Back
2006 Supreme(P&H) 2667
2006 (4) LAW HERALD 2729 (P&H) (DB)
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
(DIVISION BENCH)
Before
AMAR DUTT, A.N. JINDAL, JJ.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 386 - DB OF 2004
11.07.2006
Major Singh and others
Appellants
Vs.
State of Punjab
Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 1923 of 2004
Surinderjit Singh - Petitioner Vs. Sohan Singh and others - Respondents
For the Appellants :Mr. K.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate.
None For the Petitioner-complainant Ms. M.S. Sidhu, Sr, DAG, Punjab.
IMPORTANT POINT
i. Murder - Criminal Trial - Non explanation of injuries on the person of accused - Injuries being minor and simple in nature, if not explained, not fatal to the prosecution case - Suffering of such injuries for making safer defence, cannot be ruled out.
ii. Evidence - Medico Legal Report - Non-mentioning of all the injuries by one doctor, which were later on noticed and mentioned by another doctor, does not effect the substratum of the prosecution case.
Headnote:Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 3 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302, 324, 34 - Murder and Grevious trust - Life imprisonment - Appreciation of evidence - Appeal against conviction - 5 accused, armed with deadly weapons made rain of blows - Occurrence not in dispute - Contradiction in the statement of doctor and ocular version - Responsibility of the fault cannot be shouldered upon the complainant - It is not fatal to the prosecution case. (Para 24)
Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 3 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302, 324, 34 - Murder Common Intention - Criminal trial - Appreciation of evidence - Evaluation of testimonies of the eye witnesses requires careful, independent assessment and valuation for their credibility, which should not be adversely pre - judged, making another evidence including medical evidence as the sole touch stone for test of credibility - It is not the quantity of evidence which weighs but it is the quality. (Para 26)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302, 324, 34 - Murder - Grievous Hurt - Criminal Trial - Non explanation of injuries on the person of accused - Injuries being minor and simple in nature, if not explained, not fatal to the prosecution case - Suffering of such injuries for making safer defence, cannot be ruled out. (Para 28)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 300 - Exception 4 - Murder - To invoke exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, following requirements must be satisfied : -
It was without pre motivation.
In Sudden fight
It was committed in a heat of passion.
It was committed upon a sudden quarrel.
It was committed without the offender having taken undue advantage. (Para 32)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302, 324, 34 - Murder - Grevious trust Life imprisonment - Appeal against conviction - Right of private defence - Accuseds, five in number armed with deadly weapons like kirpans and datar gave fatal blows on the head - Took undue advantage of the fact and acted in a cruel manner - No delay in lodging the FIR - Alibi not proved - Occurrence was not in dispute - PW3, a stamped witness gave minute details of the occurrence - Right of private defence not proved. Appeal dismissed. (Para 30 and 34)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 100 - Right to private defence causing death - The accused party, 5 in number had attacked the two people - Held; As soon as weapon was snatched. The right of private defence goes - Therefore the plea of private defence is not available to them. (Para 31)
Evidence Act, 1872 - Murder - Medico Legal Report - In any case non - mentioning of all the injuries by one doctor, which were later on noticed and mentioned by another doctor does not effect the substratum of the prosecution case - Held; Responsibility of fault committed by the doctor in pointing out the minor or superficial injuries at the time of MLR, cannot be shouldered upon the complainant. (Para 23 and 24)
A.N. JINDAL, J.
1. This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 386-DB of 2004 and Criminal Revision No. 1923 of 2004 for enhancement of sentence arising out of judgment dated 27.3.2004 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Gurdaspur whereby the accused Surinder Singh, Jagir Singh and his sons Hardip Singh & Major Singh were convicted for the offence under Sections 302, 324/34 IPC and were sentenced accordingly for committing murder of Gurcharan Singh and causing injuries to Surinderjit Singh.
2. The aforesaid accused persons and Sohan Singh (since acquitted) are residents of village Vithwan, Police Station Hargobindpur in district Gurdaspur. Gurcharan Singh complainant has two sons, namely; Lakhwinderjit Singh is posted in Warehouse in Gardhiwal, District Hoshiarpur and Surinderjit Singh is also along job in Government High School, Harchowal.
3. In his statement dated 27.1.2000 at about 7.30 p.m, Gurcharan Singh disclosed that when he alongwith his son Surinderjit Singh was present in his house, Surinder Singh @ Chhinda accused in front of his house (house across the road) had been abusing them. When they reached in the vacant plot of Piara Singh to prevent them, then Major Singh, Hardip Singh & Jagir Singh armed with Kirpans, Sohan Singh armed with dang and Surinder Singh armed with datar came there and exhorted to catch them and they be taught a lesson for stopping them to play the speaker of the Gurdwara. At this, Major Singh inflicted kirpan blow on the right side of his head, Hardip Singh inflicted a kirpan blow which he warded off with a stick in his hand to save himself. However, he received injury on his fingers. Surinder Singh inflicted a datar blow on the right ear and neck. Consequently, he fell down. Then Jagir Singh again inflicted a kirpan blow on his right leg. Jagir Singh inflicted a kirpan blow, which hit him on the left side of the face and near his eye. Then his son Surinderjit Singh came forward to rescue him. Then Major Singh inflicted a kirpan blow, which hit the figures of Surinderjit Singh. Surinder Singh also gave a datar blow, which hit on the thumb of his left hand. In the meanwhile, Chanan Singh son of Jawand Singh and Sukhdev Singh son of Mohan Singh, both residents of village Vithwan came at the spot and witnessed the occurrence. Surinderjit Singh rushed back to his house and on reaching the roof of the house, he fired gun shots twice in the air to scare away the accused. Consequently, the accused ran away. Surinder Singh shifted Gurcharan Singh to Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Amritsar where ASI Joginder Singh came and recorded his statement, on the basis of which, FIR under Sections 326, 324, 148 and 149 IPC, was registered. Unfortunately, Gurcharan Singh died on 29.1.2000, as a result of which, offence was converted into under Section 302 IPC. On registration of the FIR, investigation commenced. After completing all the formalities, the challan against the accused was presented in the Court. Consequently, the Court framed the charges against the accused under Sections 148, 302, 324 read with Section 149 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. On commencement of trial, prosecution, in order to establish the charges against the accused, examined 14 witnesses PW1 Dr. Jagdish Singh Gill, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Baba Bakala had conducted the medico legal examination on the person of Gurcharan Singh and observed the following injuries :-
“1. 7.5 x 1.5 cm incised wound present on the right side of head 13 cm above right eyebrow, vertically placed, margins red swollen and clean cut. Edges clean cut. Clotted blood was present.
2. 5 x 0.8 cm incised wound present on the right ear pinna in its middle extending on the right side of neck, obliquely placed. Margins red, swollen and clean cut. Edges clear cut. Clotted blood was present.
3. 4 x 0.2 cm incised wound present obliquely on the left side of face, 3.5 cm lateral to outer angle of left eye. Diffused swel
