PRITAM SINGH Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE betrothal ceremony of Nathu son of Ishar was performed on 29th January, 1969; in village -Bhangala, which is about 12 kilometres towards the south of Police Station, Valtoha. The said betrothal ceremony was concluded at about 4 P.M. and Ishar invited his friends and others, including Kapura alias Kapur Singh (now deceased), Tarlok Singh, Banta Singh, Puran Singh, Jamber Singh and Surjit Singh alias Seeto, as well as Pritam Singh alias Prito appellant, Gurmukh Singh alias Gokha and Sawarna, to dinner at his house. So, the aforesaid persons went to his house about half an hour after sunsec Kapur Singh, Tarlok Singh, Banta Singh, Jamber Singh and Puran Singh began to take meals which were served to them by the appellant and Surjit Singh Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna. While taking meals, Kapur Singh demanded water from Surjit Singh. He refused 10 serve it to him. So, he (Kapur Singh) rebuked him (Surjit Singh) and this led to exchange of abuses between them Thereupon, the appellant spoke to Surjit Singh, Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna to leave the place in protest, since they were being insulted, and all of them, viz., the appellant, Surjit Singh. Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna quited the house of Ishar. About a few minutes later, may be without taking their meals to the full, Kapur Singh accompanied by Jamber Singh, Banta Singh, Tarlok Singh and Puran Singh left the house of Ishar. On the way to their houses, they found the appellant armed with spear, Sawarna armed with a gandasi and Gurmukh Singh and Surjit Singh having one lathi, each standing near the house of the appellant. Kapur Singh was moving ahead and when he, and his companions, reached near the house of the appellant, the latter, (the appellant) hit spear near the left eye of Kapur Singh and Sawarna struck gandasi on his head. As a result of the injuries sustained by him from the appellant and Sawarna, Kapur Singh dropped on the gound Tarlok Singh advanced to save Kapur Singh and Surjit Singh alias Seeto and Gurmukh Singh alias Gokha caused injuries to him with lathis. Thereafter, the appellant, as well as his companions, viz., Surjit Singh Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna decamped carrying their weapons with them. Tarlak Singh was taken to his house and Kapur Singh was carried on a cot by Jamber Singh and others to Primary Health Centre, Gharyila, which is about 12 kilometres from village Bhangala. When he reached there at about 11.15 P.M., Dr. Harbans Singh examined his injuries and he (Dr. Harbans Singh) sent information about his arrival in injured condition to the Police Post, Gharyala, from where Assistant Sub -Inspector Amar Singh went to the Primary Health Centre. Kapur Singh was then lying unconscious and Jamber Singh reported the incident to him. The report, made by Jamber Singh, was sent to Police Station, Valtoha, where First Information Report was recorded under Section 308, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, on its basis. Kapur Singh succumbed to his injuries at 3. A.M. on 30th January, 1969, and Dr. Harbans singh sent information about his death to the Police Post. Thereupon Assistant Sub Inspector Amar Singh again went to the Primary Health Centre and he held inquest on the dead body of Kapur Singh and despatched it to Amritsar where Dr. A. Phillips conducted autopsy on it. After registration of the case, Assistant Sub Inspector Des Raj went to village -Bhangala from Valtoha. He collected blood soaked earth from the scene of occurrence and he recorded statements of Puran Singh Banta Singh and Tarlok Singh and he (Assistant Sub Inspector Des Raj) sent Tarlok Singh to Primary Health Centre, Gharyala, for medical examination. Dr. Harbans Singh examined his injuries. The appellant, Surjit Singh, Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna were not available at their houses or in the village. They were produced by Surjit Singh Sarpanch of Kotli Wasawa Singh before Assistant Sub Inspector Des Raj on 18th February, 1969. Hence, the Police, Valioha, after necessary investigation, prosecuted the appellant, Surjit Singh, Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna under section 302, read with section 34, India Penal Code, and the learned Magistrate charged the appellant under section 302, Indian Penal Code, and Surjit Singh, Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna under section 302, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, and committed them to the court of Session for standing trial for the said offence. At the trial Surjii Singh and Gurmukh Singh were further charged under section 33, Indian Penal Code, and the appellant and Sawarna were also charged under section 323, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, for causing injuries to Tarlok Singh (P.W.). Thus is the prosecution case.

(2.) THE appellant denied the prosecution story. The learned Additional Sessions Judge. Amritstr, however, accepted the prosecution version and convicted the appellant under section 302, Indian Penal Code, and Sawarna, Surjit Singh and Gurmukh Singh under section 302, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced them to imprisonment for life, each. He further convicted Gurmukh Singh under section 323, Indian Penal Code, and the appellant Sawarna and Surjit Singh under section 323, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, for causing injuries to Tarlok Singh and sentenced them to three months' rigorous imprisonment, each Surjit. Singh alias Seeto was also held guilty under section 323, Indian Penal Code, and the appellant, Sawarna and Gurmukh Singh were convicted under section 323, read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, for causing injuries to Tarlok Singh and they were sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment, each, with the direction that all the aforesaid three sentences of imprisonment would run concurrently. Aggrieved by their convictions and sentences, the appellant, Surjit Singh, Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna preferred separate appeals from jail. Since all these four appeals i.e., No. 44 of 1971 preferred by Surjit Singh, No. 46 of 1971 preferred by Gurmukh Singh, No. 47 of 1971 preferred by Sawarna and this appeal No. 45 of 1971 preferred by the appellant, have arisen out of one case, the same are being disposed of by one judgment. The evidence was read out to us and we heard the arguments and examined the record.

(3.) JAMBER Singh (P.W. 4), Tarlok Singh (P.W. 5), Puran Singh (P.W. 6) and Banta Singh (P.W. 7), who gave ocular narration of the event, related the story which has been summarised above. The gist of their statements is that when they reached near the house of the appellant they noticed him and his companions, viz., Surjit Singh, Gurmukh Singh and Sawarna, standing together and the appellant had spear while Sawarna carried a gandasi and Surjit Singh and Gurmukh Singh were armed with one lathi each and that the appellant opened the attack by hitting spear near the left nose of Kapur Singh and Sawarna then struck gandasi on his head and as a result of the injuries so inflicted to him, Kapur Singh fell on the ground. Jamber Singh and Tarlok Singh further maintained that when Tarlok Singh came forward to save Kapur Singh, Surjit Singh and Gurmukh Singh save lathi blows to him.