KULDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts of the case which have led to the filing of this appeal are as under : On 28th May, 1990, Arjan Singh-PW3 was present alongwith Lakhwinder Singh since deceased in the shop of Baljeet Singh-PW4, situated in Krishna Basti, Samana, as they alongwith others were planning to attend the bhog ceremony of Sh. Hardayal Singh Rajla, Ex-MLA, who had been murdered. While a conversation was going on, Kuldeep Singh the appellant and his co-accused Devinder Singh came to the shop on a motor cycle. They called out Lakhwinder Singh, who came out of the shop, whereupon Devinder Singh took out a knife from his dub and gave a blow on the left side of his chest, whereas, the appellant gave a knife blow on his left arm pit, as a result of which, he fell down. The assailants thereafter, ran away from the place of occurrence on their motor cycle with their respective weapons. The occurrence was witnessed by Arjan Singh-PW3, Baljeet Singh PW4 and one Sandeep Pal Singh who was not examined as a witness. After arranging a Maruti van, the injured was taken to the Civil Hospital, Samana, where he was declared dead by the attending doctor. The motive as stated by Arjan Singh-PW3 was that the accused and the complainant party had been members of rival groups while studying in college and on 18th May, 1990, in the course of hearing in Courts at Patiala, there had been some quarrel between the deceased and Devinder Singh. Dr. Kusam Mohinderoo-PW2 sent a ruqa to the police station, Samana about the arrival of the dead body in the hospital, thereupon Harbhajan Singh ASI-PW9 took up the investigation of the case, reached the Civil Hospital and recorded statement Ex.PC of Arjan Singh at 12.20 p.m. The Special Report was also conveyed to the Ilaqa Magistrate in Samana itself at 4.10 p.m. through constable Nand Lal. While the trial was yet pending, Devinder Singh accused died a natural death and the case thereafter, proceeded against the present appellant only. The trial Court after considering the evidence against the appellant, came to the conclusion that the case against him stood proved and, accordingly, convicted him for an offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for a period of one year. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal has been filed at the instance of Kuldeep Singh appellant alone.

(2.) THE evidence that was tendered before the trial Court consisted of the medical evidence, various formal witnesses, as also the two eyewitnesses i.e. Arjan Singh PW3 and Baljeet Singh-PW4. In his statement recorded under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the plea taken was that he had been involved falsely in this case on account of strained relations between the two groups of students and that the liquor vendor of Punjab territory had some grudge against the appellant on account of a liquor vend that he was running in an adjoining village in the State of Haryana and that the rival party had utilised the murder of Lakhwinder Singh to involve him as an accused. He also produced some evidence in support of his case.

(3.) WE have considered this argument of Mr. Ghai and find no merit in it. It has come in the statement of Dr. Kusam Mohinderoo-PW2 that ruqa Ex.PB/1 was despatched from Civil Hospital, Samana to the Police Station at about 11.05 a.m. and it reached the police station at 11.15 a.m. wherein it was entered vide Daily Diary Report 12, but as there was no Investigating Officer present in the police station, it was marked to Incharge, Police Post, City Samana, for further action, and it was in all probability handed over to A.S.I. Harbhajan Singh (PW-9) at about 11.30 a.m. ASI Harbhajan Singh-PW9, thereafter, reached the Civil Hospital, Samana, where he recorded ruqa Ex.PC - the statement of Arjan Singh - PW3 and the endorsement Ex.PC/1 shows that it was concluded at 12.20 p.m. and the formal First Information Report was recorded 10 minutes later. It is undoubtedly true that the Special Report did reach the Ilaqa Magistrate at 4.10 p.m., but in the light of the facts as given above, this delay, by itself, could not detract the genuineness of the prosecution case. It is to be noted that in the ruqa Ex.PB/1 which was sent to the police by the doctor at 11.05 a.m., the name of the deceased and that of Arjan Singh, the first informer have been clearly mentioned. And in the First Information Report Ex.PC/2 which followed soon thereafter, full details with regard to the incident had been clearly spelt out.