Crl.Appeal No. 668-SB of 2000 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.Appeal No.668-SB of 2000 Date of decision: 19.4.2011 Amar Singh and another ... Appellants versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH. Present: Mr.P.S.Brar, Advocates, for the appellants. Mr.P.S.Grewal, AAG, Punjab. ... JORA SINGH, J. This is an appeal by Amar Singh and Manga Singh sons of Bahal Singh, appellants, to impugn the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 6.7.2000 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, in Sessions Case No. 178 of 6.1.1994, arising out of FIR No.230 dated 27.7.1993, PS Sadar, Ferozepur, under Sections 450/459/367/120-B IPC. By the said judgment, they were convicted under Sections 459 and 367 IPC along with Kulwant Singh and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for three months each under Sections 459 and 367 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Jasmer Singh @ Mela Singh was acquitted of the charge levelled against him. Against acquittal, no appeal by the State. Gurlal Singh had died during the pendency of trial. Crl.Appeal No. 668-SB of 2000 2 Prosecution story, in brief, is that on the intervening night of 26/27.7.1993 at about 11.00 PM, Jasbir Singh, complainant, along with his wife Harjit Kaur and mother Mukhtiar Kaur on different cots was sleeping in the courtyard of his house. Gurlal Singh and Amar Singh, armed with pistol, Manga Singh, armed with kassi and Kulwant Singh, armed with dang, came inside their house by scaling the wall and had caught hold the complainant. Accused threatened to eliminate him. Harjit Kaur and Mukhtiar Kaur came forward to rescue the complainant, then Manga Singh armed with kassi gave blow which hit on the forehead of Mukhtiar Kaur. On receipt of blow, Mukhtiar Kaur fell down on the ground. Complainant was dragged towards the street. In front of the house of Hari Singh, Sarpanch, Major Singh, Ajmer Singh and two other villagers came at the spot. Then accused had fled away from the place of occurrence by leaving the complainant. Motive to commit the crime was that Jasmer Singh @ Mela Singh, brother of the complainant, was residing separately. Parents of Jasmer Singh were residing with the complainant. Father of the complainant and Jasmer Singh owned land measuring 10 acres, out of which, 3.5 acres was given to Jasmer Singh for cultivation and remaining land was under the cultivation of complainant and his father. Jasmer Singh with the connivance of his brothers-in-law and siri Kulwant Singh caused injuries to grab the property. Injured was shifted to the hospital, where she was medico legally examined. Intimation was given to the police and on receipt of intimation, IO came to the hospital. Statement of the complainant was recorded by SI Darshan Singh on 27.7.1993 near Shaheed Udham Singh Chowk, Ferozepur. Rough site plan with correct marginal notes was prepared. Blood stained earth and simple earth was lifted from the spot and Crl.Appeal No. 668-SB of 2000 3 was made into sealed parcels. Sealed parcels were taken into police possession vide separate memos attested by the witnesses. Blood stained clothes worn by Mukhtiar Kaur were also taken into police possession after the same were made into sealed parcel. Jasbir Singh was also medico legally examined. Accused were arrested. After completion of investigation, challan was presented in Court. Accused were charged under Sections 450/459/367 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined 9 witnesses. After close of the prosecution evidence, statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied all the prosecution allegations and pleaded to be innocent. In defence, copies of judgments (Ex.D1 and Ex.D2) were produced. After hearing learned PP for the State, learned defence counsel for the appellants and from the perusal of evidence on the file, appellants were convicted and sentenced as stated aforesaid. I have heard learned defence counsel for the appellants, learned State counsel and have gone through the evidence on file. Learned defence counsel for the appellants argued that appellants are the brothers-in-law of Jasmer Singh @ Mela Singh, who is brother of complainant. Parties have effected compromise. Gurlal Singh had died before presentation of challan. Kulwant Singh after undergoing imprisonment was released from jail on 12.2.2001. Amar Singh has already undergone one year, four months and twenty two days, whereas Manga Crl.Appeal No. 668-SB of 2000 4 Singh has undergone one year, seven months and ten days out of actual sentence. Impugned judgment is not challanged on the point of conviction. Requested to take lenient view in view of compromise. Learned State counsel argued that there was dispute regarding agricultural land amongst the complainant party and Jasmer Singh, who was acquitted by the trial Court. Gurlal Singh had died before presentation of challan. Kulwant Singh was released from jail after undergoing entire sentence. Appellants are the brothers-in-law of Jasmer Singh, who is the brother of complainant. No objection if lenient view is taken. No doubt, learned defence counsel for the appellants has not challenged the impugned judgment on the point of conviction and only requested to take lenient view but question is whether prosecution story inspires confidence or not. Mukhtiar Kaur, injured, appeared as PW4 and supported the prosecution story by saying that injuries were caused by the appellants. Jasbir Singh, complainant, also appeared as PW3 and supported the version of his mother Mukhtiar Kaur. PW1 Dr.Faqir Masih had medico legally examined Jasbir Singh and found the following injuries on his person:- “1. 2 cms x 1.5 cms reddish abrasion on front of right knee. 2. 1.5 cms x 2.25 cms reddish abrasion on outer side of right knee joint. 3. 2 cms x 1.5 cms abrasion in front and upper part of right leg, just below right knee joint. 4. 3 cms x 1.5 cms abrasion in front of left knee joint. 5. 2 cms x 1.75 cms reddish abrasion in upper part of left Crl.Appeal No. 668-SB of 2000 5 leg.” All the injuries were found simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. PW2 Dr. Davinder Kumar had medico legally examined Mukhtiar Kaur and found the following injuries on her person:- “1. An incised wound 15 cms x 3 cms on the nose and forehead. Fresh bleeding was present. Underlying bone was fractured. 2. Incised wound 4 cms x 1 cm on the left side of nose. Fresh bleeding was present.” Injury No.1 was found to be grievous in nature, whereas injury No.2 was declared simple in nature, but no x-ray report on the file qua injury No.1. Evidence on the file shows that Jasmer Singh and his father owned land measuring 10 acres. Out of this joint land, some portion was sold. There was civil litigation amongst the parties. Ex.D1 and Ex.D2 are the copies of judgments. FIR No.246 dated 108.1993 was registered against Amar Singh, Kulwant Singh and Jasmail Singh, whereas FIR No. 249 dated 10.8.1993 was registered against Amar Singh under the Arms Act. As per judgments (Ex.D1 and Ex.D2) dated 16.5.1994 in FIR Nos. 246 and 249, Amar Singh and others were acquitted of the charges levelled against them. That means, there was motive to cause injuries. In view of the statements of injured, eye witness and doctors, I am of the opinion that evidence on the file was rightly scrutinized by the trial Court. No reason to differ. Impugned judgment is upheld on the point of conviction. As discussed earlier, Gurlal Singh had died after registration of Crl.Appeal No. 668-SB of 2000 6 present FIR. Amar Singh was armed with pistol, but no injury was caused to any one. Kulwant Singh was armed with dang but he is out of jail after serving entire sentence. Manga Singh was armed with kassi but only one injury on the person of Mukhtiar Kaur was found to be grievous in nature. Parties have effected compromise. Appellants are related to the complainant party. Amar Singh has already undergone one year, four months and twenty two days, whereas Manga Singh has undergone one year, seven months and ten days out of actual sentence. Occurrence was in the month of July, 1993 and at that time, Amar Singh was 32 years' old, whereas Manga Singh was 22/23 years' old. Amar Singh and Manga Singh are real brothers. They are brothers-in-law of Jasmer Singh, who was acquitted by the trial Court. Jasmer Singh is the real brother of Jasbir Singh, complainant. After present occurrence, no dispute amongst the parties. Parties are residing peacefully. Ends of justice would be fully met if lenient view is taken, otherwise there are chances of further litigation. In view of all discussed above, appellants are directed to undergo imprisonment already undergone (one year, four months and twenty two days in case of Amar Singh and one year, seven months and ten days in case of Manga Singh). For the reasons recorded above, appeal without merit is dismissed with modification on the point of sentence. 19.4.2011 ( JORA SINGH ) pk JUDGE