AMARJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals by way of special leave arise out of the following facts:

(2.) Several arguments have been raised by Mr. R.S. Cheema and Mr. K.B. Sinha, the learned senior counsel for the appellants. It has been argued that the fact that some incident had happened on the morning of 2nd July was clear from the statements - Exhibits DE and DD, the two applications that had been filed by the two warring parties in the police station. It has also been submitted that the fact that Amarjeet Singh was indeed in the police station in the evening had been found correct to be in the investigation made by Inspector Prem Singh DW 5 and it was on that basis that the prosecuting agency had declined to file a challan against the accused. It has further been pleaded that there was absolutely no reason whatsoever as to why the alibi given by Sher Singh appellant duly supported by some of the staff in the PSEB office where he stood posted and was residing with his family had been disbelieved as he had been present in the morning at 7:30 a.m. on the day of the incident and again at about 3:30 p.m. the same afternoon and that it would have been impossible for him to have visited village Bassi, committed the murder and returned to his place of posting at village Ghannori 17 kms. away. It has finally been submitted that in any case there was absolutely no explanation for the injuries that had been suffered by Gurlal Singh and as this onus had not been discharged by the prosecution an inference could rightly be drawn that the defence version was the correct one. For the last submission, Mr. Cheema has placed reliance on Lakshmi Singh v. State of Bihar, 1976 4 SCC 394.

(3.) Mr. Roopansh Purohit, the learned State counsel has, however, pointed out that there was absolutely no reason to disbelieve the statement of the three prosecution witnesses, more particularly, for the reason that Joginder Singh had been injured and P.W. 2 Pala Ram was an independent witness. He has further submitted that there was no evidence to suggest that Gurlal Singh had suffered the injuries in the same incident in which Gurmnam Singh had been killed and Joginder Singh had been injured as there was no contemporaneous record to show this fact and further that Gurlal Singh had made absolutely no effort to make a statement to the police giving his version of the events or after he had reached Assandh on 3rd July, 1998 at 6:20 p.m. It has further been pleaded that Gurlal Singh was a handicapped person and it would not have been impossible for him to have fired two shots as suggested by him in his defence.