Gurdev Singh vs Pal Singh

G.S. Chahal, J. (Oral)

Gurdev Singh, a brother of the deceased, in respect of case FIR No. 108 dated 7.8.1987, under Sections 307, 326, 324/34, IPC, Police Station Khaira, District Amritsar has come to this court in criminal revision against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar dated 21.2.1990, vide which he discharged PW Baldev Singh without examining him.

Baldev Singh PW is a deaf and dumb person. He was one of the injured persons in the occurrence regarding which the FIR was registered. During investigation, he is stated to have been examined by the Police with the help of Smt. Hem Kiran as an interpreter. When Baldev Singh was put into the witness box, Smt. Hem Kiran was asked to interpret his statement. She claimed that she was unable to make him understand her questions by making signs and she was also unable to make out anything from the signs and gestures made by Baldev Singh. It was, in this situation, that Baldev Singh PW was discharged.

The learned Counsel urges that Smt. Hem Kiran, when examined as a witness, had been declared as a hostile witness, as she had denied having made statement Ex. PA under Section 161, Cr.P.C. and also showed ignorance about Baldev Singh having been shown to her and of her having examined him. The learned Counsel urges that Smt. Hem Kiran had not made a correct statement of her failure to understand the signs of Baldev Singh. In this situation, it was but proper that the trial Court should have called some other interpreter to interpret the signs and gestures made by Baldev Singh about the occurrence. The order of discharge of the PW was not proper.

I accept the contention of the learned Counsel. Since Baldev Singh was an injured witness, the presence of the witness at the time of occurrence becomes very probable and it was the duty of the Court to examine him with the help of another interpreter. The fate of the case could not be left to the whims of Smt. Hem Kiran to interpret Baldev Singh.

At one stage, the prosecution had tried to utilise the services of Gursewak Singh, a brother of the deceased as an interpreter, but it was objected to by the accused and the learned Additional Sessions Judge had not accepted him as an interpreter. In my view, that was a correct approach of the learned trial Judge.

I hereby accept the criminal revision and set aside the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 21.2.1990, vide which Baldev Singh PW was discharged. The trial Court will recall Baldev Singh PW and examine him with the help of an interpreter, who may be competent to interpret his signs and gestures.