JASBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to the prosecution case, on 5th April, 1992 at about 6.30 p.m. Khajan Singh was shot dead by the appellant by firing from a country made pistol. First Information Report was lodged on the statement of father of the deceased, Inder, P.W. 2 at Police Station Jatusana. According to the first informant, the appellant came to their house and asked deceased-Khajan Singh to came out and go with the appellant. Younger son of the informant, Stapal, P.W. 1 went behind them, followed by the informant and his wife. When the appellant and deceased covered a distance of about 50/60 yards, the appellant allegedly took out a pistol from the right pocket of his pants and fired a shot from it which hit the deceased. On receipt of the injury, he fell down and died. The first informant and his wife, who were at a short distance of 15/20 paces from them, on hearing the firing of the shot, rushed to the place where the deceased had fallen down and put him on a cot. They took the deadbody home and place it in the courtyard of their house. P.W. 2 went to the Police Station to lodge the report. He lodged a report at about 8.30 p.m. on 5-4-1992. S.I. Karan Singh, P.W. 8, after registration of the case, proceeded to the spot. He prepared an inquest report Exh. PG. He then asked P.W. 7 to go to the village for investigations. On the next day, i.e., April 6, 1992, P.W. 7 S.I. Bhana Ram could not carry out the investigation at night and, therefore, he inspected the spot and prepared rough site plan. He took into possession one empty cartridge and blood stained earth from the spot and after making them into separate parcels sealed the same and sent them to the Malkhana. The dead body of Khajan Singh was sent to General Hospital, Rewari on 6-4-1992 in the morning for post-mortem examination which was performed by P.W. 5, Dr. R. A. Gupta. The appellant was searched but not found. He was arrested on 10-4-1992 at 10.30 a.m. in the morning. On a disclosure statement made by the appellant, under S. 27 of the Evidence Act, a country made pistol was recovered from him. The pistol was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban where the empty cartridge recovered from the spot on the morning of 6-4-1992 had already been sent. After completion of investigation, the appellant was sent up for trial. The Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari, after recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses vide judgment dated 5-8-1995, convicted the appellant for an offence under S. 302, I.P.C. and S. 25 of the Arms Act. The appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under S. 302, I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. For an offence under S. 25 of the Arms Act, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred an appeal in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Vide judgment dated 27th January, 2000, the appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court and conviction and sentence of the appellant was maintained for both the offences.

(2.) By special leave, the appellant is before us.

(3.) Mr. U. R. Lalit, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the First Information Report had been ante-timed and in support of this submission, he relied upon the receipt of the Special Report by the Illaqa Magistrate at 2.30 p.m. on 6th April, 1992. He also assailed the evidence of the eye-witnesses PW-1 and PW-2, the younger brother and father of the deceased. The main criticism of the evidence of these two eye-witnesses was based on certain admissions made in the cross-examination by PW-7 S.I. Bhana Ram and PW-8 S.I. Karan Singh. Learned counsel submitted that on the basis of the statements of PW-7 and PW-8, it appeared that Satpal, PW-1 and his mother Inderwati whose statements were not recorded on 5th April, 1992, had not actually seen the occurrence. It was further submitted that so far as PW-2 is concerned, the possibility that he roped in the appellant on a misguided suspicion, could not be ruled out. In support of this plea, it was submitted that appellant was not even searched on 5th April, 1992 and that indicated that the assailant was not known.