Crl. Appeal No. 547-DB of 2001

- 1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Criminal Appeal No. 547-DB of 2001

Date of Decision: 21.9.2011.

Sukhpal Kaur

.......Appellant

Vs.

State of Punjab

......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:

Mr. S.P.S.Sidhu, Advocate

for the appellant.

Ms. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Addl. A.G., Punjab

for the respondent.

.....

SABINA, J.

Appellant faced the trial for an offence under Section

302 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) in FIR No. 48 dated

09.4.1999 registered at Police Station Mamdot. Vide

judgment/order dated 19.9.2001, the trial court convicted and

sentenced the appellant for commission of offence under Section

302 IPC. Hence, the present appeal by the accused.

The prosecution story in brief is that on 09.4.1999,

complainant Sukhbir Singh made a statement before

SI- Darshn Singh that he had come to his maternal house about

two days prior to the occurrence. His maternal grand father

Dalip Singh had gone to Anandpur Sahib. His maternal uncle

Balraj Singh had gone to inquire about the combine for

Crl. Appeal No. 547-DB of 2001

- 2-

harvesting the wheat crop. A day before, at about 7.00 P.M.,

when he came from outside and was about to enter the house,

he saw that his maternal aunt Sukhpal Kaur wife of Balraj Singh

was inflicting injuries on the person of his maternal grand

mother Harbhajan Kaur with a gandasi. Sukhpal Kaur inflicted

blows on the head, fore-head and both the eye-brows of

Harbhajan Kaur. As a result of this, Harbhajan Kaur fell on the

ground. Sukhpal Kaur fled away from the spot along with the

gandasi. He stepped forward to take care of his maternal grand

mother but he found that his maternal grand mother had died.

No other family member was present in the house. After bolting

the door of the house, he immediately rushed to his village and

narrated entire occurrence to his father Hakam Singh and other

family members. He returned back to village Kohar Singh Wala

along with his mother. Their relatives Harbans Singh and Jit

Singh also came there on receipt of his telephonic message.

On the basis of the statement of the complainant,

formal FIR was registered at 3.05 P.M.

After completion of investigation and necessary

formalities, final report was presented against the appellant.

Charge was framed against the appellant by the trial

court under Section 302 IPC vide order dated 22.9.1999.

In support of its case, prosecution examined nine

witnesses. After the close of prosecution evidence, the appellant

when examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short) stated as under:-

“I am innocent. My father-in-law, Dalip Singh, had

given me and my son landed property through Will.

Crl. Appeal No. 547-DB of 2001

- 3-

Mother of Sukhbir singh complainant namely Gurdev

Kaur, daughter of Dalip Singh and wife of Dalip

Singh namely Bhajan Kaur wanted the share from

the land of Dalip Sigh which he (Dalip Singh) was not

ready to part with. Therefore, there used to be a

quarrel between Dalip Sngh from one side and his

wife Harbhajan Kaur and daughter from other side.

Sukhbir Singh never used to come to our village

during those days. I was found innocent during

enquiry. I will produce defence.”

Appellant examined DW-1 Ajaib Singh, DW-2 Udik

Singh and DW-3 Rachhpal Singh DSP in her defence evidence.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that

the appellant had been falsely involved in this case due to

property dispute. The complainant had not witnessed the

occurrence. There was unexplained delay in lodging of the FIR

which made the prosecution story doubtful. During investigation,

the matter was duly inquired into by DW-3 Rachhpal Singh DSP

and he found that the alleged eye witness was not present at the

spot.

Learned sta