Resham Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Dewan, J.

Resham Singh and Rattan Singh appellants were brought to trial before the Court of Sessions at Jallandhar for committing the murder of Sodhi and having been found guilty thereof, they were convicted under Sections 302/34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 500/ each by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, on October 30, 1985. They have challenged their conviction and sentence in this appeal.

The victim of the crime is deceased Sodhi, who was the son of Amin Chand. He was an employee of Resham Singh accused was working as a Cleaner with him for the last about four years and he was getting Rs. 4,000/ per month as salary. The prosecution herein has no eyewitness of the alleged occurrence and rests entirely on circumstantial evidence. It emerges from the evidence that in the month of March, 1985. Sodhi deceased went with Resham Singh accused with a truck load of potatoes to Surat. Rattan Singh accused used to drive that truck. On 14th March, 1985, Sodhi deceased went with Resham Singh accused with a truck load of potatoes to Surat. Rattan Singh accused used to drive that truck. On 14th March, 1985, in the evening, Bhagat Ram, PW came to Amin Chand and told him that his sole Sodhi was lying injured at the turning of village Kotli and he was further told by two children that Sodhi had been thrown out of the truck. Consequently, Amin Chand went to the said spot on a cycle and found Sodhi lying there semiconscious. It was alleged that Sodhi told Amin Chand and Bhagat Ram PW that one of the accused had inspected him for having stolen a piece of cloth and on that account, both the accused took him to the garden of Resham Singh and gave him beating with an ironrod and also put his iron rod in his anus. Amin Chand took Sodhi to Bhogpur Hospital, but the doctor was not available there. Then he was taken to Kala Bakra Hospital, where Dr. Amarjit Singh examined him at 12.30 a.m. and found four injuries on his person. The condition of Sodhi being serious the doctor referred him to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar. He was then removed to the said hospital where he died at 2.25 p.m. on the same day.

On receipt of the medicolegal report of Sodhi deceased, Kashmira Singh Assistant Sub Inspector went to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar where he received a chit Ex.PH from a doctor indicating therein that Sodhi had expired at 2.25 p.m. Kashmira Singh then recorded the statement Ex.PC of Amin Chand, on the basis of which formal F.I.R. Ex.P/C 3 was recorded at the Police Station, Bhogpur, at 10.30 a.m. on 17th March, 1985. He also prepared the inquest Ex.PD and sent the dead body to the mortutory for autopsy. On the same day, he prepared the rough site plan Ex.PK of the place of occurrence. The accused were arrested on 30th September, 1985, by the Sub Inspector Gurparkar Singh.

Dr. Paramjit Singh Aneja PW9 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Sodhi on 16th March, 1985 at 12.10 p.m. and found the following injuries.

Lacerated wound 1.5 cm skin deep present on the base of left ring finger of left hand.

Bluish contusion 2 cm. 1.5 cm present just above the lateral malieolous of left leg.

Multiple small abrasions of left side of leg.

(i) On dissection of abdomen, all the intestines, small and large were adherent to each other, forming a gummed up mass.

(ii) Faecal matter mixed with blood present in peritoneal cavity which was full of it.

(iii) Multiple performance of small intestines.

(iv) Tear on anterior surface of liver.

(v) Tear on lateral surface of spleen.

(vi) Preformation in the recotvesical pouch, communicating with Anal opening."

Death was opined to be due to shock and internal haemorrhage due to the injuries which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time that elapsed between the injuries and death was stated to be about four days and between death and postmortem within, 24 hours. After necessary investigations, the accused were challenged and committed.

In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses. Amin Chand PW.2 deposed that he was informed by Bhagat Ram and two children of his village that his Sodhi was lying injured on the turning of village Kotli and he made a statement Ex.PC before the police on the basis of which formal F.I.R. was recorded at Police Station, Bhogpur. Bhagat Ram PW3 deposed that he saw accused Rattan Singh throwing Sodhi on the road in injured condition and then the truck was driven away towards Kariala and that he was informed by Sodhi that the accused had given him beating with an iron road as they suspected him for having stolen their piece of cloth. Satnam Singh PW4 deposed that the accused made an extrajudicial confession before him for having caused injuries to Sodhi. Kashmira Singh PW6 was the Investigating Officer. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied the prosecution allegations and pleaded false implication in the case but led no evidence in defence.

As is evident from the facts stated above, the extrajudicial confession made by the appellants had not been disbelieved by the trial Court. Their conviction is sought to be secured on the basis of the two oral dying declarations alleged to have been made by Sodhi deceased to his father Amin Chand PW2 and Bhagat Ram PW3 but the evidence adduced by these witnesses, in our opinion, is far from satisfactory and suffers from a number of infirmities. The learned Counsel for the appellants has severely criticised the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution to prove the oral dying declarations of the deceased. In our opinion, this critism of the learned Counsel is well founded and we are not disposed to attach any weight to the testimony of the said prosecution witnesses who try to prove that before he died, Sodhi named his assailants to the PWs. It, however, emerges from the evidence of PW.1. Dr. Amarjit Singh Pathologist, Civil Hospital, Jalandhar that when Sodhi deceased was brought to the hospital by his father Amin Chand, he was in shock and his blood pressure and pulse was unrecordable. The condition of Sodhi deceased being precarious, he was referred to Civil Hospital, Jalandhar at about 1 p.m., where he died at 2.25 p.m. Dr. Paramjit Singh Aneja PW9, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Sodhi and found all the intestines, small and large adherent to each other forming a gummed up mass, faecal matter mixed with blood was present in peritoneal cavity. His liver, spleen and anal region also suffered injuries. We are, therefore, unable to believe that after receiving these serious injuries, the deceased made two oral dying declaration first to Bhagat Ram PW and then to his father Amin Chand. We have great difficulty in believing that the deceased could possibly have lived for so long after receiving the aforesaid injuries, much less could be have been conscious. The probability of his ever living to make two dying declarations it too remote to be considered.

It is a matter for regret that in spite of there being a lawyer appearing on behalf of the appellants. Dr. Amarjit Singh, who gave the emergency treatment to the deceased was not put a single question on behalf of the appellants to show whether in the opinion of the medical expert, the deceased was in a condition to make any statement whatsoever in view of the fatal injuries that he had received. The fact, however, remains that the doctor was not questioned on this point when he was examined in this case. In the absence of any opinion by the said doctor on the point, it cannot be said with any degree of certainly that the evidence the prosecution witnesses who attempted to prove the dying declaration of the deceased are positively false but in view of the numerous and severe injuries received by the deceased on the vital parts of the body, we have very grave doubts as to his being in a condition to utter even a single word after those injuries had been inflicted upon him.

Even otherwise, it is settled now that when the dying declaration is oral, the exact words stated by the deceased to the witnesses are of the utmost importance and if the witnesses improve upon their statements by carrying their versions, that evidence becomes unreliable. Bhagat Ram stated that Sodhi deceased told him that one of the accused suspected him to have stolen his piece of cloth and that they took him to the garden of Resham Singh and gave beating to him with an iron rod and they also put the iron rod in his anus, whereas according to Amin Chand PW, the deceased told him that he was given blows with iron rod in his abdomen. In this case, there is no consistent version as to what were the words used by the deceased and hence the dying declaration have to be eschewed.

It thus follows from the discussion above that no reliance can be placed on the dying declarations made by Sodhi deceased and as such the prosecution version fails to connect the appellants with the crime. So, we find that the charge has not been brought home to the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence passed on the appellants are set aside and they are acquitted of the charge.