Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 1 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 Dated of Decision: 12.05.2009 Dinesh Kumar alias Dina son of Vasdev Chawla, aged 25 years, Shopkeeper, r/o Basti Tainkanwali, Ferozepur City. ... Appellant Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Dated of Decision: 12.05.2009 Harinderpal Singh @ Lallu son of Jugraj Singh, 25 years, r/o Industrial Area, Ferozepur City. ... Appellant Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Dated of Decision: 12.05.2009 1. Lalit Sharma alias Banti son of Inderjit Sharma son of Jai Kishan, aged 24 years, Mechanic, resident of H. No. 85-B, Balochanwali Basti, Ferozepur. 2. Manoj Kumar alias Guru son of Sheesh Ram aged 25 years, Poultry Farm, resident of Tainkanwali Basti, Ferozepur. ... Appellants Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 2 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER Present: Mr. Bikramjit Arora, Advocate, (Amicus-Curiae), for the appellant, in Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995, and Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995. Mr. Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate, for the appellants, in Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995. Ms. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent – State. SHAM SUNDER, J. * * * * This judgement shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 449- SB of 1995, filed by Dinesh Kumar alias Dina, Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995, filed by Harinderpal Singh @ Lallu, and Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995, filed by Lalit Sharma alias Banti, and Manoj Kumar alias Guru, appellants, against the judgement of conviction, and the order of sentence dated 28.07.95, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, vide which, it convicted the accused, and sentenced them as under:- Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 3 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded 1 2 3 (i) Harinderpal Singh (a) Under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (b) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (c) Under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of four months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 4 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (d) Under Section 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. (e) Under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. (f) Under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 5 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (ii) Manoj Kumar (g) Under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (h) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (i) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 6 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (j) Under Section 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (k) Under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. (l) Under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 7 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (iii) Dinesh Kumar (m) Under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (n) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (o) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 8 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (p) Under Section 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (q) Under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (r) Under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 9 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (d) Lalit Sharma (s) Under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (t) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (u) Under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 10 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Names of the accused (now appellants) Offence for which convicted Sentence awarded (v) Under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of three months. (w) Under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. (x) Under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of two months. All the substantive sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently. 2. The facts, in brief, are that Parminder Singh complainant/injured, resident of Ferozepur Cantt, was a student of 11th Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 11 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 Class in Guru Nanak College, Ferozepur Cantt., at the relevant time. On 10.03.87 at 7.30 p.m. Parminder Singh, Amritpal Singh sons of Inderpal Singh, residents of 148 Sant Lal Road, Harjinder Singh son of Amar Singh resident of Bazar No.6, Ferozepur Cantt, Resham singh son of Darshan Singh, resident of Satiey Wala and Bhupinder Singh son of Satpal Singh, resident of Gali No.22, Ajit Road, Bathinda, were sitting in the house of Parminder Singh, and talking to each other, when in the meanwhile Rajesh Murgai son of Subhash Chander Murgai, resident of 60 Jhoke Road, Ferozepur Cantt, came there and told that he had gone to D.A.V. College, Cantt. Ferozepur to bring his sister where she was studying and when he was standing outside the gate of the College to take his sister with him, Lallu, Waziri, Dina, Manoj, Banti Sharma, Narinder Bhullar and Sanjeev Chatley, played jokes with him, and gave fist blows to him. Upon this, Parminder Singh, Resham Singh, Amritpal Singh, Harjinder Singh and Bhupinder Singh, accompanied by Rajesh Murgai, left for the house of Lallu to lodge protest. At about 8.30 p.m., when they reached near the main Cantt Chowk of Ferozepur Cantt, in front of Monga Machinery Store, where the electric light of the Chowk was glowing, they found Lallu, armed with a Kirch, Waziri, armed with a Kirch, Dina, armed with a Knife, Banti Sharma, armed with a Kirch, while Narinder Bullar and Sanjeev Chatley, accused empty handed. On seeing Parminder Singh and others, Narinder Bhullar, accused raised an exhortation that they should not be allowed to go unharmed. Parminder Singh told the Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 12 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 accused that they had not done good thing, in giving slaps to Rajesh Murgai, whereupon, Lallu accused, gave a kirch blow, which hit the buttock of Parminder Singh on the left side, while Waziri, accused, gave a kirch blow, which hit the abdomen near the navel of Resham Singh. Manoj, accused gave a kirch blow which hit the left side of the buttock of Bhupinder Singh. Then Dina accused gave a knife blow which hit the abdomen of Amritpal Singh. Banti Sharma gave two kirch blows, on abdomen near the navel of Harjinder Singh. Sanjeev Chately, continued proclaiming in loud voice that they (complainant and others) should not be allowed to go alive and enter the college function on the next day. Parminder Singh and his companions raised hue and cry of 'killed killed', whereupon all the accused decamped with their respective weapons, from the spot. Rajesh Murgai took the injured to the hospital, where they were medico-legally examined. 3. The motive for causing the injuries, was that Rajesh Murgai studied in the College, alongwith Parminder Singh, and others. He was their friend. Therefore, the complainant and his companions, were going to the house of Lallu, accused to lodge a protest for having beaten Rajesh Murgai, whereupon, the accused caused injuries on their person. 4. On the application, carbon copy whereof is exhibit PH, moved by the Police on 17.02.88 Dr. T.N. Singh made his endorsement exhibit PH/1 to the effect that injury on the person of Parminder Singh was grievous as knife broke in the vertebral column and would have Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 13 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 led to paralysis of lower limbs. On the basis of the statement of Parminder Singh, the first information report, was registered. 5. The case was investigated by Sub Inspector Raj Paul, Sub Inspector Madan Lal and Sh. Harjinder Singh Gill, Deputy Superintendent of Police. The accused were arrested. After the completion of investigation, the accused were challaned. 6. On their appearance, in the Court of the Committing Magistrate, the accused were supplied the copies of documents, relied upon by the prosecution. After the case was received by commitment, in the Court of Sessions, charge for various offences, was framed against the accused, which was read over and explained to them, to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed judicial trial. 7 The prosecution, in support of its case examined Sunder Singh, draftsman (PW1), who proved scaled site plan PA. 8. Assistant Sub Inspector Jagjit Singh (PW2), recorded the formal first information report, carbon copy whereof is PB. 9. Dr. T.N. Singh, Surgeon, Mission Hospital, Ferozepur (PW3), on 10.03.87 conducted medical examination of Resham Singh son of Darshan Singh, aged 25 years, and found the following injury on his person:- (i) Penetrating wound in right ypochondrium 5 cm from coastal margin and 9 cm from mid line size about 3 cm long x 2 cm wide x 5 cm deep. He declared the aforesaid injury as dangerous to life and opined that the injury was caused with sharp pointed weapon and the probable Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 14 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 duration of the injury was within six hours. He further stated that the injured was discharged from the hospital on 28.03.87. 10. It was further stated by Dr. T.N. Singh, that on 10.03.87 at 8.30 P.M., he also conducted the medico-legal examination of Parminder Singh son of V.P.S. Lamba and found the following injury on his person:- (i) 21/2 cm long x 11/2 cm wide x 3 cm deep stab wound on right side of back 21/2 cm above posterior inferior iliac spine. 3 cm from mid line posteriorly on right side of back. Dr. T.N. Singh in his medico-legal report, carbon copy whereof is exhibit P.D opined that nature of injury on the person of Parminder Singh was grievous and the probable duration of injury was within six hours. It was further stated by him that the injured was discharged from the hospital on 12.03.87. He further stated that when he operated upon Parminder Singh, he recovered metal piece of broken knife which was converted into a sealed parcel exhibit P1. 11. On the same day i.e. 10.03.97 Dr. T.N. Singh conducted medico-legal examination of Bhupinderpal Singh injured and found the following injury on his person:- (i) Stab wound left gluteal region 2 cm long x ½ cm wide 3 cm deep. 13 cms below left inferior posterior iliac spine. 3 cm from mid line. He opined that the injury was simple in nature and it was caused by sharp edged weapon. The probable duration of this injury was within six hours. 12. Dr. Harsh Bhola, (PW4), who at the relevant time was also Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 15 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 working in Mission Hospital, Ferozepur, sent ruqa exhibit PJ to Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, regarding the admission of Resham Singh, injured. He also sent ruqa exhibit PJ/1 to the Police Station regarding the admission of Parminder Singh. PJ/2 regarding the admission of Bhupinder Singh, exhibit PJ/3 regarding admission of Amritpal Singh and exhibit PJ/4 regarding the admission of Harjinder Singh, injured, were also sent by him to the Police Station Sadar Ferozepur. 13. Ex-subedar John, Record Keeper, Mission Hospital, Ferozepur (PW5), brought the summoned record. 14. Head Constable Nirmal Singh (PW6), recorded the statement of Parminder Singh, injured,PK and after appending the endorsement PK/1, sent the same to the Police Station for registration of the case. 15. Parminderpal Singh (PW7), is one of the injured. The broad features of his testimony, already stand mentioned, while narrating the facts of the case. 16. Harjinder Singh (PW8), an eyewitness also corroborated the statement of Parminderpal Singh, prosecution witness, in all material particulars. 17. Rajesh Murgai (PW9) another eyewitness also corroborated the statement of Parminderpal Singh, injured. 18. Raj Paul, Retired Sub Inspector (PW10), investigated this case and recorded the statements of some of the prosecution witnesses. 19. Dr. Satish Kaura, Surgical Specialist (PW11), on 10.03.87, Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 16 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 when he was posted in Mission Hospital, Ferozepur, conducted the medical examination of Harjinder Singh, injured-cum-eyewitness and found the following injuries on his person:- (i) There was cut injury on the righthypochondium about the size of 3 cm x 2 cm x ½ cm below coastal margin about one and half cm from the mid line. (ii) There was also cut injury in the right iliac fossa about the size of 21/2 cm x 11/2 cm x ½ cm. It was 8 cm from the anterior iliac spine and above 4 cm from the mid line. Injuries No.1 and 2, as per the opinion of Dr. Satish Kaura, were simple in nature and caused by sharp edged weapon. Dr. Satish Kaura gave medico-legal report exhibit PM regarding the injuries on the person of Harjinder Singh. After conducting operation on the person of Harjinder Singh he gave supplementary report copy whereof is exhibit PM/1 that both the injuries on the person of Harjinder Singh were grievous and the kind of weapon used was sharp edged. 20. On the same day i.e. 10.03.87 at 8.30 p.m. Dr. Satish Kaura also medico-legally examined Amritpal Singh, injured and found the following injury on his person:- (i) Cut injury on the abdomen about the size 2cm x 1cm x ½ cm about 4 cm about the mid line and about 1 cm below coastal margin. It was a fresh wound. Dr. Satish Kaura gave his medico-legal report exhibit PN and operated upon injured Amritpal Singh and gave opinion that the injury on the person of the injured was simple in nature and the weapon used was sharp and the probable duration of the injuries was within six hours. Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor for the State, closed the prosecution Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 17 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 evidence. 21. The statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, were recorded. They were put all the incriminating circumstances, appearing against them, in the prosecution evidence. They pleaded false implication. Narinderpal Singh, accused, in his statement, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stated that he was named in the first information report by the complainant due to groupism in the students in the college. He further stated that he was not present at the time of the alleged occurrence. The accused examined Shiv Dayal, Moharrir Head Constable (DW1), who proved DW1/A, true copy of the first information report No. 133, dated 22.10.86, registered under Section 324 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Cantt. Ferozepur, and Sat Mohan Singla, Pharmacist, Civil Hospital, Ferozepur (DW2), who brought the MLR register containing MLR No. 830/AS/87 of Harinderpal Singh son of Jugraj Singh, and MLR No. 831/AS/87 of Lalit Sharma son of Inderjit Sharma, and identified the signatures of Dr. A.S. Mann, on the same. He proved DB and DC, the copies of the MLRs. 22. The Counsel for the appellants submitted that there was an explained delay of 14 hours in lodging the first information report. They further submitted that the medico-legal reports PC of Resham Singh, injured and PD of Parminder Singh, injured, reveal that their fathers were present at the time of their medical examination and the Police Station was not far away from the hospital. But even then, the Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 18 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 first information report, was not lodged, immediately after the alleged occurrence. They further submitted that unexplained delay of 14 hours in lodging the first information report was utilized by the complainant to falsely implicate the accused, introduce false witnesses, and concoct a story. The submission of the Counsel for the appellants, in this regard, does not appear to be correct. As soon as the injuries were caused on the person of the injured they were taken to the hospital. The first and foremost concern of the kith and kin of the injured was to provide them the best medical aid to avoid any harm to their life. In getting admitted the injured in the hospital, consulting the doctor and arranging the money for the medicines to be provided to the injured, to save their life and avoid further harm, it must have taken sufficient time for the parents/kith and kin of the injured. The parents of the injured could not be said, in a proper condition of mind, on seeing their wards with dangerous to life and grievous injuries on their person having been caused at the hands of the accused. In those circumstances, any prudent man, could get puzzled and perplexed. Under these circumstances, it could not be expected even of a well educated person to immediately decide, as to what further course of action was required to be taken, in the matter. The mere fact that the Police Station was near the hospital in itself could not be said to be such a circumstance, which proved that there was deliberate delay on the part of the injured or their parents in lodging the first information report. Nothing has come, on the record, that either the parents of the injured or the injured, Criminal Appeal No. 449-SB of 1995 19 Criminal Appeal No. 465-SB of 1995 Criminal Appeal No. 496-SB of 1995 in any way, were reluctant to report the matter to the Police. As soon as, the information was sent to the Police Station, regarding the admission of the injured in the hospital, it came there, and recorded the statement of Parminder Singh, on the basis whereof, the first information report was registered. The delay, if any, occurred, on account of the aforesaid reasons. The same stands explained. Even otherwise, mere delay in lodging the first information report, in itself, could not be said to be sufficient, to disbelieve