JANGIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated February 23, 1981 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No. 133-DB of 1980. The said Criminal Appeal arose out of the Judgment and order dated December 24, 1979 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, in Sessions Trial No. 82 of 1979. Seven accused persons including the four appellants in this appeal were convicted on a charge under Sections 148, 302/149,325/149, 324/149 and 323/149, IPC. Accused No. 1, Jangir Singh accused No. 2, Makhan Singh, accused No. 3, Baj Singh, accused No. 6, Jit Singh, are the appellants in the instant appeal. The remaining accused, namely, accused No. 4, Kashmira Singh, accused No. 5, Bahal Singh, accused No. 7, Jaswant Singh, have been acquitted by the High Court in the said Criminal Appeal No. 133-DB of 1980. The prosecution case in short is that on February 20, 1978, P.W. 10, Kashmira Singh, P.W. 11, Dalbir Singh and P.W. 12, Gurbax Singh, along with Jangir Singh, the deceased were working on the road at about 9.00 a.m. The appellants in this appeal and the said three acquitted accused came out of the fields. The appellant No. 1, Jangir Singh, was armed with a gandasa, the appellant No. 2, Makhan Singh, was armed with a pistol, the appellant No. 3, Baj Singh, was armed with a 12 bore gun, and the appellant No. 4, Jit Singh, was armed with a gandasa. The other co-accused since acquitted by the High Court were also variously armed, namely, Kashmira Singh with a gandasa, Bahal Singh with a barchhi and Jaswant Singh with a sword. On the lalkara of accused Nos. 2 and 3, Makhan Singh, and Baj Singh, Makhan Singh fired a pistol at Jangir Singh. Baj Singh fired his gun on Jangir Singh and being hit by the shots, Jangir Singh fell down. P.W. 10, Kashmira Singh, was given a gandasa blow by Jit Singh. The other accused persons also inflicted injuries to the other eye-witnesses. P.W. 10, Kashmira Singh, thereafter, went to the village Kharia and brought a jeep from the said village. He then removed Jangir Singh, the deceased and the injured persons to hospital at Rania. Thereafter, the said Kashmira Singh went to the Police Station and lodged the first information report with the Sub-Inspector of Police, P.W. 15, Shri K. K. Sethi. The motive for the attack as alleged by the prosecution is that about four years prior to the occurrence, a dispute had taken place between the accused party and the complainant party over the possession of a plot of land. The deceased, Jangir Singh, was on the side of Kashmira Singh and others. There was a fight between the two sides in which a case under Section 307, IPC was registered and the said case was then pending. The police had taken proceedings against both the parties. Another case was also registered under Section 107/151, Criminal Procedure Code and such proceedings were also pending. At about 10.45 a.m. on the date of occurrence, namely, February 20, 1978, P. W. 3, Dr. D. L. Gupta, examined Jangir Singh and noted about 14 injuries on the person of the said Jangir Singh. The said doctor at about 2.30 p.m. on the same day also examined Baj Singh and noted five injuries on his person and at the same time he also examined Dalbir Singh and noted three injuries on his person. Jangir Singh, however, succumbed to his injuries at about 2.00 p.m. on the same day and intimation was sent to the Station House Officer, Rania Police Station immediately. The medical examination report of Jangir Singh was prepared at about 3.00 p.m. At about 12.15 p.m. next day, Dr. Golyan held a post mortem examination on the dead body of Jangir Singh and noticed 17 injuries both internal and external including incised and punctured wounds. In the opinion of the doctor holding the post mortem examination, the cause of the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the said injuries which were ante mortem in nature and in the normal course of life the injuries were sufficient to cause death. After obtaining the opinion of the doctor attending Baj Singh and Dalbir Singh that they were fit to make statements, the Police Officer, Shri K. K. Sethi, recorded their statements and he also got Kashmira Singh medically examined and supplementary statement from him was also recorded by the Police Officer. The police arrested five of the accused persons on February 27, 1978 and they remained in police custody. On 5th March, 1978, the said arrested persons were interrogated in the presence of the prosecution witnesses, Inder Singh and Jagtar Singh, and on the basis of disclosure statement made by the accused, Jit Singh, a gandasa was recovered from near the tubewell of Arjan Singh. Bhalla was also recovered on the basis of disclosure statement made by the accused, Bahal Singh, from near the tubewell of Arjan Singh. A gandasa was also recovered on the basis of the statement made by Jangir Singh and 12 bore pistol and one live cartridge were also recovered on the basis of the statement made by Makhan Singh. Similarly, 12 bore single barrelled gun was recovered on the basis of the statement made by accused No.6, Baj Singh, from the courtyard of his house and all the said articles were taken into possesion after observing the formalities.

(2.) The learned Sessions Judge held Jangir Singh, Makhan Singh, Baj Singh, Kashmira Singh, Bahal Singh, Jit Singh and Jaswant Singh, all guilty under Sections 148, 302/ 149 325/149, 324/149 and 323/149, IPC and convicted each of the seven accused persons under Section 302/149, IPC to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- each and in default further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Each of the said seven accused persons were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- and in default further rigourous imprisonment for three months under Section 325/149, IPC. Each of the seven accused persons were also sentenced to undergo rigourous imprison- ment for three years under Section 324/ 149, IPC. Each of the seven accused persons were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 323/ 149, IPC.

(3.) In the appeal before the High Court it was contended on behalf of the appellants that according to the statement of doctor, the stomach of the deceased, Jangir Singh, was empty and small intestines contained gases and semi-digested food material. The said fact clearly indicated that the incident had taken place in the early hours of the morning when it was dark and not at 9.00 a.m. as alleged by the prosecution. Such contention was, however, not accepted by the High Court in view of the deposition of the eye-witnesses that they had taken food in the morning before coming to the place of occurrence and the deceased had expired at about 2.00 p.m. so that by time the food taken in the morning had left the stomach. The High Court also indicated that here was no other material suggestion to the effect that the occurrence had taken place early in the morning. The High Court also did not accept the contention made on behalf of the accused /appellants that the injuries suffered by some of the eye-witnesses were fabricated and they were self-inflicted injuries. It was pointed out by the High Court that the occurrence had taken place at about 9.00 in the morning. The injured persons reached the hospital at a distance of six miles at 10.30 a.m. Moreover, at that time the deceased, Jangir Singh, was alive and if there was any intention to implicate the accused persons, the same could have been done with Jangir Singh alone. It was indicated by the High Court that the injured persons having reached the hospital within a short time, there was hardly any reasonable time for the witnesses to suffer self-inflicted injuries. On the question of suffering prejudice by the accused/ appellants for not examining the other injured witnesses until 2.30 p.m., the High Court has indicated that Dr. Gupta has given a very reasonable explanation by stating that Jangir Singh was in a serious condition and even his medico legal report could not be made ready by 3.00 p.m. The doctor also stated that Kashmira Singh was not present when other injured persons were examined and his absence could be explained by the fact that after taking the deceased and other injured persons to the hospital, Kashmira Singh had left the hospital for the Police Station to lodge the first information report by 10.58 a.m. and at the time of lodging the first information report, the Sub-Inspector, Shri Kewal Krishan Sethi, had noticed the injury on the person of Kashmira Singh. Thereafter, he accompanied the Police to the place of occurrence. Precisely for the said reason he could not be medically examined till 5.30 p.m. It was contended on behalf of the accused/ appellants that although the eyewitnesses had stated that the shots were fired from the opposite side on Jangir Singh but the injuries noted on the person of the deceased, Jangir Singh, suggested that the two shots from two sides were fired at him. The High Court, however, did not accept the contention sought to be made on behalf of the accused/ appellants that the eye-witnesses had not been telling the truth by indicating that in the very nature of things, the details of the incident were not expected to be given in the first information report by Kashmira Singh who lodged the first information report because he himself was injured. Moreover the close relations of Kashmira Singh had been seriously injured and they had been taken by him to the hospital. The mind of Kashmira Singh was, therefore, quite disturbed and omission of the details in the first information report was of very little consequence. That apart, Jangir Singh must have been trying to save himself and it was also not improbable that in the process when he was trying to run away one of the assailants had overtaken him and fled from the other side. The High Court, however, after indicating the reasons, gave benefit of doubt to Kashmira Singh, Bahal Singh and Jaswant Singh and set aside their conviction and sentences and acquitted them. The accused/ appellants, thereafter, preferred this appeal.