CHAND SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The precaline knit by the prosecution unfolds the yin yang of human nature However, first the back-drop of this sordid drama. The dramatis personae are the alleged eye witnesses Raj Singh (Public Witness 8) Balwan Singh (Public Witness 10),Lal Singh (Public Witness 18) and Rohtas (Public Witness 21). They are no strangers to each. After all, they belong to the same village. Some of them have something more in common-their criminal propensities and a keen sense to flock together. And as we shall see later, they are also endowed "with an astounding capacity to manufacture and blurt gargantuan lies. The other set of course, consists of the appeltants namely Chand Singh.Ram Narain, Sri Bhagwan and Sat Pal, out of whom Ram Narain died on July 12, 1990. As per the prosecution, their victim was Baljit Singh

(2.) Time now for a brief resume' of-the events as provided by the prosecution. Raj Singh (Public Witness 8) and Baljit Singh (deceased) bad been arrested under Section 388 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for having allegedly attacked Kali Ram brother of Chand Singh appellant. Even other- wise, the relations between Chand Singh on the one hand and Baijit Singh, Raj Singh and the other above-mentioned alleged eye witness es on the other hand, we far from happy. They had voted against him in the election for the post of Pradhan and he in turn bad allegedly got Baijit Singh, Raj Singh and Balwan Singh implicated in criminal cases. As for Rohtas, his brothers were allegedly prosecured on the complaint of Chand Singh's brother. Coming back to that case under Section 308. Balwan Singh (Public Witness 10) and Lal Singh (PW 18) stood sureties for Raj Singh and Baijit Singh respectively, while the said sureties were identified in court by Rohtas. This was on April 8, 1982. The same evening the said two sureties accompanied by Rohtas (Public Witness 21) went to Tihar jail, received Raj Singh and Baijit Singh on their release, and accompanied them to Tilak Nagar from where they all boarded a fully jompacked bus Their destination was lssapur. The time was 8.45 p m We are told that the appellants who were armed with dandas (three to four feet long (had also boarded the iame bus. At about 9 15 p.m. when the bus reached near village Mitrao. the appellants made the bus stop, pushed down Raj Singh and Batjit Singh from it. belaboured them with their dandas and in addition thereof Chand Singh, appellant, threw sulphuric acid on Raj Singh and Baljit Singh and thereafter gave a blow on the eye of Raj Singh and caused injuries on the eyes of Baijit Singh with "some pointed weapon". When Balwan Singh tried to intervene, Satpal appellant threw acid on his hand and also gave a blow with his dand on his danda on his head. The appellants then ran away leaving behind their dandas a knife and a bottle. A minute or two thereafter Balwan Singh and Lal Singh left for village Mitrao to arrange for some conveyance, while Rohtas went .to village lisa Pur. At aboat 9.30 p.m. the police reached the place of occurrence, took the injured to the hospital, recorded the statement offical Singh (Ex. Public Witness 8/A), got the formal first information report recorded on its basis and then proceeded again to the place of occurrence for further investigation. While Baljit Singh succumbed to the injuries. Raj Singh still lives. These, in brief, are then the essentials of the prosecution case.

(3.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge found the prosecution case proved beyond reasonable doubt and conrequently convicted and senenced the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 and so also under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. That is why these appeals.