MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order of the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court, allowing the appeal filed by the respondent State. By the impugned judgment the Division Bench set aside the order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhatinda and convicted both the appellants for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'). The appellants-accused were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each with default stipulation.

(2.) The prosecution version as unfolded during the trial is as follows : A land dispute had been going on between Mukhtiar Singh and his brother Babu Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') which had ended in favour of the deceased. Mukhtiar Singh was aggrieved thereby. His two sons Gurmail Singh and Harbans Singh had caused injuries to the deceased which resulted into fracture of his leg and thereafter Harbans Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh was murdered by deceased and his son Buta Singh. On 15.04.1994, the deceased and his family members which included his wife Surjit Kaur, son Makhan Singh, daughter-in-law Jasvir Kaur and father-in-law of daughter of deceased Balwant Singh decided to visit Bathinda jail where the son of the deceased was lodged. In order to catch a train to Bathinda they reached Kahangarh Railway Station which was next to their village at about 5:00 AM and waited there for the arrival of the Train. Since the train was late from its scheduled time the ticket counter at the Station was closed. Except the deceased all had seated themselves on a bench while the deceased was standing nearby. In the meantime Mukhtiar Singh armed with a kirpan and his son Gurmail Singh armed with a takua came there. Mukhtiar Singh gave two kirpan blows one on the neck of the deceased and another on his head. Consequently, he fell down. Immediately thereafter Gurmail Singh gave blows on the chin, right shoulder, left shoulder and chest of the deceased. The family members of the deceased raised an alarm. Mukhtiar Singh accused exclaimed that they had avenged murder of his son. One SPO Gurdas Singh who was posted on the Assault Post, Kahangarh Railway Station came running and challenged the accused but both the accused managed to escape. A wireless message was received in the railway station Bathinda at 11:50 AM upon which ASI Gurdip Singh accompanied by other police officials reached the Kahangarh Railway Station where he found Surjit Kaur, Makhan Singh, Jasvir Kaur, Balwant Singh and SPO Gurdas Singh present. He prepared the inquest report Ex. PC which was attested by Surjit Kaur and Makhan Singh. Thereafter statement Ex. PM, of Surjit Kaur was recorded at 5.15 PM, on which he made an endorsement Ex. PM/1, upon which formal FIR Ex. PM/2 was registered in the concerned Police Station. The ASI Gurdip Singh went to the spot, lifted the blood stained earth and put it into a container. After sealing the same, the container was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PK which was attested by the witnesses. SPO Gurdas Singh also produced a pair of shoes which was taken into possession vide memos Ex.P.U. and a sum of Rs. 165/- which was recovered from the person of the deceased. A rough site plan Ex.PR of the place of occurrence was prepared by the Investigating Officer. The autopsy on the dead body of the deceased was conducted on the next day (16.4.1994) by Dr. Kuldip Rai. Thereafter, Sub-Inspector Hukam Chand arrested both the accused on 20.4.1994. The investigation was taken up by ASI Gurdip Singh and during interrogation accused Mukhtiar Singh suffered a disclosure statement Ex.PU about concealing of kirpan and blood stained clothes. Thereafter, the accused Mukhtiar Singh got recovered his kirpan and blood stained clothes. Kirpan was taken into possession vide memo Ex.P.U./1 and its sketch Ex.P.U./2 was also prepared. The blood stained clothes were also taken into possession vide separate recovery memos. Similarly Gurmail Singh accused also suffered a disclosure statement Ex.P.V. about concealment of takua and blood stained clothes. Thereafter, he also got recovered takua which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.P.V. and its sketch Ex.P.V./2 was also prepared. His blood stained clothes were also taken into possession. After the completion of the investigation, challan was filed against both the accused and they were charged under Section 302/ 34 IPC. During the trial Dr. Kuldip Rai was examined as PW 1, Makhan Singh, son of the deceased was examined as PW 2; Surjit Kaur, wife of the deceased was examined as PW 3; ASI Gurdip Singh was examined as PW 4 and SPO Gurdas Singh was examined as PW 5. The trial Court acquitted both the accused of the charges on the ground that the testimony of two eye witnesses cannot be believed as the circumstances confirm absence of the eye-witness at the place of occurrence. It was further stated by the trial Court that the prosecution case was nothing but a got up story, knitted after due deliberation between the police and the named eye witnesses. On appeal by the State the High Court set aside the order of the trial Court. It held that the trial Court had discarded the testimony of two eye witnesses on feeble grounds and had entertained unnecessary doubts despite there being clear and sufficient evidence pointing towards the guilt of the accused.

(3.) Mr. Aman Lekhi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant very eloquently argued that it was a blind murder and the appellants have been falsely implicated due to the previous animosity. While elaborating his argument he submitted that there was significant delay in giving the information to the police and that the alleged eye-witness were not present at the time of the incident and came to the railway station at 3:00 p.m. only. He submitted that story knitted by the prosecution is belied which is established from the very fact that before recording the statement of the eye witness who were well present there the ASI proceeded to prepare the inquest report.