MANGAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment dated 6.11.1996 of the Sessions Judge, Amritsar whereby he acquitted Swinder Singh alias Chhindu and convicted appellant Mangal Singh under Section 364 and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 7 years. Mangal Singh was also convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ -, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo R.1. for 6 months.

(2.) THE prosecution story is unfolded by the statement Ex.PA of PW2 Nirmal Singh son of Sucha Singh Sansi given on 18.3.1994 at 5 p.m. before SI Dharam Singh (PW6). He stated that he is a labourer. He has two brothers and two sisters. On 11.3.1994 at 8.00 p.m. appellant Mangal Singh whose house is adjacent to house of complainant, called his father Sucha Singh (since deceased) to his house. They being neighbours, Sucha Singh went to the house of the appellant. Chhindu son of Shangara was also present. All the three started consuming liquor. Later on, Nirmal Singh enquired from the wife of Mangal Singh regarding the whereabouts of his father. She stated that Mangal Singh, Sucha Singh and Chhindu had gone out. Again in the morning, Nirmal Singh went to the house of appellant Mangal Singh to enquire about his father who had not returned. Mangal Singh stated, that he had sent Sucha Singh to convey some message to his relatives. After about 4/5 days, Nirmal Singh's brother Jhirmal Singh along with some persons enquired from Mangal Singh regarding the whereabouts of Sucha Singh deceased. Mangal Singh stated that Sucha Singh had fallen ill and he would bring him back home from his (Mangal Singh's relative's) house. Further, in his statement before PW6 SI Dharam Singh, Nirmal Singh stated that he suspected that Mangal Singh and Chhindu had kidnapped his father Sucha Singh with intention to kill him. Deceased Sucha Singh had taken a loan from appellant Mangal Singh and Chhindu (who has been acquitted by the trial Court) to run a business. After recording of the statement, formal F.I.R. Ex.PA/2 was registered on 18.3.1994 at 5.20 p.m. under Sections 364/34 IPC.

(3.) PW 2 Nirmal Singh and PW3 Darshan Singh who are both sons of the deceased, have not shown natural behaviour specially after they came to know that their father was missing. PW2 Nirmal Singh in his testimony stated that he asked the wife of Mangal Singh appellant regarding the whereabouts of Sucha Singh, who stated that he had gone out with appellant Mangal Singh and Chhindu. On the next day i.e. on 12.3.1994, he again enquired from Mangal Singh regarding the whereabouts of his father, who replied that, he had sent him to give a message to his relatives. It has come in evidence that Mangal Singh and Sucha Singh were neighbours. In the FIR Ex.PA/2, it has been stated by PW2 Nirmal Singh that deceased Sucha Singh was wearing a Chadar, Kameej, and a Parna (small piece of cloth) on his head. Nobody in the villages goes to another place wearing a Parna. One always wears a turban on his head. Nothing has come in the statement of PW2 Nirmal Singh or PW3 Darshan Singh as to what transport was used when deceased Sucha Singh was sent to give a message to the relative of Mangal Singh after 8 p.m. i.e. night time. PW2 Nirmal Singh knew that deceased Sucha Singh had gone from the house of Mangal Singh along with Mangal Singh and Chhindu. This had been told to him (Nirmal Singh) by none else than the wife of appellant Mangal Singh. Even though knowing that Sucha Singh had been sent away by Mangal Singh and no definite answer was coming from the side of appellant Mangal Singh or his wife as to the whereabouts of Sucha Singh, PW2 Nirmal Singh did not inform the police for several days.