Dhir Singh and others vs State of Punjab

M.R. Sharma, J.

Vide his judgment and order dated May 3, 1982, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the three appellants as under :

Name of the appellant Convicted under section Sentence

Dhir Singh 302 I.P.C. Imprisonment for life

Dalip Singh 323 I.P.C. Released on probation

Tara Singh 323 I.P.C. Released on probation

Dilbagh Singh was given the bene�it of doubt And acquitted. The convicts have filed Criminal Appeal No. 381/DBA of 1982 against their conviction and sentences. Criminal. Appeal No. 658DB A of 1982 has been filed by the State against the acquittal of Dilbagh Singh, Tara Singh and Dalip Singh under section 302/34 I.P.C. Bakshish Singh filed Criminal Appeal No. 493/DB of 1982 against Dalip Singh and Tara Singh qua their release on probation. He also filed Criminal Revision No. 1122 of 1982 for payment of compensation. The other petition filed by him was Criminal Revision No. 1202 of 1982, wherein he prayed that Dalip Singh and Tara Singh respondents be convicted of a major charge. Since the three appeals and two revision petitions arise out of the same matter, they are being disposed of by one judgment.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that Jarnail Singh PW 17 had entered into two agreements with Ajmer Singh and Maghar Singh, Exhibits P 14 and P15 dated October 12, 1981 and October 15, 1988 respectively, for purchasing land. The prosecution claims that Dhir Singh and Dilbagh Singh appellants intended to purchase this very land and since Jarnail Singh PW. 17 had outsmarted them, they became sore with him.

On the evening of October 17, 1981 Bakshish Singh P.W. 15 accompanied by his father Karnail Singh P.W. 16 was proceeding towards the farm house of Mohinder Singh deceased. They had hardly gone ahead after crossing, the bridge, when Dhir Singh appellant armed with rifle, Exhibit P. 7, Dilbagh Singh armed with a pistol, Dalip Singh and Tara Singh armed with lathis came out of the paddy fields and surrounded them on the road. Dalip Singh raised a lalkara challenging Karnail Singh that he would be taught a lesson for helping his brothers. Thereafter, he gave a couple of dang blows on his right shoulder and head. Dilbagh Singh the acquitted accused, took out his pistol and fired two, shots in the air. He also proclaimed that who ever came near would be done to death. Mohinder Singh and Jarnail Singh P.W. 17 came running from the farm house of the former. Mohinder Singh requested Dhir Singh and his companions that they should stop the attack. Dalip Singh appellant raised another lalkara calling upon Dhir Singh appellant to finish him. Upon this, Dhir Singh fired a shot from his rifle which it Mohinder Singh. The latter fell down. Dhir Singh appellant aimed another shot at Bakshish Singh P.W. 15 but the latter sat down and escaped. After this the three appellants and Dilbagh Singh, the acquitted accused ran away from there. Mohinder Singh deceased was shifted to Civil Hospital Ajnala, where he breathed his last Bakshish Singh P.W. 15 accompanied by Kashmir Singh went to police'' station Ajnala and lodged First Information Report, Exhibit P. 16 at 8.00 P. M. On the basis of his statement a case under Sections 307/323/34 Indian Penal Code read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act was registered against the accused persons.

In the course of investigation Dr. Haropinder Singh P.W. 11 examined Bakshish Singh P.W. 15 on 171081 at 11.50 P.M. and found a red contusion 4 cm X 3 cm on his right shoulder. P.W. 10 examined Karnail Singh on October 17, 1981 at 11 P.M. and found three simple injuries on his person.

After recording the first information report, Assistant SubInspector Sukhwinder Singh PW18 had gone to the spot where he prepared the rough site plan Exhibit PA, collected blood stained earth, sealed it into a parcel and took it into possession vide Memo, Exhibit P1. He also picked up the empty cartridges from the place of occurrence vide memo Exhibit P17/A. After preparing the inquest report he sent the dead body of Mohinder Singh for postmortem examination. This examination was conducted by Dr. H.S. Gill. P.W.12 at 2 p.m. on October 18, 1982. The following two injuries were found on it.

An inlet wound 1.5 cm. X 1 cm oval in shape on the left side of the abdomen in the pubic region (left side 18 cm below the umbilicus at 5 O''clock position and 11 cm medial to the left superior iliac crest with margins inverted and ecchymosed and lacerated.

An outlet wound measuring 10 cm x 5 cm on the back in eoccygeeal region, lower portion of secral regiou in the midline with margins everte and lacerated.

On dissection the bullet after piercing the interior abdominal wall had fractured the left remus or pubic bone rupturing the peritoneum, large and small gut at four places, rupturing the urinary bladder and facturing the lower part of the sacrum bone and cocoys bone and the bullet had pierced the posterior wall and had come out of injury No. 2. Both the injuries corresponded with each other. In the opinion of the doctor, the death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of injuries to the large and small gut and the bladder accompanied by fracture which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course.

Dilbagh Singh the acquitted accused, was arrested on October 20, 1981. Dilbagh Singh and Tara Singh were arrested on October 23, 1981. Dhir Singh appellant had surrendered before the llaqa Magistrate along with his rifle on October 1, 1981. After the completion of investigation, the appellants and there acquitted companion were sent up for trial the result of which has been indicated earlier.

In this appeal by the convicts, we have gone through the evidence with the help of the learned counsel.

The learned trial Judge has observed that the agreement deeds Exhibit PW14 and Exhibit P15 did show that Jarnail Singh PW17 had agreed to purchase land from Ajmer Singh, but the prosecution had failed to lead any evidence on the point that because or these agreements, the appellants became annoyed with him. On this point Jarnail Singh could have said something but he was only tendered for cross examination. The prosecution has not led any other evidence to show that there was some animosity between the appellants and the eye witnesses. We accordingly agree with him that evidence of motive is lacking in this case.

The sequence of events mentioned in the FIR shows that the appellants probably wanted to give some beating to Bakshish Singh and Karnail Singh. Dhir Singh was carrying a rifle and Dilbagh Singh was carrying a pistol probably to overawe their adversaries. It is significant to mention that to begin with none of the fire arms was used and holders thereof merely said that nobody should come near. In this situation, the learned trial Judge was right in holding that common intention to commit greater harm than mere beating was absent in this case. Even otherwise, there was no animosity against Mohinder Singh deceased. It appears more probable that when he tried to intervene and said that the appellants should desist from attacking the prosecution witnesses. Dhir Singh on his own fired the rifle fatally injuring Mohinder Singh deceased. As far as he is, concerned, there can be no doubt about the fact that he did have the intention to commit the murder of the deceased and since he succeeded in putting an end to his life, he has been rightly convicted under section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by the learned trial Judge. Further if a person takes an extreme step of murdering another individual who merely intervenes to save the situation or to pacify the parties, we see no reason why he should not be burdened to pay compensation. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal qua Dhir Singh And allow Criminal Revision No. 1122 of 1982 and order that Dhir Singh appellant shall also pay a sum of Rs. 5000/ as compensation to the next heirs of Mohinder Singh deceased.

We have already observed that Dalip Singh and Tara Singh did not share any intention with Dhir Singh appellant to commit the murder of Mohinder Singh deceased. They have already been convicted under section 323 Indian Penal Code for causing injuries to Bakshish Singh P.W. 15 and Karnail Singh P.W. 16. The learned trial Judge has released them on probation and we do not wish to interfere with the discretion exercised by him. Similarly, Dilbagh Singh appellant had fired the pistol shot before the appearance of Mohinder Singh deceased on the scene. These shots have probably been fired to instil fear in the minds of those who might come on behalf of the prosecution witnesses to aid them. He, too, cannot be held to have shared any intention with Dhir Singh appellant of committing the murder of the deceased. Since the learned Judge has held that lalkaras are quite often attributed to innocent people, we do not wish to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by him in favour of Dilbagh Singh.

As a result of the foregoing discussion, Criminal Appeals No. 38 1/DB, 493/DB and 658/DBA of 1982 are dismissed. Criminal Revision No. 1122 of 1982 is allowed and Criminal Revision No. 1202 of 1982 is dismissed.

JUDGMENT accordingly.