IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 Date of decision: 16.09.2008 Chamkaur Singh …. Appellant Versus State of Punjab …. Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN. Present : Mrs. Malkiat Mann, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S.S. Gill, Addl. A.G.,Punjab. S.S. SARON, J. This appeal has been filed by the appellant Chamkaur Singh against the judgment and order dated 18.05.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Patiala, whereby the said appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302 and 379 Indian Penal Code (“IPC” – for short) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC; besides, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in the event of default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. As regards the offence under Section 379 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period one year. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. The FIR (Ex. PD) in the case was registered on the statement of Ram Dass son of Prem Singh (PW-4) who is the father of Beant Singh (deceased). It Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -2- is alleged by the complainant Ram Dass (PW-4) that he is resident of Village Lubana Karmu. His son Beant Singh (deceased) was employed as a Watchman (Chowkidar) at Government Middle School, Nabha. Beant Singh was taking the complainant (PW4) on his bicycle for getting medicines. It was about 9.00 a.m. (on 27.06.1995), when they both reached adjacent to the field of Kesar Singh son of Pritam Singh resident of Rohti Chhanna. There, their neighbour Chamkaur Singh (appellant) was already standing ahead on the road. He stopped them and he took away Beant Singh -son of the complainant Ram Dass (PW-4) towards the field of Kesar Singh. While talking they reached near the ditches in front of the field of Kesar Singh and the appellant caught hold of Beant Singh and started shouting and quarrelling with him. During this time in the presence of the complainant-Ram Dass (PW-4), the appellant Chamkaur Singh took out a knife from his ‘dub’ (fold of the loin-cloth around the waist) and gave repeated blows in the abdomen, chest, neck and flank of Beant Singh son of the complainant. While giving the blows he (appellant) was loudly saying to Beant Singh that he would be taught a lesson for having illicit relations with his wife. The appellant-Chamkaur Singh also threatened the complainant-Ram Dass (PW-4) that he would also be given the same treatment if he stepped forward to save his son Beant Singh. In the meantime, Beant Singh (deceased) fell on the ground with his face down towards the ground. Chamkaur Singh (appellant) then gave many knife blows on the chest and the neck of Beant Singh while he lay on the ground. The complainant Ram Dass (PW-4) raised an alarm of “Na Maro Na Maro” and “Bachao Bachao”. The appellant, however, while holding the belt of the pant worn by Beant Singh (son of the complainant), dragged him while he lay on the ground and threw him in the ditches of water in the field of Kesar Singh and he loudly said that his (complainant’s) son was having illicit relations with his (appellant’s) wife. He (appellant) had taken revenge for that. After saying this, the appellant (Chamkaur Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -3- Singh) ran away from the spot along with his knife. The complainant –Ram Dass (PW-4) out of fear by going through the fields reached the house of his cousin brother Bhola Singh (PW6) and narrated the entire occurrence to him. Then they both were proceeding to the Police Station to lodge a report. On the way they met Nachhattar Singh (PW-5) who told them that he had seen Chamkaur Singh (appellant) with blood-stained clothes and he had stolen his (Nachattar Singh’s) Vespa Scooter bearing No.4639 from front of their house. Thereafter, they (complainant Ram Dass and his cousin brother Bhola Singh) along with Nachhattar Singh (PW-5) reached at the spot. There they found that the son of the complainant namely Beant Singh had died. The cause of grudge was that the appellant Chamkaur Singh had a suspicion about the illicit relations of Beant Singh (deceased) with his wife namely Baljinder. Because of the abovesaid grudge, Chamkaur Singh (appellant) by giving knife blows had killed Beant Singh ( son of the complainant). They called Sukhdev Singh and Hem Raj at the spot and leaving them to guard the dead body, they (complainant-Ram Dass, Bhola Singh and Nachhattar Singh) came to the Police Station to lodge a report. It was requested that action be taken. The statement was attested by Gurchain Singh, SI/SHO, Police Station Sadar, Nabha (PW-13) who also conducted the investigation in the case. Gurchain Singh SI/SHO, Police Station Sadar Nabha (PW- 13) proceeded to the spot in the fields of Kesar Singh in village Rohti Channa where the dead body of Beant Singh was found lying. He (PW-13) was accompanied by ASI Parkash Chand (PW-10) and other Police officials as also Ram Dass – complainant (PW-4). Sukhdev Singh, Hem Raj and Bhola Singh were also present there. Inquest proceedings (Ex.PB) were prepared. The dead body of Beant Singh was identified by Sukhdev Singh and Hem Raj and they both signed the inquest proceedings. Thereafter, the spot was inspected by SI/SHO Gurchain Singh (PW-13) and the Head Constable Baldev Singh was sent to bring a photographer. The body of Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -4- the deceased Beant Singh was sent for post-mortem examination through Head Constable Baldev Singh and Constable Tarsem Singh. Blood stained earth was taken in possession from the spot which was put in a tin box and sealed with the seal ‘GS’ of Gurchain Singh SI/SHO (PW-13). The blood-stained earth was taken in possession vide memo Ex.PF. The memo (Ex. PF) was witnessed by ASI Parkash Chand (PW-10) and Ram Dass-complainant (PW-4). The Wallet (Ex.P10) of Beant Singh (deceased) was also recovered from the pocket of his pant and it contained his driving licence (Ex.P9). These items were taken in possession vide memo Ex.PE. The same were witnessed by ASI Parkash Chand (PW-10) and Ram Dass- complainant (PW-4). Bicycle (Ex.P11) belonging to the deceased (Beant Singh) was also taken in possession vide memo Ex.PG which was witnessed by ASI Parkash Chand (PW-10) and Ram Dass-complainant (PW-4). Nachhattar Singh (PW-5) produced the Registration Copy of the scooter Ex.P8. It was taken in possession vide memo Ex.PJ. The accused (Chamkaur Singh) had stolen the scooter of Nachhattar Singh (PW-5) after the occurrence. Gurchain Singh SI/SHO (PW-13) then went to the spot from where the scooter had been stolen and rough site plan Ex.PR with correct marginal notes (Ex.PS) was prepared. The case property was deposited with the MHC. On 08.07.1995, Sarpanch Harvinder Singh of Village Rohtas (PW- 3) produced the accused (appellant) before Gurchain Singh, SI/SHO (PW-13). The accused had made an extra-judicial confession before Harvinder Singh (PW3) regarding his involvement in the murder of Beant Singh. He (accused) was arrested and interrogated. In the meantime, Mohan Singh also arrived and the accused made a disclosure statement regarding the concealment of a knife and the blood-stained shirt and trouser at the brick kiln of Amrik Singh Labana in Village Labana Teku/Karmu. His disclosure statement (Ex.PT) was recorded which was witnessed by ASI Sucha Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -5- Singh and Mohan Singh and was signed by Chamkaur Singh (appellant). Then they went to the place where the knife, blood-stained shirt and trouser were stated to be concealed. Chamkaur Singh-appellant led them to the spot from where he took out a knife which had been wrapped in a shirt and trouser. The knife is Ex.P1, Pant is Ex.P12 and Shirt is Ex.P13. The pant (Ex.P12) and shirt (Ex.P13) were stained with blood. A parcel in respect of the recovered items was separately prepared. Parcel containing the knife was prepared after it sketch (Ex.PV) had been drawn. The clothes were separately sealed. The knife and clothes were taken in possession vide memo Ex.PU which was attested by ASI Sucha Singh and Mohan Singh. The memo was witnessed by ASI Sucha Singh and Mohan Singh. The rough site plan Ex.PX of the place of recovery with correct marginal notes was prepared. On return to the Police, the case property was deposited with the MHC. On 10.07.1995, the appellant (Chamkaur Singh) was again interrogated which led to the recovery of the scooter no. PCX-4639 in the fodder (Turi) kotha of his house. The disclosure statement (Ex.PO) was prepared and was witnessed by ASI Tejpal Singh and Nachhattar Singh and the appellant (Chamakur Singh) signed the same. On going to the spot, the scooter was recovered and the recovery memo Ex.PP was prepared which was witnessed by ASI Tej Pal Singh and Nachhattar Singh. The site plan (Ex.PY) of the place of recovery was prepared with correct marginal notes. The statements of the eye witnesses were recorded and on return to the Police Station, the scooter was deposited with MHC. After completion of the investigation, charge report (challan) in terms of Section 173 of the Code Criminal Procedure (“CrPC” – for short) was filed in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nabha. The said Magistrate in view of the offence under Section 302 IPC being alleged which was exclusively triable by the Court of Session vide order dated 31.10.1995, committed the case to the said Court for trial. Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -6- The learned Sessions Judge, Patiala vide order dated 28.11.1995 charged the appellant Chamkaur Singh on the allegations that he on 27.6.1995 at 9.00 a.m. in the area of Village Rohti Channa committed the murder of Beant Singh son of Ram Dass, by intentionally/knowingly causing his death and thereby, committed an offence punishable under Section 302. Secondly, on the same day, time and place, after committing the said murder, the appellant committed theft of scooter bearing registration No. PCX-4639 by taking it out from the possession of Nachhattar Singh son of Gurdial Singh and thereby, committed an offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. The appellant, it was directed, be tried by the said Court on the said charge. The charge was read over and explained to the accused and he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 13 witnesses and also tendered documents in evidence. The statement of appellant Chamkaur Singh in terms of Section 313 CrPC was recorded in which he took the stand that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case because there was a quarrel regarding the boundary wall of a disputed plot between the deceased Beant Singh and his father on one side and him (appellant) and his (appellant’s) father on the other side. The dispute had occurred on the day of his (appellant’s) marriage. The matter was patched up by Sher Singh (DW1) defeated Sarpanch of Rohta and Surjit Singh @ Sita of Labana Karmu (DW2). The appellant (Chamkaur Singh) was arrested in the presence of Surjit Singh @ Sita (DW2) from his house and nothing incriminating was recovered from him. However, due to that enmity, the complainant Ram Dass (PW-4) had lodged the FIR against appellant. In defence, the appellant (Chamkaur Singh) examined Sher Singh (DW1), Surjit Singh (DW2) and HC Jagtar Singh (DW3). The learned Sessions Judge, Patiala after considering the evidence and material on record, as already noticed, has convicted the appellant Chamkaur Singh for the offences under Sections 302 and 379 IPC and sentenced him Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -7- to undergo imprisonment for life; besides, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in the event of default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 IPC and also undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 379 IPC. The sentences have, however, been ordered to run concurrently. Mrs. Malkiat Mann, Advocate learned counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that the complainant Ram Dass (PW-4) in fact was not present at the time of occurrence and he has been introduced later on. It is submitted that in case the injuries were indeed caused by the appellant on the person of the deceased Beant Singh in the presence of complainant Ram Dass (PW4), then Ram Dass (PW-4) being the father of Beant Singh (Deceased) would have intervened to save him and he would have himself received and suffered some injuries which he has not received or suffered. Therefore, it is a case of a blind murder and there is nothing to show that the appellant (Chamkaur Singh) had committed the murder of Beant Singh. It is further submitted that injury No.22 on the person of Beant Singh (deceased) was not possible with a knife. Therefore, the medical evidence does not corroborate the alleged eye witness account. As regards the extra-judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant Chamkaur Singh before Harvinder Singh Ex- Sarpanch (PW-3), it is submitted that it has been cooked up by the prosecution and the same is wholly unreliable and in any case, the same is a weak type of evidence. The disclosure statement, it is submitted, is highly discrepant and unreliable and this is more so for the reason that the scooter was recovered two days after the alleged recovery of the knife and the blood-stained shirt and pant. It is further submitted that there was no motive for the appellant to commit the murder of Beant Singh (deceased) and the alleged motive has not been established by any independent Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -8- witness. Therefore, it is submitted that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the appellant Chamkaur Singh beyond shadow of reasonable doubts. In response, Mr. S.S. Gill, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab, learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that the prosecution has proved its case in all material aspects and there is no infirmity in the prosecution case which would warrant interference by this Court in the firm findings recorded by the learned trial Court. A reference has been made to the deposition of Doctor Rakesh Kumar Singla, Emergency Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Nabha (PW-1) and particularly to the numerous injuries that were found on the person of deceased Beant Singh. It is submitted by the learned State counsel that the fact that the complainant Ram Dass (PW-4) was present along with his son Beant Singh and they were riding a bicycle to get medicine is quite natural and there is nothing to show that he was not present at the time of occurrence. The extra-judicial confession made before Harvinder Singh, Ex-Sarpanch (PW-3), it is stated, is valid and reliable. The same, it is submitted, corroborates the occurrence. The recovery of the knife, blood-stained pant and shirt also go to show the guilt of the appellant. The motive, it is submitted, has come on record at the first possible opportunity i.e. the appellant suspected that the deceased Beant Singh was having illicit relations with his wife and therefore, he was brutally murdered. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and with their assistance, gone through the records. As has already been noticed, the prosecution case is based on the complaint made by Ram Dass (PW-4) who is the father of the deceased Beant Singh. Ram Dass complainant (PW-4) in his deposition in Court has reiterated the version as given in the FIR (Ex.PD). He was cross-examined by learned counsel for the defence. In his cross-examination, it is stated that when he advanced a little towards Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -9- the deceased, the accused appellant Chamkaur Singh had come towards him and he retreated. Besides, his further cross-examination shows that nothing which would favour the appellant has been brought out. He was confronted with his statement Ex.PD as regards the fact if he had specifically stated in his statement to the Police that the accused had told him that if he went towards him, he would be given (meet) the same fate. It is stated that he had in his statement to the Police stated that the appellant had advanced towards him to strike him. In his statement Ex.PD this fact was not so mentioned. It is also stated by the complainant (PW4) that he was at a distance of 20-22 karams from the place where the appellant was inflicting injuries to the deceased. The entire occurrence was over in five minutes. During the course of occurrence, no one had passed that way. The medical evidence has come on record from the statement of Dr. Rakesh Kumar Singla, Emergency Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Nabha (PW- 1). The same shows that the deceased had suffered about 28 injuries. Dr. Rakesh Kumar Singla (PW-1) conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased and he found the following injuries on the person of the deceased:- 1. 2cm x 1cm incised wound was present, muscle deep on the glutial region on the right side, going in the upward direction. Clotted blood was present. 2. 2cm x 1cm incised wound was present on the left side of the chest in the 5th inter-costal space 4cm below the nipple, going, medially and downwards, going deep into the chest. Clotted blood was present. 3. 2cm x 1cm incised wound was present just below umbilicus going deep to the right side. Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -10- 4. 2cm x 1cm incised wound was present on the abdomen in the right hyoocondrium, 3cm below costrel marginal going upward direction. 5-6. Two incised wounds present in the middle of the chest in the lower portion 4cm x 1.5cm in size tailing towards right side and superficial in the tailed portion going down to the chest. Clotted blood was present. 7,8, 9 Four incised wounds present on the abdomen & 10 each 2 x 1cm in the umbilicus region and upper abdomen, obliquely placed going downwards. 10B, 11 Three incised wounds 2cm x 1cm on the right & 12 side of the chest just below the nipple going deep into the chest. 13. 2cm x 1cm incised wound present in the axillary region on the left side. Muscles infiltrated with blood going medially. 14&15. Two incised wound present on the neck, 2cm x 1cm in size one in the middle of the neck and the second on the left superclavical region, on the left side going in the downwards direction. 16&17 Two incised wound 2cm x 1cm present on the left and right side of the neck in the posterior triangles above the upper border of scapule. 18&19 Two incised would 1cm x 5cm in size present on the left shoulder region, going downward and mid-line. Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -11- 20&21 Two incised wound one 1.5cm x 5cm and 3.5x1cm muscle deep present on the inner side of left upper arm. 22. Lacerated wound present on the ventral surface of the left arm 3cm x 2cm in size 10cm above the wrist joint, skin deep. 23. 2cm x 1cm incised wound present on the back in the scapular region on the left side. 24,25,26 Five incised wounds, 2cm x .5cm in the size present on the back of chest. 27 & 28 and abdomen obliquely placed each separated by 6 cm distance, wounds present in different directions going downward in the abdomen. Clotted blood was present. On opening the chest, on the right side, pleura was injured. Blood was present in the pleural cavity. Lungs were lacerated, corresponding to injury Nos.11, 5, 6 and 12. On the left side, pleura was lacerated. Blood was present in the pleural cavity. Lung was lacerated corresponding to injury No.2 pericardial injured. Blood was present in the pericardium-cavity. Left ventricle was lacerated corresponding to injury No.24. On opening of abdomen blood and stomach contents was present in the peritoneum cavity. Liver was lacerated corresponding to injury Nos.4 and 9. Spleen was lacerated corresponding to injury No.27. Stomach was lacerated, semi-digested food was coming out. In the opinion of Dr. Rakesh Kumar Singla (PW-1), the cause of death in this case was due to haemorrhage and shock due to the injuries described and also injuries to the vital organs, which were ante-mortem in nature and sufficient to Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -12- cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was within few minutes and between death and post mortem was within 36 hours. The appellant made an extra-judicial confession before Harvinder Singh Ex-Sarpanch (PW-3). On 08.07.1995, Harvinder Singh (PW-3) states that he was present at his house and at about 7.30 a.m. Chamkaur Singh (appellant) came and informed him (PW-3) that he (appellant) had murdered Beant Singh on 27.06.1995 as he had illicit relations with his wife Baljinder Kaur. The appellant further told Harvinder Singh (PW-3) that he (appellant) had seen his wife in a compromising condition with the deceased (Beant Singh), so he could not tolerate. Therefore, he made up his mind to murder Beant Singh. Chamkaur Singh (appellant) further told Harvinder Singh (PW-3) that on 27.06.1995, Beant Singh (deceased) was coming along with his father Ram Dass (PW-4) from village Lobana on a bicycle to Nabha and when they reached near the fields of Kesar Singh, he (appellant- Chamkaur Singh) stopped both of them. After that he (appellant) took Beant Singh in the pits and murdered him by giving knife blows and thereafter, he managed to escape on the scooter of Nachhattar Singh which was lying in his fields. Chamkaur Singh (appellant) told Harvinder Singh (PW-3) that he (PW-3) should produce him (appellant) before the Police as Harvinder Singh (PW-3) had special relations with the Police. Accordingly, Harvinder Singh (PW-3) produced the appellant Chamkaur Singh before Gurchain Singh SHO of Police Station Nabha at 11.00 a.m. near Radha Swami Satsang Bhawan. Harvinder Singh (PW-3) was cross-examined by the learned defence counsel. However, nothing which would favour the appellant could be brought out. Apart from the eye-witness account, the medical evidence and the extra-judicial confession of the appellant Chamkaur Singh, there is the evidence of Crl. Appeal No. 304-DB of 1999 -13- recovery of the blood-stained pant and shirt as also the knife. It may also be noticed that Nachhattar Singh (PW-5) did not support the prosecution case and was got declared hostile. He was cross-examined by the Public Prosecutor in which he accepted the position that on 27.06.1995 at about 9.45 am, he was present at his house in the village and his scooter No.PCX 4639 make Vespa was standing outside his house. In the meantime, the appellant (Chamkaur Singh) came there with blood- stained clothes and took his (Nachhatar Singh’s) scooter without his permission. It is accepted as correct that thereafter, he was proceeding to the Police Station. However, he denied that he was near the fields of Kesar Singh in the area of Rohti Channa. Nachhatar Singh (PW5) in his deposition in Court states that it is correct that he accompanied Ram Dass and Bhola Singh to the place of occurrence near the fields of Kesar Singh in the area of village Rohti Channa and saw the dead body of Beant Singh who was having injuries on his body and a lot of blood had oozed out. Nachhattar Singh (PW5) states that it is incorrect to say that Sukhdev Singh and Hem Raj also reached the spot and Ram Dass (PW4) left the spot and he himself went with Ram Dass (PW4) and Bhola Singh to the Police Station Sadar Nabha where Ram Dass (PW4) lodged the report with the Police. In the cross-examination by defence it