CHANAN SINGH Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHANAN Singh appellant and Amar accused (acquitted) were committed to the Court of Session on the charge that they, on the night between the 6th and 7th of September 1961 at village Nidhanwala, did commit the murder of Gurdas Singh by internationally causing his death in furtherance of the common intention of theirs and Sewak Singh and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and secondly, that they, on or about the night between the 6th and 7th of September 1961 at village Nidhanwala knowing that Gurdas Singh had been murdered and an offence punishable with death had been committed, did cause the dead body which was evidence of the said offence to disappear with the intention of screening the offenders from legal punishment and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Karnail Singh accused (acquitted) was committed to the Court of Session on a charge under section 302 read with section 109 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that he, on or about the night between the 6th and 7th of September 1961 at village Nidhanwala, abetted the commission of the offence of murder of Gurdas Singh by Chanan Singh, Amar Singh and Sewak Singh which murder was committed in consequence of his abetment. The case was tried by Shri R.S. Bindra, Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepore, who found the charge against Amar Singh and Karnail Singh doubtful and acquitted them, but held Chanan Singh appellant guilty under section 302, Indian Penal Code, convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to death vide his order dated the 13th of March 1962. In case the death sentence was not confirmed, Chanan Singh was then to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under section 201, Indian Penal Code. Sewak Singh who had turned approver was discharged. Chanan Singh feels aggrieved against that order and has come up in appeal to this Court. The question of confirmation of the death sentence of Chanan Singh as required under section 374, Criminal Procedure Code, is also before us.

(2.) THE story for the prosecution as given by the various prosecution witnesses briefly runs as under Chanan Singh appellant and Karnail Singh accused (acquitted) are brothers while Amar Singh is said to be the sister's son of Chanan Singh's wife. Gurdas Singh deceased was son of Angrez Singh, and Sewak Singh approver had been their siri about three years or so before this occurrence. He was given Rs. 300/ - by Angrez Singh P.W. by way of advance at the time he took up their service. Sewak Singh, however, left that job and at that time owed Rs. 100/ - to Angrez Singh and his son. The deceased off and on used to demand this money from Sewak Singh, but Sewak Singh for one reason or the other, could not repay the amount. The matter was brought to the notice of the Sarpanch by the deceased and through his intervention the sale -deed in favour of Sewak Singh and his father in respect of a vacant plot was given to Angrez Singh by way of pledge. The appellant and the other accused (acquitted) were Sewak Singh's friends. Chanan Svagh appellant also worked as a siri with Gurdas Singh and his father Angrez Singh. Chanan Singh demanded some food grains from the deceased and his father, but they refused to give him the same telling him that they had already given him enough. About a fortnight or so before this occurrence Chanan Singh went away in connection with the engagement of his sister without obtaining leave or permission of his employers. He remained absent for four or five days, and on his return he was severely scolded by the deceased.

(3.) SEWAK Singh expressed his desire to become an approver in this case. His statement was, therefore, got recorded on the 28th of September 1931 which runs as under: -