Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 Date of decision 15.9.2009. Malta Singh and others ...... Appellants. versus State of Haryana ...... Respondent. CORAM :- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.C.PURI. Present :- Mr. J.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate and Mr. Robin Kanwar, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. K.S.Pannu, DAG, Punjab. K.C.PURI, J. Malta Singh, Bhura Singh and Karnail Singh have directed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 6.2.1999 passed by Shri S.M.S.Mahil, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mukatsar vide which appellants have been convicted under Sections 304(Part II) of the Indian Pernal Code, (hereinafter mentioned as – the IPC) and sentenced Bhura Singh as well as Kaila Singh alias Karnail Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- each Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 2 and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one yeare whereas appellants-Malta Singh was sentenced to undergo rigorous impirsonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 304(Part II)/34 IPC. The factual matrix gathered from the record is that Jaskaran Singh and his elder brother Chamkaur Singh were jointly residing in their house situated in village Harike-Kalan, appellants also resided in the nearby houses. There was no electric light in the house of Chamkaur Singh but he had been arranging the light in his room by stealing electricity from electric pole installed in the street by means of wire and hook. Bhura Singh etc had objected to the illegal extraction of electicity by Chamkaur Singh. On 16.3.1996 at about 8 p.m. Jaskaran Singh was coming after finishing his work in the house of Mohinder Singh. All the accused armed with `dangs' were found standing in the stret outside his house. They were abusing Chamkaur Singh. In the meanwhile Chamkaur Singh also came out in the street and inquired from Bhura Singh etc about the reason for abusing him. Malta Singh and Karnail Singh accused caught hold of Chamkaur Singh while Bhura Singh gave a thrust blow with his `dang' on the abdomen of Chamkaur Singh. Malta Singh squeezed the testicles of Chamkaur Singh, while Karnail Singh also gave thrust blow with his `dang' on the abdomen orf Chamkaur Singh, who fell down on the ground. The accused gave more thrust blows with their `dangs'. Jaskaran Singh and Chamnkaur Singh raised alarm, upon which the accused ran away from the spot with their respective weapons. Jaskaran Singh and Jagjit Kaur wife of Chamkaur Singh carried Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 3 Chamkaur Singh inside their house. He was taken to a private hospital at Baghapurana from where he was taken to Moga hospital and from there he was referred to DMC Ludhiana where he was admitted on 21.3.1996. On information, police of polie station Sadar Mukatsar reached the hospital and moved an application to the doctor for statement of the injured but the doctor declared him unfit to make statement. Ultimately, Ex.PG statement of Jaskaran Singh was recorded by him and on the basis of which FIR was recorded. The doctor had declared injury on the person of Chamkaur Singh as dangerous to life. Chamkaur Sigh died on 4.9.1996 in the hospital. Statements of the prosecution witnesses were recorded. After completion of necessary investigation, challan against the appellants was presented. On appearance of the appellants in the Court, copies of the documents were supplied to them under rules. Finding a prima facie case, charge under Sections 304/34 of the IPC was framed against the appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution, in order to bring home guilt of the appellants, examined Dr.S.P.Singla (PW-1), Dr.K.K.Aggarwal (PW-2), Dr.Jaspal Singh (PW-3), Jaskaran Singh (PW-4), Jagjit Kaur (PW-5), ASI Puran Singh (PW-6) and Baldev Singh (PW-7), the evidence was closed by the Public Prosecutor. The appellants were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and all the incriminating evidence was put to them. They denied the allegations and pleaded innocence. According to them, there was no dispute about the electricity with Chamkaur Singh and statement of Jaskaran Singh has been Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 4 fabricated. The allegations were called upon to lead evidence and they examined Dharam Singh (DW-1), Manga Singh (DW-2) in defence. The learned trial Court held the appellants guilty under Section 304(Part II)/34 of the IPC sentenced them, as narrated above. Feeling dis-satisfied with the above said judgment of conviction, the convict/appellants have preferred the instant appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned State counsel and have gone through the records of the case. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that according to the prosecution the occurrence has taken place on 16.3.1996 at 10 p.m. However, statement of Jaskaran Singh complainant was recorded on 23.3.1996 at 11.50 a.m. Such a huge delay has been used by the prosecution for deliberations and consultations. The reason for delay given by the prosecution is not convincing. I have carefully considered this submission and have gone through the records of the case. The complainant has categorically stated that they have not reported the matter as the accused have assured that they would raise fund for the treatment of Chamkaur Singh. According to the FIR itself, Chamkaur Singh was taken to a doctor at Baghapurana and from there he was taken to Civil Hospital, Moga. Thereafter, he was referred to D.M.C. Hospital, Ludhiana. It was the DMC authorities, who were sent the information and thereafter case was registered. From the records, it is revealed that the complainant party could not pay the bill of the DMC Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 5 Hospital and on that account he was discharged by DMC authorities. Chamkaur Singh deceased was thereafter taken to Government Medical College, Faridkot where he remained admitted for sufficient long period. So, in these circumstances, the delay in lodging the FIR stands fully explained. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that motive for the occurrence is not convincing. Even if, Chamkaur Singh was stealing the energy in that case the sufferer would be the electricity department and not the accused and as such the motive for the occurrence is fully proved. I have carefully considered the said submission but do not find any force in that submission also. It is a matter of common knowledge that in case unauthorized energy is stolen in that case the voltage of neighbour drops which cause hindrance in the free supply of electricity. So, it cannot be said that there was no motive for the occurrence for the accused. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that as per PW-4 Jaskaran Singh, Malta Singh accused caught hold Chamkaur Singh from the arm and the other allegations against Malta Singh is that he pressed the testicles of Chamkaur Singh. The doctor, who was produced by the prosecution, has not uttered a single word that there was any injury to the testicles of Chamkaur Singh nor any treatmen5 to Chamkaur Singh for his injuries to the testicles was provided. Dr.Jaspal Singh(PW-3) of DMC Hospital has stated that Chamkaur Singh was operated by him on 20.;3.1996 and laportomy was Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 6 done and sigmoid colon performation was found and sigmoid colostomy was done for the same. So, this doctor deposed about treatment of Chanmkaur Singh in respect of injury to his abdomen. No person would catch the other while causing injuries by the accused with dang as there may be chances of the person catching already injured, while receiving the injuries. There was only one injury as per the prosecution on the abdomen of Chamkaur Singh that injury has been attributed to Bura Singh. Both the PW-3 Dr.Jaspal Singh and PW-2 Dr.K.K.Aggarwal have not stated about the second injury on the body of the injured Chamkaur Singh. So, it is submitted that the delay in lodging the FIR, has been concocted regarding false involvement against Malta Singh accused. I have carefully considered the said submission. This submission carries weight and has to be accepted. There is no corresponding injury attributed to the said accused to the testicles of Chamkaur Singh, which in turn, has been attributed to Malta Singh accused. No same person would catch hold the victim when the other accused are causing injuries with dang like weapon as there is every possibility of receiving injuries by that person, who caught hold the victim. So, the part attributed to Malta Singh may be exaggerated. So, the delay in these circumstances so far as Malta Singh appellant is concerned assumes importance. Even according to Dr.Jaspal Singh and Dr.K.K.Aggarwal there was no second injury in the abdomen of Chamkaur Singh. So, Karnail Singh may also have been falsely implicated. Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 7 It is settled law that no innocent person should be punished. So, keeping in view that proposition of law, as the possibility cannot be ruled out that his name has been dragged. So, giving benefit of doubt, both Malta Singh and Karnail Singh stand acquitted. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that there is no co-relation between cause of death and the nature of injuries attributed to the accused Bhura Singh. That submission is without any substance. PW-3 Dr.Jaspal Singh has conducted the operation upon deceased at the initial state and has declared the injury dangerous to life as per endorsement on Ex.PF. Chamkaur Singh remained admitted in different hospitals and ultimately succumbed to his injuries. PW-2 Dr.K.K.Aggarwal has categorically stated that injury to the abdomen caused the septicemia which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. So, in these circumstances, the guilt of Bhura Singh appellant stands proved. There is absolutely no reason to implicate Bhura Singh and to allow the real culprit to go scot free. So, the conviction recorded by the trial Court in respect of Bhura Singh stands affirmed. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that Bhura Singh has undergone actual sentence for a period of three years eleven months and twenty four days as per conviction slip whereas the total period of incarceration is four years twenty two days including a period of parole. It is further contended that appellants has undergone protracted trial since 1996 i.e. more than thirteen years. So, prayer has been made for reduction of sentence. The learned trial Court has convicted the accused under Section Criminal Appeal No.626-SB of 1999 8 304-Part II and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/-. The maximum sentence prescribed under the Act has been awarded to the appellants. As per allegations, the appellant- Bhura Singh has given a single blow of dang in the abdomen of Chamkaur Singh and there was only one injury on the persons of Chamkaur Singh. As per medical evidence on record, the accused has not repeated the blow. He has undergone incarceration for a period of actual sentence of three years eleven months and twenty five days excluding the parole period of twenty eight days. So, the ends of justice in my opinion would be met in case his sentence is reduced to already undergone. However, Bhura Singh accused is directed to deposit Rs.25,000/- in the trial Court within two months from today as compensation u/s 357 Cr.P.C. which amount on realization is ordered to be paid to legal heirs of Chamkaur Singh deceased. In the above terms, the appeal stands disposed of accordingly. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance. September 15, 2009 ( K.C. PURI ) sv JUDGE