VED PARKASH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners along with one Joginder Singh were alleged to have voluntarily caused hurt to Balbir Singh and Baldev Singh Forest Guards on 18.2.1988, while they were discharging their duties as public servants. A case under Sections 332, 353 and 186 I.P.C. was got registered by Satpal Singh, Forest Range Officer, Dhar at Police Station Dhar Kalan. According to the prosecution, Balbir Singh, Baldev Singh and Harinder Singh, were working as Forest Guards at Check Post Majha. On 17.2.1988 at about 10 p.m. truck No. P.B.N. 9879 came there from the side of Pathankot. It was stopped for checking. The driver had informed the Guards that they were going to their home. On 18.2.1988 at about 6.30 a.m. the same truck was stopped coming from the opposite side and when the driver tried to by pass the check post, the officials became suspicious and stopped the same. The truck was found to be loaded with wood so as to violate the provisions of Sections 41 and 42 of the Timber Transit Rules. Roshan Lal, Ved Parkash and Joginder Singh (since dead) armed with Kirpans and lathis came down from the truck and attacked Forest Guards and thereafter tried to take the truck forcibly from the Check Post. Roshan Lal and Ved Parkash gave blows with dangs to Baldev Singh and Balbir Singh and thereafter forcibly drove the truck from the check post. This incident was reported to S/Shri Gurmeet Singh, Divisional Forest Officer, Gurdaspur, Kuldip Kumar, Deputy Divisional Forest, Pathankot and Surain Singh, Range Officer, Pathankot Range. The injured were taken to Primary Health Centre, Phungal Bhadami where they were examined medico legally and a case was got registered against the accused on 19.2.1988 under Sections 332, 353 and 186 I.P.C. On completion of the investigation, during the course whereof, the statements of the witnesses were recorded and the accused were arrested, challan was put in Court against the three accused persons.

(2.) CHARGE under Section 332 I.P.C., was framed against the accused and they denied the allegations of the prosecution. Since the accused denied their complicity, the prosecution evidence was recorded and after completion thereof, the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded. Defence counsel had asserted that Roshan Lal accused on 18.2.1988 accompanied by his wife and some other family members was coming from a nearby village and when was about to pass the check post, Baldev Singh etc., who were posted there made indecent remarks against his wife and aunt. On this, Roshan Lal tried to stop the witnesses from doing this, whereupon they framed a case against them. During the period of trial, Joginder Singh had died.

(3.) DIS -satisfied with this conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court, the petitioners had filed on appeal, which was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur on 9.1.1991. He had upheld the conviction returned by the trial Court and after taking into consideration the circumstances of the case had also rejected the objection that the same was on the higher side. He like the trial Court had also rejected the prayer made by the petitioners' counsel to the effect that his clients should be released on probation.