Satbir @ Lakha vs State Of Haryana

1. The second accused is the appellant before us. The challenge is to the common judgment of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal Nos.488-SB/1995 and 580-SB/1995 dated 30.04.2009. By the impugned judgment, learned Single Judge of the High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on all the accused. The facts relating to the filing of this appeal, briefly stated, are that on 18.02.1992, Ravi Dass Jayanti was being celebrated in the village Saniana from donations collected from public. One Joginder Singh asked the appellant and Dalbir to spend the excess amount for the upkeep of the temple. At about 8 p.m. on that day, one Subhash s/o Nafe Singh (complainant), Jasbir Singh (PW-7), Kashmir Singh (PW-6), Joginder Singh and Surender Singh were present in the shop of one Kitab Singh, a tailor master. At that point of time, accused came to the spot and the appellant stated to have questioned Subhash (complainant) and others as to on what authority they were demanding for the accounts of the donation collections. When exchange of words took place between the complainant party and the accused party, the tailor Kitab Singh asked them not to indulge in such quarrel inside his shop and to get out of the shop. Thereafter all of them went out and came down to the public street and in the course of their continued quarrel, the first accused also by name Subhash s/o Ram Kumar stated to have inflicted a knife blow on the back of the complainant Subhash s/o Nafe Singh (PW-

5) while Ram Das (A-4) caught hold of Kashmir Singh and Dalbir Singh (A-3) caught hold of one Joginder Singh. Accused No.1, Subhash s/o Ram Kumar stated to have inflicted knife injuries to Jasbir Singh and Kashmir Singh. The tailor master Kitab Singh, Surender Singh and Joginder Singh tried to pacify both the groups and in that process Surender Singh also stated to have suffered knife injuries.

2. According to the complainant party, by way of private defence, they threw brickbats on the accused and that the accused stated to have fled away from the scene of occurrence. It was specifically alleged that two of the accused, namely, the appellant and Ram Das (A-4) also received injuries at the hands of Subhash s/o Ram Kumar (A-1) while he was giving knife blows to Jasbir Singh and Kashmir Singh PWs-6 and 7 respectively. The injured complainants stated to have gone to CHC Uklana in the vehicle belonging to one Baldev Singh where Subhash s/o Nafe Singh was admitted and given treatment while PWs-6 and 7, namely, Kashmir Singh and Jasbir Singh were referred to civil hospital, Hisar as the injuries sustained by them were serious injuries. Surender Singh stated to have gone to CHC Uklana, Saniana on the next day where he was also given treatment.

3. On receipt of the memo from the hospital, the sub-Inspector L.R. Sharma, PW-9 recorded the statement of Subhash s/o Nafe Singh pursuant to which the case was registered under Sections 324, 323 read with Section 34 IPC. Subsequently, after the receipt of report from the G.H., Hisar of the injuries sustained by Kashmir Singh PW-6, which were noted as serious injuries and were dangerous to life, the offence under Section 307 IPC was also added. PW-9 stated to have recovered a knife from the possession of Subhash s/o Ram Kumar (A-1) based on his disclosure statement. Since the said knife was a spring actuated knife, a separate case under the Arms Act was also registered against him.

4. Based on the investigation and after its conclusion the final report was lodged and a specific charge under section 307, IPC was framed against the first accused Subhash s/o Ram Kumar and a charge under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC was framed against the appellant Dalbir (A-3) and Ram Das (A-4). A charge under Section 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC was made against all the accused persons. PW-1 was the doctor J.S. Bhatia who was examined to prove the X-ray report Exhibits PD and PE relating to PWs-6 and 7 Kashmir Singh and Jasbir Singh respectively. As per the said Exhibit, it was stated that air was found under the diaphragm of both the injured. PW-2 Dr. Sukhdev proved the MLRs Ex.PF and Exhibit PG of Subhash s/o Nafe Singh and Surender Singh respectively. He found one incised wound on the back of Subhash s/o Nafe Singh and two incised wounds near the chest and two simple injuries of blunt weapon on the person of Surender Singh. He also proved in cross-examination the MLRs Exhibit DA, of Satbir, Exhibit DE of Dalbir and also deposed about the injuries of Ram Das. He found one incised wound on the back of Satbir Singh and one incised wound on the back of Ram Das. Two injuries on the person of Satbir, two injuries on the person of Dalbir and one injury on the person of Ram Das were found to be simple injuries caused with blunt weapons. PW.3 Dr. C.R. Garg proved the MLRs Exhibit PL and Exhibit P.M. according to which five injuries caused with sharp edged weapon, one of which consisted of two incised wounds, were found on the person of Kashmir Singh and two incised wounds were found on the person of Jasbir Singh. Injury No.5 on the person of Kashmir Singh which consisted of two incised wound in the left axillary midline was declared to be dangerous to life.

5. PW-8 Ram Niwas was a Panch witness who confirmed Exhibit PS, the disclosure statement made by Subhash (A-1) about the concealment of knife and the recovery memo Exhibit PS/2 at his instance pursuant to which the knife was taken into possession. The recovery of knife Exhibit PS/2 based on the disclosure statement of Subhash was produced to support the case of the prosecution that A-1 caused the knife injuries on PW6 Jasbir. Exhibit PY and PY/1 were the reports of FSL and Serologist marked in the trial Court. In the 313 questioning, while the first accused denied his involvement in the offence, the other accused took up the defence that it was Kashmir Singh who gave knife blows to the appellant and Ram Das (A-4) while complainant- Subhash, Joginder Singh and Surender threw brickbats at the accused while Jasbir Singh (PW-7) alleged to have caught hold of Ram Das A-4. The trial Court recorded that no evidence was led on the defence side.

6. The trial Court, on a detailed analysis of the entire evidence and after making a thorough discussion of the respective contentions made on behalf of the accused including that of the appellant found that no offence was made out as against Dalbir Singh (A-3) inasmuch as he did not effectively participate in the occurrence and the knife blows were inflicted by A-1 Subhash s/o Ram Kumar to the members of the complainant party. The trial Court also found that the allegation that Dalbir Singh (A-3) caught hold of Joginder to whom A-1 alleged to have inflicted the knife injuries was not proved inasmuch as no injury was found on the person of Joginder Singh. The trial Court, therefore, acquitted Dalbir Singh (A-3).

7. As far as others were concerned, the trial Court reached the conclusion that the accused party were the aggressors, that it was the appellant who was responsible for the aggression and that there was a pre-meditated intention in common to injure the complainant party with the weapon, such common intention was deliberately displayed in the course of committing the crime and, therefore, the accused No.1- Subhash s/o Ram Kumar, A-2, Satbir @ Lakha and Ram Das (A-4) were found guilty of the offence alleged against them.

8. The trial Court, therefore, imposed the sentence of three years’ rigorous imprisonment on the appellant and Ram Das (A-4) for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC along with fine of Rs. 1000/- and also rigorous imprisonment of 1 ½ years each for the offence under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC. The sentences awarded to the accused under different sections were directed to run concurrently and in default of payment of fine each of the accused were to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each. As far as A-1 was concerned, he was imposed with a rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years along with fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 307 IPC and rigorous imprisonment of two years for the offence under Section 324 IPC, in default of payment of fine he was to under go default sentence of three months.

9. The appellant along with Ram Das preferred Criminal Appeal No.488- SB/1995 while A-1 Subhash s/o Ram Kumar preferred Criminal Appeal No. 580-SB/1995 and by the common order impugned in this appeal, the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant as well as the other convicted accused persons. The appellant has come forward with this appeal against that order of the High Court.

p) Having regard to the serious and dangerous injuries suffered by PW- 6 Kashmir Singh, as well as the other injuries sustained by all the three of them namely, PWs-5 6 and 7, offence falling under Sections 307,323 and 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC was made out.

16. Taking an overall consideration of the evidence available on record both ocular as well as documentary the reasoning of the trial Court as well as that of the High Court we are also convinced that the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant for the offences under Sections 307, 323 read with Section 34 IPC was fully made out and we do not find any good grounds to interfere with the same. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed.

17. The appellant is on bail. The bail bond stands cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining part of sentence, if any.

October 18, 2012