SAHIB SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MANJIT Kaur (PW -5) was running a petrol pump on the G.T. Road, Malout. Behind the petrol pump she had built her residential house as well. At about 9.30 P.M. on 22.9.1990, her Salesman Rakesh Kumar came to her residence and called her outside and told her that some Sarpanch had met with an accident and his son wanted petrol for his car and as such he wanted the keys of the petrol pump. Manjit Kaur accordingly opened the door and in anger told Rakesh Kumar that the keys of the petrol pump were with him and as she was talking, another youngman, whose name was later revealed as Sahib Singh armed with a. 12 bore pistol, pushed open the wireguage door, on which, Rakesh Kumar alongwith Sahib Singh, and another youngman, who was later identified as Bohar Singh, was also armed with a pistol entered the room. Sahib Singh and Bohar Singh threw Manjit Kaur on the bed, whereafter three other persons, namely, Daljit Singh, Dharam Singh and Satish Kumar also entered the room. Manjit Kaur was then made to hand over the keys of her safe, which was duly opened by the accused and ten gold pounds, a necklace, a gold kara, two gold ear rings, one gold ring, one pair of tops and two wrist watches were taken out therefrom. The accused then ran away from the spot taking Rakesh Kumar with them. Manjit Kaur thereafter went to the police station and recorded her statement, Ex.PF, and on its basis, a first information report, Exh.PF/1, was registered. Daljit Singh accused was arrested on 13.10.1990 and a 12 bore country made pistol and some cartridges were recovered. A separate case under the Arms Act was registered against him. On his disclosure statement, one gold pound was recovered from his toori kotha Darshan Singh, Sahib Singh and Bohar Singh accused were arrested on 14.10.1990 and on their disclosure statements, two gold pounds, one watch, two gold pounds, one watch and two gold pounds, two gold rings, one pair of tops and one chain, respectively, were recovered from them. The matter was accordingly committed for trial. The accused were ultimately charged for offence punishable under Sections 395 read with Sections 397, 342 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code and as they pleaded not guilty, were brought to trial.

(2.) THE prosecution in support of its case examined PW -1 ASI Kulwant Singh, PW -4 Chanan Singh Sarpanch, PW -5 Manjit Kaur, the complainant, PW -6 Inspector Jagir Lal and PW -7 ASI Sukhdev Singh.

(3.) THE trial Court observed that the offence: with regard to Sections 395 and 397, i.e., the dacoity rested on the solitary statement of Manjit Kaur (PW -5), but in the light of the fact that she could name only Sahib Singh, Bohar Singh and Rakesh Kumar and no test identification parade had been arranged with respect to any of the accused, there was no evidence to connect the accused with the crime. The Court also held that the fact that the two accused, who had been named by her in the FIR, i.e., Sahib Singh and Bohar Singh, had been identified in Court for first time, was also of no help to the prosecution. The Court also found that as Rakesh Kumar accused was a Salesman of that petrol pump and was an employee of Manjit Kaur, would have in normal circumstances absconded, no offence under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code was made out against any of the accused. The Court nevertheless held that in the light of the fact that various articles had been recovered from Daljit Singh, Sahib Singh and Bohar Singh in the defence to show that, as a matter of fact, no incident as alleged by the prosecution, had taken place and that the accused had in fact been involved in a false case. In the light of the fact that the police had made absolutely no effort to join any independent witness and the fact that the accused had been acquitted by the trial Court for offences under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code, it would perhaps be unsafe to maintain their conviction with respect to the offence under Section 411 as well. The appeal is accordingly allowed, the judgment of the trial Court is set aside and an order of acquittal is made in favour of the accused.