Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jasbir Singh vs State Of Punjab on 31 January, 2010
Author: T.P.S. Mann
Bench: T.P.S. Mann
I N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. 1460-SB of 2002
Date of Decision : January 29, 2010
Jasbir Singh
....Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN
Present : Mr. H.N.S. Gill, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. P.S. Grewal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
T.P.S. MANN, J.(Oral)
By one order, this Court intends to dispose of the present appeal filed by Jasbir Singh and Criminal appeal No.1800-SB of 2002 filed by Jagmail Singh, whereby both of them have challenged their conviction and sentence, as recorded by Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala on 16.8.2002.
According to the prosecution, on 7.7.2001 at about 8.30 P.M. complainant Lala Ram was seeing off his brother Mast Ram when in the meantime both the accused came there and abused him. Jagmail Singh accused told the complainant that he would be taught a lesson for having an evil eye on his sister. They put a piece of cloth around the neck of the complainant and started throttling him. They threw him on the floor. Jagmail Singh accused then over-powered the complainant and removed his underwear. He then took out a knife from his fold and used the same in amputating the testicles of complainant-Lala Ram. Both the accused Criminal Appeal No. 1460-SB of 2002 -2- also gave beatings to Lala Ram and they then ran away from the spot. Even while running away, they threatened the complainant that in case he narrated the incident to anyone, he would not be spared. According to the complainant, he was afraid of the accused as while leaving the spot, they had further threatened him that in case anyone enquired from him as to how the incident had taken place, he should only say that he suffered electric shock. He was also told by the doctors, who attended upon him that on account of amputation of his testicles he had become impotent. He then thought it appropriate to inform the police and on 20.7.2001, he made a statement before the police, on the basis of which FIR No.193 was registered at Police Station, Barnala under Sections 307/34/452 IPC. Following the registration of the FIR, the investigation was conducted by SI Darshan Singh, who took into possession the treatment record of the complainant from Civil Hospital, Barnala. Both the accused were arrested. From the possession of Jagmail Singh accused, a knife was recovered. Even the piece of cloth used by the accused in throttling the neck of the complainant, was taken into possession from Jasbir Singh accused. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the investigation final report was submitted. Following commitment of the case, the accused were charged under Sections 307/34/452 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In support of its case, the prosecution examined PW1 Malkiat Singh, PW2 Lala Ram, PW3 Mast Ram, PW4 ASI Jaswant Singh, PW5 Dev Raj, Draftsman, PW6 Dr. K.G. Singla and PW7 SI Darshan Singh.
When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, both the accused pleaded false implication. According to Jagmail Singh accused, the complainant was biased against him as he was suspected of having an Criminal Appeal No. 1460-SB of 2002 -3- evil eye on his sister. In defence, the accused examined DW1 Jarnail Singh.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence available on the record, the trial Court believed the prosecution case. Accordingly, Jagmail Singh-appellant was held guilty under Section 307 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default thereof, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. Jasbir Singh accused was convicted under Sections 307/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default thereof, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. Both the accused were also convicted under Section 452 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default thereof, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
At the outset, learned State counsel has produced the affidavit dated 25.1.2010 of Superintendent, District Jail, Sangrur, wherein he stated that Jagmail Singh-appellant was released from the jail on 21.6.2005 on completion of his sentence. The said affidavit is taken on record.
I have heard learned counsel for Jasbir Singh-appellant and the learned State counsel and with their able assistance perused the evidence.
Complainant-Lala Ram PW2 has specifically stated that both the accused had come to his place when he was seeing off his brother Criminal Appeal No. 1460-SB of 2002 -4- Mast Ram. They started abusing him. Jagmail Singh accused stated that the complainant be taught a lesson for having an evil eye on his sister. At this, both the accused put a piece of cloth around his neck and started throttling him. When he fell on the floor, it was Jagmail Singh accused, who removed his underwear and after taking out a knife from his own fold, amputated the testicles of the complainant. The testimony of complainant Lala Ram is corroborated by that of his brother Mast Ram PW3. Malkiat Singh, while appearing as PW1, informed the Court that the accused had come to him and made extra judicial confession. The medical evidence corroborates the prosecution case as there was a laceration of the size 10 cms. x 6 cms. over scrotum with skin loss haematoma. On evacuation of haematoma, bleeding points were ligated on both the sides and both the testes were also found missing. Apart from that there was an abrasion on the left eye brow and whitish necrotic area over right palm. The complainant was medico legally examined on 8.7.2001 at about 12.15 A.M. in Civil Hospital, Barnala. According to the doctor, the lacerated wound over the scrotum was on account of wielding of knife. He specifically ruled out injury No.1 being the result of electric shock. Under these circumstances, the trial Court was justified in coming to the conclusion that while amputating both the testicles of the person by using knife, the accused must have the knowledge that the same would endanger the life of the victim and cause his death. Therefore, no case is made out for any interference in the conviction of the appellants.
Learned counsel for Jasbir Singh-appellant submitted that his client has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution since July, 2001. He was not said to armed with any weapon. It was his co-accused Jagmail Singh, who had wielded the knife for amputating the testicles of Criminal Appeal No. 1460-SB of 2002 -5- the complainant. Out of the maximum sentence of four years imposed upon him, he has already undergone a period of nine months. Therefore, his sentence of imprisonment be reduced to that already undergone by him.
Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer by submitting that both the accused had come together to the spot where the complainant was seeing off his brother. They first abused him and then tried to throttle him by putting a piece of cloth around his neck. One of them, namely, Jagmail Singh then took out a knife from his fold and used the same in amputating the testicles of the complainant. It being a heinous offence, Jasbir Singh-appellant does not deserve any concession in the matter of sentence of imprisonment.
The occurrence in question had taken place on 7.7.2001. The FIR was registered on 20.7.2001. Sword of criminal prosecution has remained hanging on the head of Jasbir Singh-appellant since then. He was not shown to be armed with any weapon. As per the prosecution, he, alongwith his co-accused, had put a piece of cloth around the neck of the complainant and throttled him. Despite the same, no injury was found around the neck of the complainant. It was injury No.1 attributed to Jagmail Singh-appellant which was found to be falling within the ambit of Section 307 IPC.
Learned State counsel has also produced another affidavit dated 25.1.2010 by Superintendent, District Jail, Sangrur, wherein it stands mentioned that Jasbir Singh-appellant remained in jail as an under-trial for one month and three days and, thereafter, as a convict for seven months and twelve days. Thus, he has undergone a substantive Criminal Appeal No. 1460-SB of 2002 -6- sentence of eight months and fifteen days out of the maximum sentence of four years imposed upon him. Under these circumstances, it would serve the ends of justice by not sending Jasbir Singh behind the bars, once again, for serving the remaining sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him. At the same time, he can be directed to pay an additional amount of Rs.10,000/- as fine so as to compensate complainant-Lala Ram.
In view of the above, the conviction of Jasbir Singh-appellant under Sections 307/34 and 452 IPC is maintained. His sentence of imprisonment is, however, reduced to that already undergone by him. However, in addition to the fine already imposed upon him by the trial Court, he shall deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- as fine with Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur within three months from today. In the event of Jasbir Singh-appellant not depositing the said amount within the stipulated period, he shall be required to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The said amount of Rs.10,000/-, on realisation, be paid to complainant Lala Ram as compensation. Criminal Appeal No.1460-SB of 2002 filed on behalf of Jasbir Singh is, accordingly, disposed of. Criminal Appeal No.1800-SB of 2002 filed by Jagmail Singh has been rendered as infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.
( T.P.S. MANN )
January 29, 2010 JUDGE
satish