SAT PAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SAT Pal appellant alongwith his co-accused Parvesh Kumar was brought to trial for the murder of Ashok Kumar deceased before the Court of Sessions at Jalandhar. The learned Session Judge, Jalandhar by his judgment dated November 12, 1986, acquitted Parvesh Kumar accused but held the appellant guilty under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. He appeals.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that on May 26, 1986 at about 8 PM, Ashok Kumar deceased was watching TV at his house when somebody called him from outside. He opened the door and met Sat Pal and Parvesh Kumar accused. While they were talking to each other, they proceeded toward the chowk and were present near the shop of Raj Kumar, a karyana merchant. It is alleged that the electric light outside the nearby shop of Raj Kumar was on and there was sufficient light near the place of occurrence. At that time Sat Pal accused complained to Ashok Kumar deceased as to why he had written a letter to his sister. This fact was, however, denied by Ashok Kumar. Immediately thereafter, Parvesh Kumar accused caught hold of Ashok Kumar deceased by his neck and Sat Pal accused took out a knife from his dub and plunged it in the left flank of Ashok Kumar. On hearing the noise raised by Ashok Kumar, Behari Lal and Girdhari Lal PWs were attracted to the spot and they also witnessed the occurrence. Thereafter, both the accused bolted away from the spot alongwith the knife. Immediately after the occurrence, Paras Ram removed Ashok Kumar injured to the Civil Hospital, Jalandhar, where Dr. jasbir Singh PW 1 found the following injury on his person :-

(3.) THE hallmark of the prosecution case here is the unimpeachable nature of the ocular account. There is hardly anything in dispute that the occurrence took place in the chowk near the shop of Raj Kumar, a Karyana merchant, Girdhari Lal PW 6 is entirely a natural witness who was present at the spot when the altercation took place between the appellant and Ashok Kumar deceased. The significant thing, however, is that not a hint of any animus or interestedness against the appellant could even be suggested to the said eye-witness. For the detailed reasons recorded by the trial Court, which we affirm, we unhesitatingly accept the ocular account in the present case. The medical evidence in the present case is entirely consistent with the ocular account. The injury found on the body of the deceased is entirely corroborative of an attack with a knife and the seat of the injury also is in line with that deposed to by the prosecution witness. The First Information Report in the case is patently prompt in the circumstances. Immediately on receipt of intimation from the doctor. Head Constable, Joginder Singh went to the hospital and after obtaining the opinion of the doctor that Ashok Kumar deceased was fit to make a statement, the Head Constable recorded his statement Ex. PF, on the basis of which formal FIR was recorded at Police Station Division No. 6, Jalandhar at 8.35 a.m. i.e. within about half an hour of the incident. There are other reassuring circumstances regarding the guilt of the appellant. He had apparently absconded and was unavailable to the police on the day of the incident. Soon after his apprehension, he led to the recovery of knife Ex. P2, which is again a corroborative factor in the case.