LAWS(SC)-2005-8-99

STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. HAKAM SINGH

Decided On August 31, 2005
STATE OF PUNJAB Appellant
V/S
HAKAM SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal filed by the State of Punjab is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated April 18, 1996 whereby the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has acquitted the respondent- accused Hakam Singh from the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to be referred to as the I.P.C.) for committing the murder of the deceased Harbans Singh. Learned Sessions Judge, Bhatinda convicted the respondent- Hakam Singh under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default of payment of fine the respondent was directed to undergo a further imprisonment for four months. Learned Sessions Judge also convicted the respondent under section 302/34, I.P.C. in respect of the death of Mohinder Singh and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.2000/-, the respondent was also convicted under Section 307/34, I.P.C for causing injuries to Sadhu Singh and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-; in default of payment of fine, the respondent was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for four months. The respondent was also convicted under Section 449, I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- ;in default of payment of fine the respondent was to undergo R.I. for two months. All the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. Learned Sessions Judge acquitted the remaining accused persons i.e. Mander Singh, Nachhatar Singh and Bikkar Singh. The High Court has dismissed the criminal revision filed by Harbans Kaur-the wife of the deceased, Harbans Singh for compensation. We are not concerned with regard to the acquittal of the remaining accused persons as there is no State appeal before us. Therefore, we are concerned in the present State Appeal with regard to the acquittal of the respondent- Hakam Singh.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, was that an F.I.R. was registered on the statement of Jagdev Singh (deceased), the brother of deceased Harbans Singh on 25-8-1990. That Jagdev Singh, Harbans Singh and Sadhu Singh were brothers. While Harbans Singh and Jagdev Singh lived in the same house, Sadhu Singh lived in a separate house. Sadhu Singh and Jagdev Singh had licenced .12 bore guns. They purchased about 15 marlas of land on which accused Bikkar Singh and others had heaped their manure. On 24-8-1990 a village Panchayat was convened for getting the land vacated. In the said Panchayat meeting it was decided that they should vacate the land after getting it demarcated by the Patwari. On 25-8-1990 at about 9.30 A.M. Harbans Singh (deceased) and complainant Jagdev Singh were present in their house when respondent-Hakam Singh armed with a .303 bore rifle while other accused-Mander Singh and Nachhatar Singh @ Pamma each armed with a .12 bore double barrel gun along with other assailants-Darshan Singh armed with a .315 bore rifle and Bhola Singh armed with a .12 bore single barrel gun entered their house raising lalkara (shouting). Bhola Singh immediately on reaching there, fired a shot and abused them saying , "come out, we will deliver you the possession of the place of manure heaps". Harbans Singh rushed into the house and brought a licenced gun of the complainant, Jagdev Singh. Respondent- Hakam Singh then fired a shot with his .303 bore rifle at Harbans Singh which hit his left buttock and pierced through his groins. In that injured condition, Harbans Singh fired a shot with his gun in self defence which hit Bhola Singh. On hearing the noise of the fire shots, other brother Sadhu Singh came out of his house. Accused Darshan Singh fired a shot with his .315 bore rifle at Sadhu Singh which hit him on his right arm. Sadhu Singh ran away from there and entered in his house and thereafter scaling his wall and entered into the house of Mohinder Singh. Mohinder Singh came out from his house and ran towards the street. One of the assailants namely Darshan Singh fired a shot with his.315 bore gun at Mohinder Singh which hit on his back. The accused persons kept on firing shots with their respective guns. Jagdev Singh witnessed the entire incident from the roof of his house clandestinely. It is alleged that on hearing the alarm, P.W.5- Baldev Singh (son of Mohinder Singh, deceased) and others reached there to save them. Mohinder Singh and Bhola Singh died at the spot. Jagdev Singh sent his brothers, Sadhu Singh and Harbans Singh to the Civil Hospital, Bhatinda in a tractor trolley along with his sister-in-law, Malkiat Kaur and Harbans Kaur. Jagdev Singh went to the Police- station and lodged the report which was recorded by the S.H.O.-Satwant Singh (P.W.7). The said report was treated as the formal F.I.R. and special report was sent to the Judicial Magistrate on the same day at 8.00 p.m. Though originally Nachhatar Singh was not one of the accused but after the examination of Jagdev Singh, the complainant, accused Nachhatar Singh @ Pamma was also put on trial. But Jagdev Singh died subsequently and therefore, his evidence could not be recorded in the Court. Darshan Singh was declared as a proclaimed offender. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and put their version of the incident.

(3.) The prosecution in its support examined number of witnesses but primarily, the star witness was P.W.1, Dr. Gupta, P.W.2 Dr.Malik and P.W.3- Harbans Kaur the wife of the deceased Harbans Singh. Sadhu Singh, the injured eye witness as P.W.4, Baldev Singh (P.W.5), son of Mohinder Singh, Sub-Inspector-Satwant Singh, S.H.O. as P.W.7 was the Investigating Officer. Though Jagdev Singh was also one of the witnesses on whose complaint the F.I.R. was registered but he died before the trial and as such his statement could not be recorded. Prosecution examined other formal witnesses also.