Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 19 May, 2009
Author: K.S.Garewal
Bench: K.S. Garewal
Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004
Date of decision: May 19, 2009
Jaswinder Singh ...Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GAREWAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH
Present: Mr. R.S. Ahuja, Advocate,
for the appellant.
Ms. Gurveen Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
K.S.GAREWAL, J.
Jaswinder Singh (20) faced trial for the murder of his wife Baljit Kaur @ Bali (22). He was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Faridkot, on September 2, 2004 for Baljit Kaur's murder, and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life.
On the evening of October 9, 2002 at about 5 p.m., Jaswinder Singh, his wife Baljit Kaur deceased, Baljit Kaur's brother Baltej Singh (PW-1) and sister Palli (PW-2) had gone to a drain in Sakkanwali to collect firewood. Sakkanwali was the village where two sisters of Baltej Singh-- Palli (PW-2) and Veerpal--lived with their respective husbands Pala Singh and Kala Singh. Baltej Singh (PW-1) belonged to Kacha Kalewala, about 40 Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 2 k.m. from Sakkanwali. Jaswinder Singh and Baltej Kaur belonged to Sadhanwali about 35 k.m. from Sakkanwali. Baltej Singh, Jaswinder Singh and Baljit Kaur were labourers who had gathered in Sakkanwali for doing labour work. In the evening, they had set out to the drain to collect firewood when the occurrence took place.
Jaswinder Singh and Baljit Kaur had taken the southern bank of the drain, while Baltej Singh and his sister Palli were walking along the northern bank. When Baltej Singh and Palli reached near Mohan Singh's sugarcane field they heard Baljit Kaur's screams. They crossed the bridge and went to the other side. They saw Jaswinder Singh attacking Baljit Kaur with an axe. The two eye witnesses saw the entire occurrence and within their sight Jaswinder Singh inflicted three blows on his wife's head. Baljit Kaur fell down in the watercourse with face downward. Alarm was raised by Baltej Singh and Palli. Jaswinder Singh fled from the spot alongwith the axe. When Baltej Singh and Palli went near Baljit Kaur, they found that she had died.
According to the prosecution, Baljit Kaur suspected that Jaswinder Singh had illicit relations with some women. She would stop her husband and for this reason Jaswinder Singh murdered his wife Baljit Kaur with an axe.
Baltej Singh left his sister near the dead body and returned to the village to inform Pala Singh, who also went to the spot. Baltej Singh himself proceeded to his village Kacha Kalewala to inform his parents. From his village he took ex-Sarpanch Kartar Singh alongwith him and lodged a report with Police Station Bariwala. Baltej Singh's statement was recorded at 5 a.m. The statement was sent to Police Station Sadar, Muktsar, Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 3 for registration of a case. FIR was registered at 7.05 a.m. at Police Station Sadar, Mukatsar, under Section 302 IPC. Special report sent to the Judicial Magistrate, Muktsar, was received by him at 10.30 a.m. Investigation of the case was taken up by ASI Kuldeep Singh (PW-5), P.S. Bariwala, who went to the spot. The Investigator inspected the place of occurrence, prepared a rough site plan and took up blood stained earth. After preparing inquest report of the dead body, it was sent for post-mortem. Thereafter, HC Baj Singh (PW-10) partly investigated the case.
The post-mortem was conducted by Dr. Madan Gopal Sharma (PW-6) at Civil Hospital, Muktsar. The Medical Officer found six incised wounds on the head of the deceased. Out of these, four were on the right side of the head, measuring 9 cm x 1 cm, 5 cm x 1cm, 10 cm x 1.5 cm and 4 cm x 1 cm. The underlying bones were fractured, brain matter and meninges were found cut, brain cavity was found clotted under all the four injuries. There was a fifth incised wound on the back of the head, measuring 15 cm x 1.5 cm. Under this injury as well, the underlying bone was cut, brain tissue was coming out of the wound. The sixth incised wound was on the right side of the face and neck. On dissection the underlying bone was found fractured and brain matter and meninges were found cut and clotted blood was found in the cavity. In the opinion of the medical officer, death was immediate and was due to shock and haemorrahage resulting from injuries 1 to 6, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
Jaswinder Singh was arrested on October 13, 2002. On interrogation, he made a disclosure statement which led to the recovery of the axe from elephant grass (sarkanda) on the banks of the drain. The axe Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 4 was sent for chemical examination and found to be blood stained by the Scientific Officer, Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh. On completion of the investigation, the accused was sent up for trial. At the trial, charge was framed against the accused under Section 302 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined Baltej Singh (PW-1), Palli (PW-2), HC Ranjit Singh (PW-3), ASI Nirmal Singh (PW-4), ASI Kuldeep Singh (PW-5), Dr. Madan Gopal Sharma (PW-
6), Sukhwinder Singh (PW-7), HC Surinder Singh (PW-8), Patwari Lakha Singh (PW-9) and HC Baj Singh (PW-10). The accused was examined without oath under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the evidence produced against him and made the following statement:-
"I am innocent and have been implicated falsely in this case. It was a blind murder. Baltej Singh and Palli P.Ws. Are made up P.Ws Baltej Singh PW was called from his village and story of the prosecution was concocted and fabricated on next day of the alleged occurrence.
In fact, panchayat of the village had informed the police about this blind murder. There was no motive for me to commit this offence. I was having strained relations with Pala Singh brother in law of the deceased and as such, I have been falsely implicated in this case. On 10.10.2002, I was brought from my village in the presence of respectables. My formal arrest was shown on 13.10.2002. I did not make any disclosure statement nor got recovered any kulhari as alleged. The kulhari has been foisted on me. "Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 5
When called upon to enter defence, he examined Mohan Singh (DW-1), who testified that the dead body had been found near his fields at about 5.30 p.m. It was discovered by his servant who told him that it was the body of a woman, a relative of Pala Singh. Pala Singh and his wife Palli were informed and they went to the spot, where the body was lying, and thereafter the matter was reported to the police.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, accepted the prosecution version and found Jaswinder Singh guilty as charged.
The learned counsel for the appellant has raised several basic points in support of his argument that Baltej Singh (PW-1) and Palli (PW-2) were made up witnesses who did not see the occurrence. The delay in reporting the matter to the police had given Palli and her husband Pala Singh enough time to call Baltej Singh from Kacha Kalewala which was about 40 kilometers from Sakkanwali. The owners of the adjoining fields were not examined by the prosecution. One of them, namely, Mohan Singh (DW-1) appeared as defence witness and testified that the body had been discovered by his servant and that he had informed Palli and her family about the occurrence.
It may seem somewhat strange that Jaswinder Singh and Baljit Kaur of Sandhawali and Baltej Singh of Kacha Kalewala had gathered in Sakkanwali for labour work. One must remember that the accused and the prosecution witnesses belonged to that strata of society which works as farm labourers in the fields of the farmers. If Jaswinder Singh and Baltej Singh had been shopkeepers in their respective villages or farm owners or otherwise gainfully employed, there would have been no reason for them to be present in Sakkanwali. It would then have been necessary for the Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 6 Prosecution to produce witnesses to prove the real purpose of their visit to Sakkanwali. But the fact is that these people were landless labourers who did labour work wherever they could find it. Sakkanwali was the village where Baltej Sigh's two sisters Palli (PW-2) and Veerpal were married. Therefore, it was not at all unusual for Palli to call her sister Baljit Kaur deceased to her village. Baltej Singh (PW-1) had also come along for work. It was thus that they were altogether in Sakkanwali on the day of occurrence.
The learned counsel for the appellant argued that geographic location of Sadhanwali, Sakkanwali and Kacha Kalewala, distances between these villages were such that aimless wanderings of Baltej Singh on the night of October 9/10 could not be believed. The witness set out for Kacha Kalewala on a bicycle to inform his parents. The village was about 14 k.m. away on the Muktsar-Abohar road while Sakkanwali was 14 kms short of Muktsar on Muktsar-Sadiq road. The witness had to first pass Muktsar before proceeding to Kacha Kalewala. Distance of 40 k.m. could be covered on a bicycle in about four hours. The witness did not report the matter to Police Station Sadar Muktsar but lodged the report with Police Station Bariwala at 5 a.m. It must be a long distance on a bicycle but the tragic situation in which Baltej Singh had found himself, the journey had to be undertaken.
In cross-examination, Baltej Singh admitted that cases of Sakkanwali were registered at Muktsar, which is about 14 k.m. away. It was also suggested to the witness that Bariwala, was only 5 k.m. from Sakkanwali. If Bariwala was closer then it was natural for the witness to presume that it was Bariwala which had the jurisdiction to register the case. Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 7 Members of the general public very often do not know where to go to report a crime. In this case Baltej Singh reported the matter at Bariwala. The complaint was then forwarded to Muktsar, where the case was registered. It may look a bit irregular but one cannot blame Baltej Singh for his ignorance of the rules. Baltej Singh's evidence was the basis of the prosecution case which cannot be thrown out if the case was not reported to the correct police station.
It did take up a lot of time before the case was registered. This time was consumed in travelling but if one accepts that the deceased was visiting her sister in Sakkanwali then one has to accept that the family had gone to drain to collect firewood. It would have certainly strengthened the prosecution case if the farmer with whom the family had worked on October 9, 2002 was produced as a witness. But the prosecution version cannot be rejected for this lapse on the part of the police or for the failure to interrogate the employer.
If once it is accepted that the occurrence was witnessed by Baltej Singh (PW-1) and Palli (PW-2), minor flaws in the investigation cannot help the appellant. Jaswinder Singh was upset by his wife's complaint that he had relations with other women. He chose the quick way out for this predicament by killing his wife. Interestingly, in cross- examination, a suggestion was put to Baltej Singh that it was the deceased who had illicit relations with her brother-in-law Pala Singh and that Jaswinder Singh would stop the deceased from visiting Sakkanwali. This had led to the dispute between the husband and wife and strained relations between Jaswinder Singh and Pala Singh. We fail to understand how this suggestion helped the appellant. If the deceased did have relations with her Crl. Appeal No. 936 DB of 2004 8 brother-in-law then the motive aspect stands proved. Husband accusing his wife of infidelity, the wife also blaming her husband of relations with other women. Infidelity of one or the other was the motive, and this led to Jaswinder Singh hacking his wife with the axe.
We have examined all the aspects of the case and find that the witnesses were truthful and reliable, they were present at the spot where the occurrence took place and saw the appellant murdering his wife. Minor defects in the investigation would not detract from the value attached to the statements of the witnesses.
We fine no merit in this appeal. Dismissed.
(K.S. GAREWAL)
JUDGE
May 19, 2009 (NAWAB SINGH)
prem JUDGE
Note:- Whether refer to reporter No