Criminal Appeal No.853-DB of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Hari Parkash APPELLANT VERSUS State of Haryana RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mrs.Kamla Malik, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Pardeep Singh Punia, Additional A.G. Haryana. MEHTAB S.GILL, J. This is an appeal against the judgment/order dated 30.10.2000/ 3.11.2000 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari whereby he convicted Hari Parkash son of Baldeva under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for the murder of Angad and Chander Parkash. He was further convicted under Section 394 I.P.C. on the charge of robbery. He was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the murder of Angad and Chander Parkash and to undergo another sentence of life imprisonment under Section 394 I.P.C. All the sentences were ordered to run Criminal Appeal No.853-DB of 2009 -2- conrurrently. A fine of Rs.25,000/- was imposed on each count and in default, to further undergo RI for two years. Rajinder Singh son of Baldeva was acquitted by the learned trial Court. The case of the prosecution is unfolded by the statement of Ved Parkash Ex.PK given to SI Sukhbir Singh on the liquor vend of Bus Stand Rewari. Ved Parkash stated that he was working on S.K. & Company, L-2, Bawal Chowk, Rewari. Chander Parkash and Angad Kumar were working with him as co-workers at the liquor vend. On 9.2.1989 at about 9.15 p.m. they all were present in their liquor shop. Chander Parkash was working on the cash counter and he himself and Angad Kumar were supplying liquor to the customers. Two young persons of middle height, being non-Sikh came there. One was wearing a white Kurta, whereas the other was wearing a shirt. One of them demanded a quarter of honey Bee Brandey. Ved Parkash stated, that they had Aristocrat Brandy. Both the accused were talking in the local language. Accused then pulled out their pistols and pointed them towards Ved Parkash and Angad Kumar and fired at them. Thereafter Ved Parkash was told to give the cash, otherwise he would also be killed. Ved Parkash then handed over all the cash to them which he had as per the sale of liquor. Both the accused after taking the cash, went towards the Bawal Chowk. It came to his knowledge later that the accused then went to Jain Filling Station and shot dead Nimmi Chand Salesman and took away the cash. Ved Parkash stated that he could identify both the persons, if they were brought before him. Both the deceased were then taken to the hospital by Surinder Kumar and Subhash Chand in an injured condition. On the basis of this statement Ex.PK F.I.R. Ex.PK/1 was registered on 9.2.1989 at 11.30 p.m. and the special report reached the S.D.J.M., Rewari on Criminal Appeal No.853-DB of 2009 -3- 10.2.1989 at 3.15 a.m. The prosecution to prove its case, brought into the witness-box HC Sheodan Singh PW-1, Ram Avtar Yadav Advocate PW-2, Ashok Kumar PW-3, Roshan Lal PW-4, Satish Kumar PW-5, Dr.Sahib Singh Chandna PW-6, Dr.V.K.Jain PW-7, HC Randhir Singh PW-8, HC Sarvsukh PW-9, Surinder Kumar PW-10, Rai Singh PW-11, Shri Pahlad Singh S.D.M. PW-12, Ved Parkash PW-13, Raj Kumar PW-14, HC Kanwaljit Singh PW-15, ASI Ram Kishan PW-16, SI Sukhbir Singh PW-17, ASI Dharam Chand PW-18, Inspector Udai Singh PW- 19 and SI Gulbir Singh PW-20. Learned counsel for the appellant has stated that there are material discrepancies in the statement of the witnesses in the F.I.R., no identification mark or anything which could show the identification of the appellant, has been stated. Ved Parkash PW-13 in his statement Ex.PP has stated that the occurrence took place at 9.15 p.m. on 9.2.1989. Sukhbir Singh PW-17 in his cross-examination has stated that he received the information of the occurrence at the liquor vend from Surinder Kumar PW-10 at 7.30/8.00 p.m. on 9.2.1989. Surinder Kumar PW-10 has not stated that Ved Parkash PW-13, the eye-witness to the occurrence was employed in his liquor vend and nowhere has he stated that he was present at the time of the occurrence. This witness has also not stated as to whether Ved Parkash PW-13 had come to his house to tell him about the occurrence. Further, Ved Parkash PW-13 has stated that Police Station Rewari is 1-1/2 kms. from the liquor vend and the police station is next to the house of Surinder Kumar PW-10. He has further stated that he went to the house of Surinder Kumar PW-10 and after the occurrence the conduct of Ved Parkash PW-13 was unnatural and it seems that he was not present at the time of the occurrence and is a planted witness. Criminal Appeal No.853-DB of 2009 -4- Investigating Officer SI Sukhbir Singh PW-17 has stated, that he received a telephonic message of the dacoity having taken place on the liquor shop and the petrol pump, but he did not mention that two persons had been killed. The medical evidence does not corroborate the ocular account. Ved Parkash PW-13 in his testimony before the Court has stated that the appellant fired from a distance of 3 to 4 feet. Dr.V.K.Jain PW-7 who prepared the post-mortem report, has stated that there was no blackening around the wound. Learned counsel for the State has argued that the test-identification parade was held by Shri Prahlad Singh S.D.M. PW-12 it was conducted in a very methodical and legal manner. Both the accused were identified by the witnesses. The occurrence had taken place at 9.15 p.m. on 9.2.1989 and the special report had reached the J.M.I.C. Rewari at 3.15 a.m. on 10.2.1989. Both the eye-witnesses i.e. Ved Parkash PW-13 and Raj Kumar PW-14 who were workers at an adjoining Dhaba, are independent witnesses. No enmity has been suggested or has come forward from the side of the defence that they were inimical towards the appellant. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. The test-identification parade was conducted by Shri Prahlad Singh SDM PW-12 on 18.5.1989. It was conducted in District Jail Mohindergarh by the Jail Superintendent. Ved Parkash PW-13, Raj Kumar PW-14 and Om Parkash were present at the time when the identification was done. 17 persons were made to stand in a row along with the appellant. Shri Prahlad Singh SDM PW-12 has stated that first Ved Parkash PW-13 was called and he looked at all the 17 persons and thereafter he identified Hari Parkash. In his testimony before the Court especially in his cross- examination where specific questions were put to Ved Criminal Appeal No.853-DB of 2009 -5- Parkash PW-13, he stood by the test-identification parade. Similarly, Raj Kumar PW-14 who is an independent witness, also identified appellant Hari Parkash. Ved Parkash PW-13 is an independent witness. There was no need for him to falsely implicate the appellant. His testimony is trustworthy and inspires confidence. The testimony of both Ved Parkash PW-13 and Raj Kumar PW-14 gets corroboration from the medical evidence of Dr.V.K.Jain PW-7 and Dr.Sahib Singh Chandna PW-6. Further, they get corroboration from Surinder Kumar PW- 10 the owner of the liquor vend. ASI Dharam Chand PW-18 arrested the appellants. In his testimony he has stated, that appellant committed robbery in Delhi when he was apprehended under Section 307 I.P.C. and under T.A.D.A. A 9 mm. pistol was recovered from him and it is thereafter that he was handed over to the Haryana Police in the double murder case of Chander Parkash and Angad. In view of the observations and discussion made above, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned trial Court. Conviction of the appellant is maintained. Sentence imposed is adequate. Fine of Rs.25000/- imposed under Sections 302 and 394 I.P.C. each is also maintained. Appellants shall undergo 3 months RI in default of payment of fine. Appeal is dismissed. Before parting with the judgment, we would like to direct the State of Haryana to look into the undergone period of the appellant, as it has been pointed out to us by the learned counsel for the parties that appellant has already undergone more than 20 years RI. If his undergone period of sentence has been completed, he should be released forthwith. Criminal Appeal No.853-DB of 2009 -6- A copy of this order be sent to the Home Secretary and the Chief Secretary of Haryana. ( MEHTAB S.GILL ) JUDGE ( ARVIND KUMAR ) January 12, 2010 JUDGE GD WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES/NO