Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Budhi Singh vs State Of H.P. on 22 September, 2016
Bench: S.A. Bobde, Ashok Bhushan
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1016 OF 2009
BUDHI SINGH .....APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF H.P. ....RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
The appellant, aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, is before us with the leave of the Court. The appellant was put on trial for commission of offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the 'IPC') read with section 25 of the Arms Act. The learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, by judgment and order dated 21.8.2002 passed in Sessions Trial No.25 of 2001, found the appellant guilty of the offences and sentenced him to undergo (i) life imprisonment under section 302 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year, and (ii) rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under section 25 of the Arms Act and to pay a Signature Not Verified fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to Digitally signed by SANJAY KUMAR Date: 2016.10.20 16:55:59 IST suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The amount of Reason: fine was ordered to be paid to the heirs of deceased Raju Ram. The sentences imposed on the accused-appellant have 2 been directed to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred an appeal before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh.
The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 15.3.2005 passed in Criminal Appeal No.599 of 2002, affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by the Sessions Judge, Mandi. Hence, the present appeal.
The prosecution case is that the appellant committed murder of one Raju Ram by a shot fired with muzzle loading gun on the intervening night of the occurrence. The said muzzle loading gun along with its iron rod have been recovered by the police. The medical evidence shows that there was a circular wound over the left side of umbilicus which was about 1” in diameter and the surrounding abdomen skin was charred with burns measuring 4” in diameter. The wound was also charred with burns caused by gun powder with burnt surrounding tissue. Rectus muscle on the left side was found burnt and charred. Peritoneium was found open. The intestines were found torn and charred at many places. The deceased had died due to hemorrhage leading to heamoharric shock and cardio respiratory failure.
Before the shooting, there was an altercation between the deceased and the accused at the Tea Stall of one Puran Chand (PW-12) at Jhatingari, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. Apparently, the 3 deceased Raju Ram had requested the accused to return his sleepers of Deodar borrowed by him whereupon the accused became angry and started to abuse and manhandle the deceased Raju Ram. PW-12 Puran Chand then asked the accused to leave the shop. The accused-appellant threatened them to set the shop on fire or he would shoot them with a gun. Thereafter, the accused left the shop and proceeded to his house in village Sila Sawad. At about 10.30 P.M., these persons i.e. PW-12 Puran Chand, PW-4 Amar Nath and the deceased Raju Ram, started going to village Sila Sawad and when they reached at a place known as Labain, the accused appeared from the upper side of the path armed with a gun. The accused aimed the gun towards them and directed them to stand in a queue. PW-12 Puran Chand and PW-4 Amar Nath raised the alarm and started running towards the down side of the path. In the meanwhile, the accused fired a gun shot. The gun shot resulted in the death of Raju Ram who was accompanied by PW-12 Puran Chand and PW-4 Amar Nath on the intervening night of the occurrence.
Further, the case of the prosecution is that at the time of incident, PW-11 Kamla Devi had gone out of her house to relieve herself when she heard the cries of some person. She informed her husband and other villagers viz., PW-2 Guddu Ram and PW-6 Gopal Singh. PW-2 Guddu Ram and PW-3 Parkash Chand came to the spot of the incident and found Raju Ram lying on a path in an injured 4 condition. On being inquired, Raju Ram told them that Budhi Singh @ Baina (accused) had fired gun shot at him when he was accompanying PW-12 Puran Chand and PW-4 Amar Nath. The information of the occurrence was sent to the police station and a case under section 302 of IPC and section 25 of the Arms Act was registered against the accused. After usual investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet and the accused person was committed to the Court of Sessions to face the trial. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. We have gone through the entire evidence with the assistance of Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as amicus and also of Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State and found that the evidence of PW-12 Puran Chand and PW-4 Amar Nath, and the dying declaration made by the deceased to two witnesses viz., PW-2 Guddu Ram and PW-3 Parkash Chand, are sufficient to maintain the conviction of the accused-appellant. In his testimony, PW-4 Amar Nath, who was present at the shop of PW-12 Puran Chand, narrated the altercation between the accused and the deceased Raju Ram. He stated that the accused threatened to set the shop on fire or to shoot them with a gun in case they saved themselves. Thereafter, while going to his village, PW-4 Amar Nath along with PW-12 Puran Chand and the deceased Raju Ram reached the place known as 'Labain', the accused appeared 5 there from the upper side with a gun. At this point of time, this witness along with PW-12 Puran Chand ran away. On the following morning, this witness came to know that Raju Ram had died due to gun shot. There is nothing in the cross-examination of this witness which cast a doubt about his credibility.
The deposition of PW-12 Puran Chand is similar to that of PW-4 Amar Nath since he was accompanied by PW-4 Amar Nath and the deceased Raju Ram, while they were going to their village on the date of occurrence. He had narrated the incident in the same way as PW-4 Amar Nath narrated it. His testimony has also not been shaken in cross-examination.
Dying Declaration When the deceased Raju Ram was lying on the road side, his cries were heard by one Kamla Devi (PW-11) who had gone to relieve herself. She went back to her house and informed her husband and other persons viz., PW-2 Guddu Ram and PW-6 Gopal Singh, who came to the spot. PW-2 Guddu Ram and PW-3 Parkash Chand went to the place of occurrence and found Raju Ram lying on the path in an injured condition with bleeding from his abdomen. When they enquired from Raju Ram about the incident, he said that Budhi Singh @ Baina – accused/appellant had fired a gun shot at him. He also stated that all this happened 6 when he was accompanied by PW-12 Puran Chand and PW-4 Amar Nath. PW-2 Guddu Ram and PW-3 Parkash Chand also stated that after 10 to 15 minutes, Raju Ram succumbed to his injuries.
The statement of PW-3 Parkash Chand is substantially the same. In his testimony, he stated that thereafter, other villagers came to the spot and they remained by the side of dead body throughout the night. The statements of this witness have not been shaken in the cross-examination.
We see no reason to doubt the veracity of the statements of all these witnesses.
Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-State, relied on the statement of the accused recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where the accused admitted the altercation with the deceased Raju Ram, that took place at the shop of PW-12 Puran Chand. The accused-appellant stated in the said statement that in the scuffle, his cloths were also torn.
There is merit in the contention of Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent-State that though the accused may not have admitted that, he later on got a gun and shot the deceased. The accused clearly admitted the incident immediately preceding. This indeed indicates that the initial fight was taken place between the accused and the deceased.
7
Having regard to the evidence on record referred to above, we see no reason to allow the appeal which is, accordingly, dismissed.
By order dated 4.10.2010, this Court granted bail to the appellant. His bail bonds are cancelled. He is directed to surrender forthwith before the concerned jail authorities to undergo remainder of his sentence.
We record our appreciation to the assistance rendered to this Court by Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Amicus Curiae.
....................J [S. A. BOBDE] ....................J [ASHOK BHUSHAN] NEW DELHI;
SEPTEMBER 22, 2016.
8
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No.1016/2009
BUDHI SINGH Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF H.P. Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents and office report) Date : 22/09/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Appellant(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv.
Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati,(A.C.) Ms. Mehul Singh, Adv.
Mr. T. Gopal, Adv.
Mr. (Pt.) Shailendra Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma,Adv.
Ms. Parul Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order. By order dated 4.10.2010, this Court granted bail to the appellant. His bail bonds are cancelled. He is directed to surrender forthwith before the concerned jail authorities to undergo remainder of his sentence. As a sequel to the above, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar-II) (Indu Pokhriyal)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed Order is placed on the file)