitting co- accused Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh.
9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment and record very carefully.
10. PW.1 Varinder Mann Singh testified that on 27.12.2001 at about 1.30 PM, he along with his mother Surinder Kaur and father Gaupal Singh was present in their house. They came to know that accused Harjit Singh, Onkar Singh, Roshan, Anil Kumar and Piare Lal were raising wall on the common wall of their haveli. They were about to lay lentil. They went to their haveli. They prevented the accused from raising wall. Accused Onkar For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 4 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 5- Singh was armed with a kirpan. He gave a kirpan blow on the head of Gaupal Singh. Gaupal Singh fell on the ground. Onkar Singh gave another kirpan blow on the right hand of Gaupal Singh. Thereafter, accused Harjit Singh, Anil Kumar, Roshan and Piare Lal caught hold of this witness. Accused Piare Lal gave a spade blow from its reverse side on the right side of his head. His mother Surinder Kaur raised alarm. The injured were taken to Civil Hospital, Hoshiarpur. His father Gaupal Singh was referred to DMC Hospital at Ludhiana. The motive for causing the injuries was that the accused were raising wall on the wall of the haveli of the complainant party. They prevented the accused. In his cross-examination, he admitted that their haveli adjoins the house of accused Harjit Singh on the one side and their residential house was also adjoining other side of the house of Harjit Singh. His father was removed to hospital in a car along with him. His father was referred to DMC Hospital. He also admitted that they had not convened Panchayat. There was duel between the parties.
11. PW.2 Surinder Kaur supported the version of PW.1 Varinder Mann Singh. She also deposed that on 27.12.2011, when they went to the spot, the accused were laying lentil on their wall. Accused Onkar Singh gave kirpan blow on the head of Gaupal Singh. He fell down. Onkar Singh gave another kirpan blow on his right hand. Accused Harjit Singh, Anil Kumar and Roshan caught hold of her son. Accused Piare Lal gave a spade blow on the right side of his head. In her cross-examination, she categorically deposed that she did not accompany her husband to the hospital.
12. PW.3 Dr. Ashok Kumar Sood medico legally examined Gaupal For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 5 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 6- Singh and Varinder Mann Singh on 27.12.2001. He noticed following injuries on the body of Gaupal Singh :-
1. On the left side of head 3" from the left ear irregular skin laceration lying obliquely. Bone deep 1 ½" long edge lacerated irregular and swollen contused and margin abrated laceration was stitched and advised CT scan and surgical opinion was sought.
2. ½" long laceration on right hand near the thumb oblique superficial and bleeding. Patient was given the treatment and referred to DMC, Ludhiana at 6 PM on the request on 27.12.2001.
The nature of weapon was blunt. Probable duration of injuries was within six hours. He noticed following injuries on the body of Varinder Mann Singh :-
1. 1 ½" long laceration on the right side of head in the parieto-occipital region lying almost obliquely. The edges were irregular, the bleeding was present. Marginal contused and patient complained of pain. Laceration was skin deep. Advised X-ray opinion and patient was admitted in surgical ward vide MRD No. 8064 dated 27.12.2001.
The kind of weapon used was blunt. Probable duration of injuries was within six hours.
13. PW.4 Dr. Avnish Sood conducted the post-mortem examination on the body of Gaupal Singh on 29.12.2001. He found following injuries on the body :-
1. Stitched wound 2" in size present on the head in left parietal region above the superior surface of pinna 5 cm.
On dissection there was linear fracture of the skull bone For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 6 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 7- extending antero posteriorly beneath the injury and bone was depressed, there was dual rupture and cranial vault was full of clotted blood with laceration of the brain matter.
2. There was stitched wound at the base of right thumb, 1"
in size underlying muscle and bone normal.
The cause of death was fracture of cranial vault with injury to underlying membrane and brain leading to death. The injuries were ante-mortem in nature.
14. PW.5 SI Satnam Singh testified that he moved an application Ex.PD on 27.12.2001 regarding fitness of Varinder Mann Singh to make a statement. The doctor declared him fit to make statement vide opinion Ex.PD/1. FIR was registered. He went to spot and prepared rough site plan Ex.PN. He went to DMC Ludhiana. He prepared inquest report Ex.PL. He interrogated accused Piare Lal on 04.01.2002. Piare Lal disclosed that he had kept concealed a spade underneath the cot in his residential room. He also interrogated accused Onkar Singh on 04.01.2002. Onkar Singh made disclosure statement that he had kept concealed kirpan in the room. Spade and kirpan were got recovered by Piare Lal and Onkar Singh, respectively.
15. The case of the prosecution is that Varinder Mann Singh (PW.1), his mother Surinder Kaur (PW.2) and his father Gaupal Singh were present in their house. They received information that the accused were laying lentil on the wall of their haveli. They went to the spot and requested the accused not to lay lentil. Appellant Onkar Singh inflicted kirpan blow on the head of Gaupal Singh. He fell down. Onkar Singh gave another kirpan blow on his right hand. Varinder Mann Singh was also inflicted For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 7 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 8- injury with spade by Piare Lal. It has come in the statement of PW.3 Dr. Ashok Kumar Sood that nature of weapon was blunt qua the injuries received by Gaupal Singh as well as by PW.1 Varinder Mann Singh. The recovery of spade and kirpan was on the basis of disclosure statements made by appellants Piare Lal and Onkar Singh. The police has not shown in the site plan the place where the lentil was being raised on the wall.
16. The incident had happened, when PW.1 Varinder Mann Singh, PW.2 Surinder Kaur and Gaupal Singh had gone to the spot. It has come in the evidence that altercation took place between the parties. It was not a pre- meditated act. Thereafter, injuries were inflicted upon Gaupal Singh and Varinder Mann Singh. Though appellant Onkar Singh had no intention to kill Gaupal Singh, but he had the knowledge that even if the injuries are caused from the blunt side of kirpan on his head, these would prove fatal. The kirpan and spade were not sent for Forensic Science Laboratory examination. In case, appellant Onkar Singh had the intention to kill Gaupal Singh, he should have inflicted blow from the sharp edged side of the kirpan.
17. In view of the above discussion, appellant Onkar Singh is liable to be convicted under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.
18. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction of appellant Onkar Singh under Section 302 IPC is converted to Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code. The State is directed to produce him in Court on 23.04.2019 to be heard on quantum of sentence under Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code.
19. The prayer of the petitioner in revision petition with regard to For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 8 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 ::: CRA-D-786-DB of 2003 - 9- enhancement of sentence of Onkar Singh does not survive. The petitioner - complainant has not made out any case for grant of compensation to the family of the deceased. The trial court has correctly appreciated the evidence while acquitting co-accused, namely Anil Kumar, Roshan Tirki and Harjit Singh. Hence, there is no merit in the revision and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
( RAJIV SHARMA )
JUDGE
April 05, 2019 ( HARINDER SINGH SIDHU )
ndj JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable Yes
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-786-DB-2003 9 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 28-04-2019 18:07:51 :::