Hardev Singh vs State of Punjab

R.L. Anand, J. (Oral)

This is a criminal appeal and has been directed against the judgment and order dated 8.5.1987 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, who convicted the appellants under Section 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. for committing murderous assault upon Major Singh PW and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 5 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ each. In default of payment of fine each one of them was directed to undergo R.I. for one year.

The facts of the case lie in a short compass :

Smt. Kashmiro is the sister of appellant Hardev Singh and daughter of Inder Singh appellant. As per the story of the prosecution Smt. Kashmiro developed illicit/friendly relations with Major Singh PW. This became the strong motive for the commission of the offence on the part of Hardev Singh and Inder Singh appellants, who suspected that Kashmiro is carrying on with Major Singh. On this strong motive there was an altercation between Hardev Singh on one side and Major Singh on the other side just 3/4 days prior to the occurrence which took place in the early hours of 21.10.1986. Thus there is a strong community of interest between Hardev Singh and Inder Singh, who are none else but the real brother and father of Kashmiro.

The story of the prosecution further goes that on 20.10.1986 at about 11.00 p.m. Major Singh PW had gone to sleep in his tubewell kotha. At about 3.00 a.m. on 21.10.1986 both the appellants armed with Kirpans came there and they caused multiple injuries on the head, nose, chin, cheeks and hands of Major Singh. After causing the injuries the appellants fled away from the place of occurrence. After the day break Major Singh was found lying in an injured condition by his uncle Vir Singh, who called his son and nephew Sarabjit Singh to the spot and Shri Jagir Singh father of the injured was also informed about the incident. Resultantly, Major Singh was shifted to Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Amritsar for treatment and intimation about the admission of the injured was sent to Police Station Sadar Amritsar at 8.30 a.m. on 21.10.1986. SI Gurbachan Singh came to the hospital and tried to record the statement of Major Singh. But his request was turned down because Major Singh was found unfit to make a statement. Thereafter the Investigating Officer went to the village but could not locate the parents of the injured. He was told by Sarabjit Singh younger brother of Major Singh that his parents had gone to Sarangdev village. The Investigating Officer then returned to the hospital where Jagir Singh, father of Major Singh, met him and he gave a statement which was sent to the police station and on the basis of which the case was registered against the appellants. The condition of Major Singh was precarious and on that account his medicolegal examination was deferred. He was got admitted in surgical ward and extensive surgery was conducted upon him and the doctor found the following damage on his person :

(A) Cut wounds over the head :

Wound over the forehead explores, underlying frontal bone was found to be cut and C.S.F. was leaking out. Stitching and ASD done.

Cut wounds over left occipito parietal region.

(a) Two occipital wounds were explored and underlying bone was found to be cut and C.S.F. was leaking out. Stitching done after putting a drain. ASD alone done.

(b) Another occipitoparietal wound was explored and underlying bone was found to be cut. C.S.F. was leaking, stitching and ASD done.

(B) Cut wounds over the face :

Cut wound extending from right cheek to the left cheek crossing over the bridge of nose, transversally was explored, underneath nasal bone was found to be cut. A chip of bone was present in the wound over the left cheek. It was removed, stitching and ASD done.

Cut wound extending from tip of the nose to the left cheek underlying nasal cartilage was found to be cut, stitching and ASD done.

Cut wound present over the right angle of mouth extending over the lower part of right side of the face. Wound was found to be through and through cutting the underlying muscles and mucous membrane. Wound stitched in layers, ASD done.

Cut wound over the chin explored, underlying bone was found to be cut. Wound stitched in layers and ASD done.

Cut wound present in front of left ear and extending over the left mastorid process, cutting the ear just above the lobule of the ear. Cartilage was found to be cut. Rest of the wound was skin deep. Stitching was done in layers and ASD done.

(C) Cut wounds over the left hand :

Cut wound over the dorsum of hand near the wrist, was found to be skin deep. ASD done.

Cut wound over the dorsum of hand lying over second and third metacarple bone was explored, underlying tendon to the index finger was found to be cut. Stitching and ASD done.

Cut wound over the inner side of middle of left hand was explored, underlying muscles and bone was found to be cut. Stitching and ASD done.

Cut wound over the left thumb was found to be skin deep, stitching and ASD done.

Cut wound over the dorsum of base of left index finger was explored, underlying tendom and bone was found to be cut. Stitching and ASD done.

Cut wound over the dorsum of middle finger was explored and found to be skin deep. Stitching and ASD done.

(D) Cut wound over the dorsum of right ring finger was found to be skin deep. Stitching and ASD done.

On 27.10.1987 Major Singh became sufficiently recovered. Resultantly his formal medicolegal examination was conducted by Dr. Rakesh Tiwari and this doctor found as many as 21 injures on his person which are as under :

A stitched wound 12 cms. long having 10 stitches present on the face, extending from the right cheek to the bridge of the nose and then extending to the left cheek.

A stitched wound 7 cms. long having 6 stitches present on the left side of the face, extending from the left cheek going horizontally upto the alar nasi of the left side of nose.

A stitched wound 5 stitches present on the left side of the face horizontally placed, starting from in front of left ear and extending upto the ear lobule of left ear.

A stitched wound 3 cms. long having 3 stitches obliquely placed present on the right side of face at the level of angle of mouth.

A stitched wound 8 cms. long having 8 stitches obliquely placed present on the left side of chin.

A stitched wound 2 cms. long having 2 stitches present on the back of right hand at the base of ring finger.

A stitched wound 3 cms. long having 3 stitches obliquely placed present on the back of left hand 2 cms. above the left wrist joint.

A stitched wound 4 cms having 4 stitches present on the back of the left hand obliquely placed just below the middle and index finger going downward and medially.

A stitched wound 2 cms. long having three stitches present on the back of middle finger obliquely placed on left hand on its proximal phalaya.

A stitched wound 2 cms. long having 3 stitches present on the back of index finger of left hand at the proximal phalanyns obliquely placed.

A stitched wound 2 cms. long having two stitches present on the medial and back side of left thumb on its terminal phalaynx.

A stitched wound 2 cms. long having 4 stitches present on the medial side of left hand 3 cms. above left wrist joint.

A stitched wound 10 cms. long having 10 stitches horizontally placed present on the forehead 3 cms. above the eye brow.

A stitched wound 8 cms. long having 9 stitches obliquely placed present on the back of head 3 cms. above the external occipital protuberance.

A stitched wound 6 cms. long having 6 stitches 3 cms. below the injury No. 14.

A stitched wound 12 cms. long having 12 stitches obliquely placed present on the left side of head 9 cms. above the left ear.

A linear scabbed scratch 6 cms. long present on the back of left chest in its upper part horizontally placed.

A linear scabbed scratch 6 cms. long 3.5. cms. below the injury No. 17 obliquely placed.

A linear scabbed scratch 7 cms. long obliquely placed 5 cms. lateral to injury No. 18.

A lenear scabbed scratch 5 cms. long present on the lateral side of left upper arm in its upper part obliquely placed.

A greenish yellow contusion 5x4 cms. present on the both lips in its middle. On 30.10.1986 Major Singh was subjected to Xray examination and the radiologist found fracture of occipital bone, frontal bone, left parietal bone mandible. The Xray of the left hand showed fracture of 5th metacarpal bone and proximal of phalaynx of index finger.

The Investigating Officer also visited the place of occurrence, lifted blood stained earth and also took into possession some blood stained Parali etc. Both the appellants were arrested on 7.11.1986 and they were interrogated about the weapon of offence and they got recovered the weapons of offence i.e. Kirpan under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The blood stained clothes of the injured were sent to the office of the Chemical Examiner, who found human blood on these articles. After recording the statements of the injured and by doing the other formalities, both the appellants were challaned in the Court of Illaqa Magistrate, who supplied the copies of the documents to the appellants and they were committed to the Court of Session.

On 5.2.1987 both the appellants were chargesheeted under Section 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The charge was read over and explained to the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial.

In order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses including Dr. Rakesh Tiwari, Dr. Babu Lal, Dr. Inderbir Singh, Dr. Jagdish Kumar, Dr. Ved parkash and Dr. Manjit Singh, PW1 to PW5 and PW11 respectively, besides Dr. G.S. Passi PW14. The prosecution also produced Jagir Singh, the father of the injured, as PW6, Vir Singh PW7, Nirmal Singh PW8 and Major Singh injured PW9, besides Gulzar Singh, who gave his statement as PW10. The Investigating Officer appeared as PW12.

The statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to them. They denied those circumstances and stated that they have been falsely implicated.

The learned trial Court for the reasons given in the impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the appellants in the manner as stated above and aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the present appeal.

I have heard Shri P.S. Hundal, Advocate on behalf of the appellants and Shri Vikas curruria, AAG on behalf of the State of Punjab and with their assistance I have gone through the record of this case.

The story of the prosecution relies on the following factors :

(i) Motive

(ii) Ocular account

(iii) Medical evidence

(iv0 Recovery of weapons and the offence.

There was a strong motive on the part of the appellants to commit the offence as Kashmiro is the real sister of appellant No. 1 Hardev Singh and daughter of appellant No. 2. Inder Singh. They were suspecting that Kashmiro was carrying on with Major Singh injured. There was altercation just 3/4 days prior to the occurrence and in our agriculture community no sane father or brother would tolerate that the honour of his family may be exploited by anybody much less a covillager. In these circumstances, the appellants had a strong motive against Major Singh injured for the commission of the offence. The occurrence in the main has been supported by Major Singh himself who is a stamped witness. His testimony cannot be brushed aside. According to this witness, the weapons used were Kirpans. Both the appellants are his covillagers and in these circumstances to identify the culprits on the part of Major Singh would not be a big problem because Kirpan is a weapon which can only be wielded when the assailants are only at a distance of one or two feet from the convict. A covillager can easily identify his assailant even if there is a dark during the night. The testimony of Major Singh is corroborated by the medical evidence when the doctor has found as many as 21 injuries on his person which can be easily caused by two assailants. The nature of the injuries is also suggestive of the fact that these injuries can be caused by a sharp edged weapons like kirpans which were ultimately recovered at the instance of the appellants under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Further the injures on the person of the injured and the damage which has been assessed by the doctor also prove that the assailant had the intention to commit murderous assault. All the injuries were caused with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that had Major Singh died it would have become a murder.

The learned Counsel for the appellants in his all fairness could not convince this Court about the innocence of both the appellants. His solitary argument before his Court was that the appellants should be visited with leniency in the matter of sentence especially keeping in view the fact that the occurrence took place in the year 1986 and both the appellants are suffering the agony of criminal proceedings for the last about 13 years. The learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that Hardev Singh appellant was a young boy of 20 years when the offence was committed and by this time he must have got himself married and that he must have produced the children. Inder Singh appellant was an old man of 70 years at the time of the occurrence and now he must have become more older. The counsel also submitted that the conduct of Major Singh was also not upto the mark as he took the cudgels to develop illicit relation with Kashmiro. There is merit in the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants. In the opinion of this Court, the ends of justice will suffice if the substantive sentence awarded to the appellants is reduced from 5 years to 3 years and I order accordingly. The main reason for the reduction of the sentence of the appellants is that Major Singh injured developed illicit relations with Kashmiro and his act by no stretch of imagination can be appreciated on any parameters.

With above modification in the matter of sentence, the appeal of both the appellants stands dismissed.