IMPORTANT POINT
Uniformity in behaviour of different persons in any given situation cannot and should not be expected.
Satisfactorily explained delay in lodging FIR is not fatal to the prosecution case.
Concurrent findings of courts below cannot be interfered unless perverse.
Appellate court will not interfere with acquittal merely because another view is possible.

Headnote:(a) Criminal trial – Son being assaulted brutally before father – Father chasing assailants instead of taking his injured son to hospital – Behaviour or reactions of persons situation differ from situation to situation – Uniformity of behaviour in such situations cannot and should not be expected – His evidence cannot be discarded on ground of his behaviour – More so when his evidence remained consistent even through cross-examination. (Para 17)
       (1983) 3 SCC 327; (2004) 8 SCC 660; (2013) 6 SCC 417 – Relied upon
       (b) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 154 – FIR – Delay in lodging of – Satisfactorily explained – No infirmity in conviction. (Para 21, 23)
       (c) Constitution of India – Article 136 – Concurrent findings of fact by courts below – No perversity noticed – Interference not warranted. (Para 24, 31)
       (2005) 6 SCC 211; (2013) 11 SCC 163 – Relied upon
       (d) Criminal trial – Plea of alibi – A6 an advocate pleading alibi asserting that he was working at the time of occurrence with his senior Advocate – DW6 his colleague junior advocate supporting the plea – Trial court rejecting the plea on the ground that the said senior advocate was not examined – High Court accepting evidence of DW6, another advocate – No perversity – No interference with acquittal required. (Para 33)
       (e) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 378 – Appeal against acquittal – Appellate court will not interfere merely because another view is possible (Para 35)
       (2007) 4 SCC 415 – Relied upon
       Facts of the case:
       In connection with muder of one Narinder Singh the trial court convicted and sentenced Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3), Balkar Singh (A-4), Ranbir Singh (A-6), Shamsher Singh (A-7) and Charan Singh (A-8) under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each with default clause and also convicted them for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The trial court acquitted Gurdev Singh (A-2), Ashok Kumar (A-5) and Dalbir Singh(A-9).
       The High Court confirmed the conviction of Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3) and Shamsher Singh (A-7) and acquitted Balkar Singh (A-4), Ranbir Singh (A- 6) and Charan Singh (A8).
       Finding of the Court:
       There is no perversity in the impugned judgment.
       Result: Appeals dismissed

JUDGMENT

R. Banumathi, J.

Appellants Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3) and Shamsher Singh (A-7) in Criminal Appeal No.1362/2010 challenge the legality of their conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment and imposition of fine of Rs.5,000/- each and also challenge their conviction for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and sentence of imprisonment for two years. Being aggrieved by the acquittal of Balkar Singh (A-4), Ranbir Singh (A-6) and Charan Singh (A-8), State of Haryana and Chanda Singh father of the deceased Narinder Singh have preferred Criminal Appeal Nos. 826/2010 and 830/2010.

2. Briefly stated case of the prosecution is that deceased Narinder Singh was running a shop for the sale of fertilizers at the Ladwa Town and he was residing near Veterinary Hospital. On 22.8.1998 at about 8.45 p.m. Narinder Singh was driving his motor cycle and when he turned towards Babain Road, in Ladwa little ahead of the veterinary hospital, Dilawar Singh (A-1), Gurdev Singh (A-2) and Yash Pal (A-3) and other accused persons namely Balkar Singh (A-4), Ashok Kumar (A-5) Ranbir Singh (A-6), Shamsher Singh (A-7), Charan Singh (A-8) and Dalbir Singh(A-9) intercepted him. Dilawar Singh (A-1), Yash Pal (A-3) and Shamsher Singh (A- 7) gave blow on the head of deceased Narinder Singh with their respective cutter and Narinder Singh fell down along with his motor cycle and shouted Bachao Bachao. At that time Chanda Singh-father of the deceased along with his brother Hakam Singh came nearby in their car and saw the accused being attacked. Chanda Singh and Hakam Singh cried for help and shouted ‘NA MARO NA MARO’. Gurdev Singh (A-2) and Charan Singh (A-8) caused sword blows on the left leg and right leg of Narinder Singh. Ranbir Singh (A-6) gave gandasi blow on the right hand of Narinder Singh whereas Balkar Singh (A-4) gave gandasi blow to Narinder Singh on his left arm. Two other assailants namely Ashok Kumar (A-5) and Dalbir Singh (A-9) attacked Narinder Singh with hockey sticks and caused injuries to Narinder Singh. In the meanwhile, Sham Singh (PW-7) also reached there and he too shouted at the accused not to kill Narinder Singh. All the accused fled away from the spot with their respective weapons in their motor cycles. Chanda Singh (PW-6), Hakam Singh and Sham Singh (PW-7) chased the assailants in their respective vehicles but they could not catch hold of them.

3. Further case of prosecution is that on 22.8.1998 at about 9.00 p.m. ASI Charan Dass (PW-11) who was on patrolling duty received message about an injured person lying near Veterinary Hospital, Ladwa and PW-11 and police party went to the scene of occurrence and shifted injured Narinder Singh to Community Health Centre, Ladwa where Dr. Ashwini Kumar (DW-1), Medical Officer of the Health Centre examined him and found him not fit to make statement. In the meanwhile, Chanda Singh and Hakam Singh reached the spot and found that injured Narinder Singh had already been shifted to the hospital by the police. Chanda Singh (PW-6) went to the Ladwa Hospital and Hakam Singh went to the village to inform the family members of Narinder Singh about the incident. When Chanda Singh reached Community Health Centre at Ladwa, injured Narinder Singh was, in the process of being referred to the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital, Kurukshetra as his condition was very serious. In the hospital at Kurukshetra, Dr. S.C.Grover (PW-1) examined the injured–Narinder Singh and opined that Narinder Singh was unfit to make any statement. Since the condition of Narinder Singh was serious, he was immediately referred to PGI Chandigarh and Chanda Singh shifted injured Narinder Singh to PGI Chandigarh. Dr. Munish Kumar (PW-9) of PGI Chandigarh admitted Narinder Singh in the hospital on 23.8.1998 at about 2.30 a.m. and intimation was sent to the police post located near the hospital. On receipt of information from the hospital, ASI K

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2014 Supreme(SC) 673

Cases Referred (6)