818 Criminal Aopeal No88DB of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB S HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH eee 1 Q Criminal Appeal Noe388mDB of 2007 0 0 Date of Decisionz August c21 1 20090 C5 Babu Lal I VERSUS State of Haryana Respondent Z le Whether the Reportersof Local Newspapersmay be allowed to see the judgment 7 I a5 2e To be referred to the Reportersor not7 3 Whether the judgmentshould be reportedin the Digest2 a Z QUORUM HONBLE MRJUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HONBLE MR JUSTICE MOHINDER PALe Presentl Mr Neeraj Gaur Advocate for the appellant MrPardeepSPunia Additional Advocate General Haryana MOHINDER PAL 1 Babu Lal son of Sher Singh appellano along with his coeaccused Sunil son of Babu Lal Sonia alias Sunia daughterof POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 819 m Criminal Aopeal Noe388mDB of 2007 Babu Lal Lovelydaughterof babu Lal and Dinesh son of Babu Lal was tried by the Iearned Additional Sessions Judge Gurgaonfor the offences punishableunder Sections 148 323 readwith Section 149 452 read with Section 149 and 302 read C with Section 149 e of the Indian PenalCode lereinafter referred to 0 0 as the Code Vide judgmentof conviction dated 282006 and the sentence order dated 312006 passed by the C5 I Iearned Additional Sessions JudgeGurgaon Babu Lal lpellantl was convicted under Sections 302 452 and 323 of the Code Z and sentenced to undergo imprisonmentfor Iife and to pay 2 fine of Rs20001mindefault whereof to undergofutther rigorous I for four months under Section 302 of the Code to a5 undergorigorousimprisonment for one year and to pay One of Rs l0001 In default whereof to undergo further rigorous 1 7 Z for two months under Section 452 of the Code and to undergo rigorousimprisonment for six months under Section 323 of the Code All the substantive sentences of imprisonmentwere ordered to run concurrently Coaccused of the appellant namely hIS sons SuniI and Dinesh and daughters Sonia alias Sunia and Lovely were acquitted of the charges framed against them by holding that they were entitled to get benefit of doubt Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence this appealhasbeen preferredby appellant Babu Lal The instant case was registeredon the basis of statement made before the police on 4112003 at about 7 P by Krishna Devi complainantlwherein she stated that POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 320 v3 Criminal Appeal N388DB of 20070 her husband Parkash deceasedlwho was younger brotherof appellantBabu Lal on 3112003 had demanded the amount from Babu Lal in respectof his opellantslshare of Bhat upon which the appellantexhorted to teach Parkash a Iesson for t7aising such demand Thereafter the appIlant 0 causedinjuriesto Parkash with Musal On hearing the noise C I when the complainant reached at the spot to save her C5 husband the appellant also caused injuries on her head and I rightshoulderwith Musal Sunil Dinesh Sonia alias Sunia and Z LoveIyacquittedaccused also allegedly participated in r causinginjuries to Parkash leceasedl The said occurrence was I also witnessed by Jai Singh PW8 who rescued the 08 and the deceased from the clutches of the accused Parkash was taken to Sethi HospitalGurgaon from where he neno Z was referred to the AII India Institute of Medical Sciences or r short AISl Delhi The complainantgot onlyfirst aid for the injurieson her person Parkash succumbed to the injuries on 5e1102003 On 5112003 Dr AbhijitRodra Department of Forensic Medicines A11MS Delhi PW 11 performed post mortem examination on the dead bodyof Parkash and found five injurieson the dead body 1e stitched wound over the scalp Ill the middle over the top of the head stitched wound extending from right side of frontal region to right temporalparietal region ofscalp multipleabrasions over upperpart of the chest on the rightside over the collar bone multiple abrasions over front of POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 321 4e Criminal Aopeal N388eDB of 2007 Ieft Ieg and fracture of frontal bone with separation of coronal and sigital sutures extending to the floor of the anterior cranial fossa on the right side involvingthe orbital plate with 1 haematoma formation Accordingto the opinionof the Doctor the cause of death in this case was comma as a result of head 0 0 injury producedby blunt forcetrauma by a blunt object which I was sufficient to cause death in the ordinarycourse of nature 0 I All the injurieswere ante mortem in nature Exhibit PA is the postmortem report On 5112003 Dr VK Thapar Medical Officer Q General Hospital Gurgaon PW21 had medicoIegally examined I complainantKrishna and found two injurieson her person ie 08 stitched wound present on the right parietal region and complaint of pain on the rightshoulder joint Both the injuries 7 were with a blunt weapon and within 48 hours of duration The clothes of the complainantwere bloodesoaked The complainant was referred to AIMS Delhi The case was investigated statements of the witnesses wererecorded under Section 161 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure and after completionof investigation and due formalities challan was presented in Court againstthe accused On 2632004 the Iearned Additional Sessions Judge Gurgaon framed charges against the accused under Sections 148 323 read with Section 149 452 read with Section 149 and 302 read with Section 149 to which the accused did not plead guiltyand claimed a trial POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 322 w Criminal Apoeal Noe388mDB of 2007 At the trial the prosecutionexamined Dr AbhijitRodra IAl11 DreKe Thapar N Head Constable Bal Chand PW3J Moharrir Head Constable Hardwari Lal P W41 r Assistant Sub Inspector BaIbir Singh Pwe5 complainant 0 C Krishna PeWe6lo DraftsmanNaresh Kumar N7 Jai Singh I P W e 8 Sub Inspector Sanjeev Kumar N91 Assistant Sub C5 InspectorUmed Singh PW101 Ram Avtar N11 Assistant I Sub Inspector Preet Singh InvestigatingOmcer N121 and Z Assistant Sub InspectorIqbalSingh N1 C Statementof the accused was thereafter recorded I under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he a5 denied the prosecutionallegationsand pleaded false implication due to serious partyfaction in the Village However no evidence 7 Z was producedin defence We have heard the argumentsof Mr NeerajGaur Advocate appearing for the appellantand MrPardeepSPunia Additional Advocate GeneraI Haryana appearingfor the State and have gone through the recordsof the case The eyeewitnessaccount in this case has been given by complainant Krishna PWe6 wife of victim Parkash deceasedl Krishna had also sustained injuries in the occurrence atthe hands of the appellant As stated above Dr V Thapar PeWe21 Who on 5112003 had medicoeIegally examined complainantKrishna had found two injurieson her person 1ee stitched wound on the right parietai region and complaint of POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 323 1Vl 4e Criminal Appeal N388eDB of 2007 pain on the rightshoulder joint Both the injuries were opined to have been caused with a blunt weapon Krishna PW6 IS thUS a stamped witness of the prosecution having received 1 injuriesin the occurrence She stated that on 3e112003 at r about 9 P she and herhusband Parkash were present inthe 0 0 of their house Earlier to it on that day Parkash had I goneto the house of the appellant and demanded from him C5 appellantl the share of Bhat but the appellantrefusedto I make the payment and threatened to teach a Iesson to the deceasedfor raisingsuch a demand It was the cause of dispute tt between the two real brothers ie the appellant Babu Lal and I deceased Parkash Thereafter the appellant forcibly entered C45 the house of the deceased and gave Musal blow on the head of Parkash deceasec When the complainanttried to save her m2 Z husband from the accusedshe was also given 1 Musalblow on a her head by the appellant The complainant became unconsaous on receiptof the injurye Jai Singh PWe8 a neighbourof ParkaslIeceased9 and Ram Avtar iV111 real brother of Parkash and appellantB8bu Lal the other two eyewitnessesof the occurrence did not support the case of the prosecutionand were declared hostilee However in the presence of ocular version given by Krishna PW6J who herseif had suffered an injuryon the head at the hands of the appellant in the occurrence and the medical evidence furnished by Dr Abhijit Rodra PW11 DrK Thapar PW21 which fully corroborates the ocular version POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 324 l 7 Criminal Aopeal No88DB of 20070 givenby complainant Krishna N61 nonesupporting of the prosecutioncase by Jai Singh PW8 and Ram Avtar PWelll does not affect the truthfulness of the case Dr AbhijitRodra e PWell Who on 5 11 2003 had conducted autopsy on the dead bodyof Parkash had found Ove injurieson the dead body le 0 C stitched wound over the scalp in the middle over the top of the I head stitched wound extendingfrom right side of frontal 0 region to right temporalparietal region of scaIP multiple I abrasions over upper part of the chest on the right side over the Z collar bone multiple abrasions over front of Ieft Ieg and fracture of frontal bone with separationof coronal and sigital sutures extendingto the floor of the anterior cranial fossa on the 08 rightside involvingthe orbital plate with haematomaformation Dr VK Thapar PW21 upon examination of 7 Z cornplainantKrishna had observed a stitched wound on the rightparietal region besides the complaint of pain on the right shoulderjointof the complainant Learned counsel for the appellant has Iaid much emphasis on the point that the matter was reportedto the police after about 22 hours The occurrence had taken place on 3a112003 at 8bout 9 PM whereas the complainant made statement before the police on 4112003 at 720 PM We have giventhoughtful consideration to the argument raised by Iearned counsel for the appellant but do not find any force therein The delay In this case has not remained unexplained on record In fact it stands fullyexplained As observed above POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 325 1 8 Criminal Appeal No88mDB of 2007 complainant Krishna had received injuries on her person includinga head injury which requiredstitches She has stated Ill her depositionin Court that she had become unconscious 1 afterreceivingthe injuriesand regained consciousness two hours r thereafter The condition of Parkasldeceasedlusband of the 0 complainant was quitesenous Firstly the deceased was taken C3 I to a hospital ltl Gurgaonfrom where he was referredto AMS C5 Delhle In the circumstances when the condition of the injured I remained serious the near familymembers of the injured Z were not expectedto rush to the PoIice Station to Iodgethe report Rather the firstlyanxiety on their part would be to provide best I medical aid to the injured The priorityof the complainant was a5 to save thelife of her husbandParkash leceasedl Thus there was no undue delay in Iodgingthe report with the police and the wmo Z delay stands satisfactorily explainedon record BesideS on the one hand the promptness in Iodgingthe report with the police does not ipsofacto furnish any guarantee regardingtruthfulness of the version put forth andon the other hand the deiay in Iodgingthe report Ill itself does not Iead to a conclusion that the entire version is false The delay at the most puts the Court on its guard to scrutinize the evidence Ied by the prosecutionvery carefully As has been mentioned above the case of the prosecution insofar as it relates to causingof injuries by the appellant to the deceased and the complainant stands fullyprovedon record from the cogent and trustworthyevidence Ied by the prosecution Under the circumstances the POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 326 w9 Criminal Apoeal N388eDB of 2007 inescapableconclusion IS that it was the appellant wlio had caused injuriesto the deceased and the complainant The Iearned trial Judgerightly accepted the originaiversion given by m the complainant Ill her statement recorded by the poiice on r 4 112003 at about 720 PM in which she had stated that it 0 0 was the appellant who had caused injuriesto Parkash deceased and the complainant C5 I Another argumentof Iearned counsel for the appeliant that as the dispute in thiscase had arisen just on account of Z nonepaymentof the share of Bhat by the appeilant and the r occurrence had taken place at the spur of moment therefore the I offence does not fall under Section 302 of the Code and rather 08 offence under Section 304 Part II of the Code is made out is also without any merit The appellant Ill this case caused injuries vn Z on the head of Parkash deceased with Musal which Is a deadlyweapon To give blows on the head with such a heavy weapon points clearly towards the intention of the appeilantto commit the murder of Parkash The appellantalso caused injury with Musal on the head of complainantKrishna wife of the deceased for which she requiredstitches Under the circumstance it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that appellant Babu Lal caused injuries atthe spur of moment without premeditation and having no intention to commit the murder of the deceased or the knowledgethat the inJuries he was inflicting would be sufficient in ordinaryCOurse of nature to cause death of Parkash As such the offence POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 327 10 Criminal Apoeal No88eDB of 2007 comrnitted by appellantBabu Lal falls within the ambit of Section 302 of the Code Consequently finding no merit Ill this appeal we dismiss the same tr r VP re 0 C C MOHUNTAI MOHINDER PAL I JUDGE JUDGE I C5 I 1 2009 ak Z 1 r a5 0 P W Z ll POOJA 2014.11.26 14: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document