Dilawar Singh & Ors vs State Of Haryana

Appellants Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3) and Shamsher Singh (A-7) in Criminal Appeal No.1362/2010 challenge the legality of their conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment and imposition of fine of Rs.5,000/- each and also challenge their conviction for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and sentence of imprisonment for two years. Being aggrieved by the acquittal of Balkar Singh (A-4), Ranbir Singh (A-6) and Charan Singh (A-8), State of Haryana and Chanda Singh – father of the deceased Narinder Singh have preferred Criminal Appeal Nos. 826/2010 and 830/2010.

7) gave blow on the head of deceased Narinder Singh with their respective cutter and Narinder Singh fell down along with his motor cycle and shouted Bachao Bachao. At that time Chanda Singh-father of the deceased along with his brother Hakam Singh came nearby in their car and saw the accused being attacked. Chanda Singh and Hakam Singh cried for help and shouted ‘NA MARO NA MARO’. Gurdev Singh (A-2) and Charan Singh (A-8) caused sword blows on the left leg and right leg of Narinder Singh. Ranbir Singh (A-6) gave gandasi blow on the right hand of Narinder Singh whereas Balkar Singh (A-4) gave gandasi blow to Narinder Singh on his left arm. Two other assailants namely Ashok Kumar (A-5) and Dalbir Singh (A-9) attacked Narinder Singh with hockey sticks and caused injuries to Narinder Singh. In the meanwhile, Sham Singh (PW-7) also reached there and he too shouted at the accused not to kill Narinder Singh. All the accused fled away from the spot with their respective weapons in their motor cycles. Chanda Singh (PW-6), Hakam Singh and Sham Singh (PW-7) chased the assailants in their respective vehicles but they could not catch hold of them.

3. Further case of prosecution is that on 22.8.1998 at about 9.00 p.m. ASI Charan Dass (PW-11) who was on patrolling duty received message about an injured person lying near Veterinary Hospital, Ladwa and PW-11 and police party went to the scene of occurrence and shifted injured Narinder Singh to Community Health Centre, Ladwa where Dr. Ashwini Kumar (DW-1), Medical Officer of the Health Centre examined him and found him not fit to make statement. In the meanwhile, Chanda Singh and Hakam Singh reached the spot and found that injured Narinder Singh had already been shifted to the hospital by the police. Chanda Singh (PW-6) went to the Ladwa Hospital and Hakam Singh went to the village to inform the family members of Narinder Singh about the incident. When Chanda Singh reached Community Health Centre at Ladwa, injured Narinder Singh was, in the process of being referred to the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital, Kurukshetra as his condition was very serious. In the hospital at Kurukshetra, Dr. S.C.Grover (PW-1) examined the injured–Narinder Singh and opined that Narinder Singh was unfit to make any statement. Since the condition of Narinder Singh was serious, he was immediately referred to PGI Chandigarh and Chanda Singh shifted injured Narinder Singh to PGI Chandigarh. Dr. Munish Kumar (PW-9) of PGI Chandigarh admitted Narinder Singh in the hospital on 23.8.1998 at about 2.30 a.m. and intimation was sent to the police post located near the hospital. On receipt of information from the hospital, ASI Karam Chand (PW-4) went to the hospital and on his application Dr. Kanya Rejangam (PW-8) opined that injured Narinder Singh was unfit to make statement. Injured Narinder Singh succumbed to injuries at about 5.30 a.m. on 23.8.1998 and death intimation was sent to the Police Post, PGI Chandigarh. On the same day Chanda Singh came back to Ladwa and went to the police station and lodged the complaint on the basis of which FIR was registered at Ladwa Police Station, ASI Charan Dass (PW-

4. To bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined PWs 1 to 16 and placed reliance on documents and material objects. The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. about the incriminating evidence and circumstances and they denied all of them. Accused Ranbir Singh took a plea of alibi by stating that he is practising as an advocate at Kurukshetra and was not present at the spot on the date of occurrence. Gurdev Singh (A-2) also took the plea of alibi and stated that he was posted as a Naib Tehsildar and in connection with his official work had gone to village Sardhaheri on the date of occurrence. The accused examined DWs 1to 6 as witness on their side.

10. The prosecution case revolves around the ocular version of Chanda Singh (PW-6) father of deceased Narinder Singh who witnessed the occurrence along with his brother Hakam Singh and Sham Singh (PW-7). PWs 6 and 7 have spoken about the attack on the deceased and overt act of accused Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3) and Shamsher Singh (A-7) and others. Hakam Singh was not examined. Evidence of Sham Singh (PW-7) corroborates the version of Chanda Singh (PW-6). Learned courts below found the evidence of PW-6 trustworthy and recorded respective findings for convicting Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3) and Shamsher Singh (A-7) and acquitting other accused.

8), State and Chanda Singh have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 826/2010 and Criminal Appeal No. 830/2010.

35. The court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the approach is vitiated by manifest illegality. In an appeal against acquittal, this Court will not interfere with an order of acquittal merely because on the evaluation of the evidence, a different plausible view may arise and views taken by the courts below is not correct. In other words, this Court must come to the conclusion that the views taken by the learned courts below, while acquitting, cannot be the views of a reasonable person on the material on record.

37. On evaluation of the evidence found by the High Court while recording an order of acquittal, in our view, does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality or manifest error. We see no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal of Accused 4, 6 and 8.

38. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the appeal preferred by accused (A-1, Dilawar Singh), (A3, Yash Pal), and (A-7, Shamsher Singh). The appeal fails and the same is dismissed. The appeals against acquittal preferred by the State and by Chanda Singh also are dismissed.

September 16, 2014