Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(J&K) 197

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH at Jammu
Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Puneet Gupta, JJ.
Pritam Singh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
CRA No.23/2016, CrlM No.36/2020, CrlM No.196/2020, IA No.01/2016 in CONF No.09/2016
Decided on : 23-5-2022

Advocates:
Appearing Counsel:
For the Appellant(s):Mr. S.C. Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG

IMPORTANT POINT : Every omission in statement recorded before Police or before Magistrate under Section 164-A Cr.P.C., but revealed in witness box cannot be by itself a reason to discredit statement of witnesses if those omissions do not otherwise impact statements of witnesses qua what has been deposed so far as actual occurrence is concerned.

Headnote:
Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 – Section 302 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 164-A – Murder – Life imprisonment – Statements of witnesses when viewed Court finds no major discrepancy in their statements as place where occurrence took place and manner in which accused caused injury to victim with sharp edged weapon is concerned – Mere relation of eye witnesses with victim and who speak in favour of prosecution cannot be a reason and ground to discard testimony of witnesses solely on said basis – No presumption to that effect can be raised unless overall circumstances do convince Court to hold so – Witness had no enmity with accused as such when she deposes of involvement of accused in occurrence – Accused did not produce any evidence in defence – Contradictions are minor and do not impact case of prosecution – It is not necessary that act done by one witness is observed in detail by other witness in a occurrence where commotion is bound to take place immediately after the same – Even if motive aspect is to be overlooked same does not impact case of prosecution as case of prosecution mainly hinges upon eye witnesses – Mere absence of Investigating Officer from witness box does not ipso facto result into failure of prosecution case though presence of Investigating Officer clarifies certain discrepancies which may have occurred in evidence that is brought on record by prosecution – Appeal dismissed. (Paras 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 39 nd 42)

Judgment :

Puneet Gupta, J.

The appeal is filed by the appellant against the judgment and order of the trial court, court of Sessions Judge, Kathua, whereby the appellant has been held guilty and convicted of committing offence under Section 302 RPC and awarded the term of life imprisonment and the fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine the further simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The court will refer to the appellant as accused for the purposes of discussion in the appeal.

2. The docket from ASI Police Station, Billawar coupled with the written report filed by Mst. Nichno Devi against Pritam Singh, appellant herein resulted into filing of FIR No. 139/2011 with Police Station, Billawar under Section 307 RPC as Hans Raj, victim, had suffered serious head injuries on his head due to the attack from the said Pritam Singh. As Hans Raj died later on in the hospital due to the injuries suffered by him, the offence under Section 302 RPC was also added against the appellant-accused during the course of investigation. As per the initial report filed with the police, Bodh Raj son of Beli Ram and daughter of Thakur Dass were undergoing medical training at Jammu and Bodh Raj had engineered kidnapping of the girl. The Panchayat came to be convened in the house of Thakur Dass at village Dall and the complainant, her husband Hans Raj and Beli Ram attended the Panchayat. It was also attended by Thakur Dass, Pritam Singh, Mansa Raj, Anchal Singh and Kasturi Lal. As the Panchayat concluded at about 8.45 PM and the participants were about to leave the Panchayat, the said Pritam Singh attacked Hans Raj on his head with a sharp edged weapon having intention to kill him. The injury received by victim Hans Raj was serious in nature. The victim was referred to Government Medical College, Jammu for treatment but he succumbed to injuries on 16.10.2011. The occurrence is of 14.10.2011. The accused-appellant was arrested during the course of investigation and on 17.10.2011 on the disclosure statement of the accused, the alleged weapon of offence ‘Darati’ was also recovered. The usual investigation took place in the case and on completion of the investigation the challan was filed against the accused Pritam Singh under Section 302 RPC. The court framed charge against the accused under Section 302 RPC. The accused denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution was directed to produce evidence in support of its case. On the closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused under Section 342 Cr.P.C was recorded wherein he denied the incriminating evidence produced against him by the prosecution. The accused did not produce any evidence in defense. It is profitable to go through the statements of the prosecution witnesses at this stage.

3. PW-1 Nichno Devi is the wife of the deceased Hans Raj who is stated to have been assaulted on 14th by the accused. As per the statement of the witness, Bodh Raj had contracted court marriage with the daughter of Thakur Dass. She along with her husband and other six persons participated in the Panchayat held in the house of Thakur Dass. It was decided that as Bodh Raj could not be contacted on phone, he be informed on the next day or a case will be filed. The accused present did not say anything at that time. Thakru, Prabhu, Anchal and Palla went outside and Saroti and the accused remained present in the room and later both of them left the room. Mansa Ram, Banti Devi and Bimla Devi stepped outside the door and the witness and her husband who was behind those persons also came out of the room. The accused attacked her husband on his head with a sharp edged darati as soon as her husband came out of the door of the room. As a result, the husband fell down and the brain of the husband came out and the accused fled from the spot. She came back after chasing the accused at some distance. Her husband was taken to hospital at Machadi and thereafter to Billawar and then to Hospital in Jammu.