Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab vs Sukhwinder Singh on 10 May, 2019
Author: Harinder Singh Sidhu
Bench: Harinder Singh Sidhu
CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRA-D-789-DB of 2007
Reserved on : 06.05.2019
Date of decision : 10.05.2019
State of Punjab
.... APPELLANT
Versus
Sukhwinder Singh alias Binder Singh
..... RESPONDENT
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU
Present: Mr. S.P.S. Tinna, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Mr. P.S. Hundal, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. Jashandeep Singh, Advocate,
for the respondent.
***
RAJIV SHARMA, J.
1. This appeal is instituted against judgment dated 01.02.2007, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, in Sessions Case No.154 dated 18.09.2000, whereby respondent Sukhwinder Singh alias Binder Singh, who along with co-accused was charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302/364/342/201/148 read with Section 149 IPC, has been acquitted of the charges framed against him.
2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 12.03.2000, Hari Singh complainant lodged FIR stating therein that on 11.03.2000 at 6.30 PM, he was irrigating his fields from the electric motor (tubewell). He went near Tibe Wala field, which was at a distance of about two killas from For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 1 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -2- the said electric motor, to divert the water. He noticed Pal Singh son of Anokh Singh armed with toki, Billu son of Mukhtiar Singh armed with sota, Binder Singh armed with kirch, Raja Singh armed with gandasa, Kaka Singh armed with toki, Gurnam Singh armed with kirpan, Kala Singh armed with datar, Gurdial Singh armed with toki and Teja Singh armed with kahi coming from the back side of the electric motor. They raised lalkara. They encircled and caught hold him. In the meantime, his father Banta Singh armed with his 12 bore gun came at the spot and asked the accused in a loud voice what was happening. He was not spared. In order to save him, his father fired a shot in air from his gun. The accused did not spare him. Then, his father again fired shot towards the accused to save him from them. He could not narrate who was hit by the bullet. He was let out by the accused. He ran towards the fields. All the accused over-powered his father Banta Singh with his licensed gun. They took him away with an intention to murder him. He spent whole of the night in the fields. In the next morning, he came to know that his father had not returned since the last evening. He searched for his father. The motive of crime was that for the last about 30 years, they had a dispute with regard to land measuring 2 killas 6 kanalas with the accused party. A case regarding the said dispute was pending in the court of Commissioner, Ferozepur. He accompanied by his brother Harinder Singh went to Police Station Mehna to report the matter. The FIR under Sections 364/342/148/149 IPC was registered. Balwant Singh son of Ram Singh came to Police Station Mehna and told that he had seen the dead body of Banta Singh near the cremation ground of village Kapure. Section 302 IPC was inserted. The dead body of Banta Singh was found lying in the For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 2 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -3- cremation ground. The dead body was sent to Civil Hospital, Moga, for autopsy. The matter was investigated and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.
3. Respondent Sukhwinder Singh alias Binder Singh along with other co-accused was charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 302/364/342/201/148 read with Section 149 IPC. During trial, he was declared proclaimed offender. His co-accused were separately tried. Co-accused Pal Singh, Tejwinder Singh alias Teja Singh, Balbir Singh alias Balvinder Singh alias Billu, Gurdial Singh, Sukhdev Singh alias Kaka, Joginder Singh alias Kalu, Gurnam Singh alias Gama and Rajwinder Singh alias Raja were convicted and sentenced for the aforesaid offences, vide judgment and order dated 15.09.2003, while co-accused Tara Singh had been acquitted. The respondent surrendered before the trial court on 10.08.2006. He was separately tried.
4. The prosecution examined PW.1 Hari Singh and PW.2 Harinder Singh. Thereafter, learned Additional Public Prosecutor made a statement that he did not want to lead any further evidence. The remaining prosecution evidence already adduced in the main trial qua co-accused of the respondent be read as prosecution evidence in this case. The respondent also suffered statement relinquishing his right to cross-examine the other witnesses already examined in the trial of this case concluded earlier.
5. Statement of the respondent was also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the case of the prosecution.
6. The respondent was acquitted by the trial court. Hence, this appeal.
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 3 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -4-
7. Learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the respondent. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has supported the judgment of the learned Court below.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment and record very carefully.
9. PW.1 Hari Singh has testified the manner in which the incident had taken place on 11.03.2000, when he was diverting water to the fields. According to him, respondent Sukhwinder Singh alias Billu was armed with kirch. Remaining accused were armed with toki, sota, kirpan, datar, kahi and gandasa. They were hiding. All of them encircled him. His father came on the spot. He was armed with 12 bore gun. He asked the accused to spare him. He was not separated. His father fired a shot in air. He was not spared. Thereafter, he fired straight towards the persons who had already faced trial. He did not know who was hit by the bullet. He was spared. He ran towards the fields. His father was taken away by the accused. He spent night in the fields. On the next day morning, he came to know that his father had not returned to the house since the last evening. The motive behind the occurrence was that on 21.08.1999, their fields were handed over to Gurdial Singh by the revenue department by ploughing their land. The occurrence had taken place in the fields, which were their ancestral property and were being irrigated. He went to police station. The spot was inspected by the police. Blood stained earth was lifted vide recovery memo Ex.P2. In his cross-examination, he categorically admitted that the respondent along with four other persons was not challaned and was placed in column No.2 For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 4 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -5- vide enquiry made by DSP Paramdeep Singh. He voluntarily stated that the DSP had declared the respondent innocent by taking bribe. He could not narrate about the amount allegedly paid to the local police.
10. PW.2 Harinder Singh deposed that on 11.03.2000, his brother Hari Singh and his father went to the fields for irrigation purpose. His brother Hari Singh informed him about the occurrence. He accompanied his brother to the police station. The dead body of his father was lying in the cremation ground.
11. Mohinder Singh, whose statement was recorded as PW.3 during the trial of co-accused, testified that about three years back, at 8.30 PM, he was returning from his fields to his village after daily routine. His fields were situated on the passage which leads to village Kokariwala. When he reached near the house of Pal Singh accused, he heard noise. Pal Singh, Balbir Singh alias Billu, Teja Singh, Tara Singh, Gurdial Singh were saying that they will not spare Banta Singh, as he had fired a shot at Kaka Singh. Thereafter, he went to his house to take his meals. At about 10.30 PM, he again went to his fields to have a supervision as stray cows used to enter the fields. He was coming back and reached near the cremation ground. He saw Teja Singh, Tara Singh, Gurdial Singh, Pal Singh and Balbir Singh alias Billu accused throwing the dead body of Banta Singh. In cross-examination, he admitted that his statement was recorded after 1 ¾ months of the occurrence. He did not tell any body in the village about the incident till he made the statement before the police.
12. Gursewak Singh, who appeared as PW.4 during trial of co- accused, prepared the rough site plans Ex.PH/1, Ex.PH/2 and Ex.PH/3 of For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 5 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -6- the place of occurrence and places of recoveries.
13. Sohan Singh Patwari is the material witness. He appeared as PW.8 during trial of the co-accused in Sessions Case No. 154 dated 18.09.2000. He deposed that on 21.08.1999, he received warrant of possession from the court of Shri Kuldeep Singh, Tehsildar, Moga, for delivering possession of land to Gurdial Singh and others. He along with Mukhraj Kanungo went to the spot. With the help of the police, they got delivered possession of land to Gurdial Singh and others from Banta Singh. He also proved copy of Roznamcha, Ex.PO, regarding delivery of possession of the land.
14. Inspector Satnam Singh was the Investigating Officer. He appeared as PW.10 during trial of the co-accused. According to him, on 12.03.2000 at about 9.30 AM, Hari Singh had made statement Ex.PD. FIR was registered. Subsequently, Section 302 IPC was also inserted in the FIR. He went to the cremation ground, where the dead body of Banta Singh was lying. He prepared inquest report Ex.PB. The dead body was sent for post mortem examination. He prepared rough site plan Ex.PT of the place where the dead body was lying. He lifted simple and blood stained soil after making parcels from the cremation ground. He also recovered one turban and a pair of chappals from the field of Balbir Singh. The accused were produced before him on 12.04.2000. Accused Rajwinder Singh made disclosure statement, Ex.PX, that he had buried a gandasa in the room. He could get it recovered. The gandasa was got recovered by him. Accused Joginder Singh also made a disclosure statement, Ex.PY, on the basis of which a dah was got recovered by him. Accused Pal Singh also made For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 6 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -7- disclosure statement, Ex.PZ, on the basis of which a toki was recovered. The broken 12 bore gun belonging to deceased Banta Singh was also recovered vide Ex.PBB. In his cross-examination, he admitted that gun Ex.P13 was recovered from the divider between the fields of the complainant and Gurdial Singh.
15. Dr. Sadhu Ram Mittal had conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Banta Singh. He deposed as PW.1 during trial of co- accused. According to him, the probable time between injuries and death was immediate and between death and post-mortem was between 36 to 48 hours. The cause of death was shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in an ordinary course of nature.
16. PW.1 Hari Singh has categorically stated in his statement that there were nine persons involved in the incident. The respondent was also one of them. He was armed with kirch. He also testified that his father also came on the spot armed with 12 bore gun, and fired two shots. One shot was fired in air. The second shot was fired at the accused. He escaped from the spot. He hid himself in the fields. He went to the house in the morning. Thereafter, the dead body of his father was recovered. In his cross- examination, he stated that name of the respondent was mentioned in column No.2. However, the fact of the matter is that he categorically stated that the respondent was present on the spot with kirch. PW.3 Mohinder Singh in trial of co-accused deposed that when he reached near the house of Pal Singh accused, he heard noise. Pal Singh , Balbir Singh alias Billu , Teja Singh, Tara Singh, Gurdial Singh were saying that they will not spare Banta For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 7 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -8- Singh. He had seen Teja Singh, Tara Singh, Gurdial Singh, Pal Singh and Balbir Singh alias Billu accused throwing the dead body of Banta Singh. PW.8 Sohan Singh Patwari proved handing over of possession of the disputed land to the accused party.
17. The motive behind the occurrence was that on 21.08.1999, fields of the complainant party were handed over to Gurdial Singh by the revenue department by ploughing their land, on which paddy crop was standing. The occurrence had taken place in the fields, which were their ancestral property. Complainant Hari Singh admitted that the motive was the disputed land. PW.8 Sohan Singh Patwari specifically deposed that on 21.08.1999, he had delivered possession of the disputed land to Gurdial Singh. He had proved copy of Roznamcha, Ex.PO, regarding delivery of possession of the land. The statement of PW.3 Mohinder Singh has rightly been disbelieved by the trial court during trial of co-accused.
18. It has come during trial of co-accused that the accused party had also received injuries. According to Dr. Ravinderpal Singh, who was examined by the co-accused as DW.1, co-accused Sukhdev Singh had received three injuries on his person. The injuries were dangerous to life. He had noticed penetrating wound on the right side of the chest of Sukhdev Singh. DW.2 Dr. V.J.S. Dhillon in the trial of the co-accused had medically examined Rajwinder alias Raja, Harjinder Singh and Joginder Singh alias Kalu. He had noticed injuries on their persons. Banta Singh had caused fire arm injury to co-accused Sukhdev Singh. Injuries were also inflicted on the persons of co-accused Rajwinder alias Raja, Harjinder Singh and Joginder Singh alias Kalu. Banta Singh had fired two shots at the accused from very For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 8 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:09 ::: CRA-D-789-DB of 2007 -9- close range. The injuries caused to them could result in the death. The accused had the right of private defence. It was not a pre meditated act. Rather, Banta Singh was armed with a gun and he had fired two shots, one in the air and one hit Sukhdev Singh on his chest. The accused had reasonable apprehension that they could be killed by Banta Singh. The respondent was present on the spot, as per the statement of PW.1 Hari Singh. He was also accompanying other co-accused. They all had forcibly taken away Banta Singh. They had wrongfully confined Banta Singh before killing him. They had also tried to destroy evidence by throwing the dead body of Banta Singh in the cremation ground. The respondent with common object of the co-accused had intention to kill Banta Singh. He took away Banta Singh and illegally confined him. Thus, he is liable to be convicted under Sections 304 Part I/364/342/201/148 read with Section 149 IPC.
19. In view of the above discussion, the appeal is allowed. The judgment dated 01.02.2007 is set aside. The respondent is convicted under Sections 304 Part I/364/342/201/148 read with Section 149 IPC.
20. The State is directed to produce the respondent in Court on 20.05.2019 to be heard on quantum of sentence for commission of the aforesaid offences.
( RAJIV SHARMA )
JUDGE
May 10, 2019 ( HARINDER SINGH SIDHU )
ndj JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRA-D-789-DB-2007 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU 9 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2019 14:27:10 :::