Criminal Appeal Nos. 1475 and 1476 of 2010. Case: 1. Avtar Singh, 2. Kirpal Singh @ Pala and Ors. Vs 1. State of Haryana, 2. State of Haryana and Ors.. Supreme Court (India)

Case NumberCriminal Appeal Nos. 1475 and 1476 of 2010
CounselFor Appellant: Jaspal Singh, Sr. Adv., Vipin Gogia and Jaspreet Gogia, Advs. and For Respondents: Kamal Mohan Gupta, Gaurav Teotia, Zahid Hussain and R.V. Kameshwaran Advs.
JudgesB.S. Chauhan and Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, JJ.
IssueIndian Penal Code - Sections 148, 149, 300, 302, 304, 323, 324, 325, 326
Citation2013 (2) ACR 1821, AIR 2013 SC 286, 2013 (1) AJR 88, 2013 (2) ALT 60 (Cri), JT 2012 (10) SC 127, 2013 (1) RCR 747 (Cri), 2012 (10) SCALE 88, 2012 (9) SCC 432, 2012 (2) UC 2231
Judgement DateOctober 10, 2012
CourtSupreme Court (India)

Judgment:

Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.

  1. These two appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 27.03.2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 916-DB/2006 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The second accused is the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1475/2010. Accused Nos. 4 to 9 are the Appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 1476 of 2010.

  2. According to the case of prosecution, there was a civil suit pending as between Hansa Singh (PW-11) and Surjit Singh S/o Kundan Singh (DW-2) at Samana (Punjab), that there was also an interim order granted by the Civil Court in favour of Hansa Singh (PW-11) as against Surjit Singh, that after hearing was over on 09.04.2003 in the Civil Court, the complainant party returned back home and were present at the house of PW-10 Harmesh Singh s/o Amarjit Singh in the evening. At that time, one Desa Singh, uncle of Harmesh Singh (PW-10) came and informed that some persons had gathered near the land with reference to which the litigation was pending in the Court at Samana and that they might harvest the crops belonging to Hansa Singh (PW-11). On hearing the said information, Harmesh Singh (PW-10) along with his father the deceased Amarjit Singh, his uncle Hansa Singh, Ujagar Singh s/o Chuman Singh, Paramjit Singh s/o Surjit Singh, Karnail Singh s/o Phuman Singh, Surjit Singh s/o Atma Singh, Darshan Singh s/o Surjeet Singh, Teja Singh s/o Karta Singh, Ranjit Singh s/o Phuman Singh all residents of Bhatian village proceeded towards the field of Hansa Singh at about 7.30 p.m., that when they reached the bandh of Bhatian Dam near the lands of Darshan Singh, the accused, namely, Kirpal Singh, Raminder Singh s/o Arjun Singh, Mitt Singh, Resham Singh with swords in their hands, Balbir Singh, Jagtar Singh, Fateh Singh armed with gandasis, Raghbir Singh, Avtar Singh armed with barchhis all residents of Dera Amritsaria, Shiv Majra and Kulwant Singh s/o Surjit Singh also with a sword rushed towards them raising a lalkara, that Kirpal Singh gave a sword blow upon the head of Amarjit Singh, father of Harmesh Singh (PW-10) while Raminder Singh gave a blow of sword on the left arm of the deceased Amarjit Singh and Kulwant Singh attacked the deceased on his feet and Balbir Singh, Jagtar Singh and Fateh Singh also attacked the deceased with their weapons. Raghbir Singh with his barchhi, Mitt Singh with his sword, Resham Singh also with a sword and Avtar Singh with a barchhi attacked Paramjit Singh, Ujagar Singh, Surjit Singh, Hansa Singh and Karnail Singh and inflicted injuries upon them. Due to the injuries the deceased Amarjit Singh fell down, that when the complainant went running towards the place of occurrence, the accused party fled away from the spot with their respective weapons. The deceased was stated to have been taken to the civil hospital where he was declared dead by the doctor. The other injured persons were also treated at the very same hospital, and that the statement of PW-10 was recorded at 10.35 p.m. which was forwarded to the police station at PHG, Guhla which came to be registered as FIR No. 51 dated 09.04.2003. Thereafter PW-15 Sub-Inspector took up the investigation, inspected the place of occurrence recorded the statement of witnesses, collected the opinion of doctors, prepared the draft sketch, collected blood stained earth from the place of occurrence, took steps for the arrest of the accused and based on the admissible portion of their confessional statement recovered the weapons and filed the final report before the Court. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the Appellants along with three other accused came to be charge sheeted for the offences punishable Under Sections 148, 302, 326, 325, 324, 323 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code.

  3. On the side of the prosecution as many as 16 witnesses were examined and 87 Exhibits were marked. In the 313 questioning, the accused denied all the allegations against them. DWs-1 to 7 were examined on the defence side. Based on the evidence placed before the trial Court, all the accused were found guilty of the offences alleged against them and they were convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each for the offences Under Section 148 Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months each, life imprisonment for each for the offence Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code, RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence Under Section 326 Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years along with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months each and for the offence Under Section 325 Indian Penal Code rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year along with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months each. All the sentences were to run concurrently.

  4. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed, all the Appellants preferred an appeal and the High Court while confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the Appellants held that the offence alleged against Raghbir (A1), Mitt Singh (A-3) and Resham Singh (A-10) was doubtful and on that ground acquitted them of all the charges levelled against them. Being aggrieved of the above conviction and sentence imposed on the Appellants and the confirmation of the same by the High Court, the Appellants have come forward with this appeal.

  5. Learned Counsel at the very outset fairly submitted that the Appellants go along with the story of the prosecution to considerable extent in the sense that the filing of the Civil Suit by PW-11 as against Surjit Singh in the Court at Samana was true, that it related to the lands in village Marori, that the suit was admittedly pending on the date of occurrence, namely, 09.04.2003, that on that evening the occurrence took place. learned Counsel also contended that the presence of three of the accused as well as Surjit Singh at the place of occurrence was true. The said three accused were Kirpal Singh (A-4), Raminder Singh (A-5) and Kulwant Singh (A-9). learned Counsel would, however, strongly urge that the prosecution tampered with the records inasmuch as in the complaint itself, which was preferred by PW-10, there was a specific reference to the presence of Surjit Singh, nevertheless there was no reference to him in the FIR and he was not charge-sheeted and the injuries sustained by him were not specifically explained. According to the learned Senior Counsel the Civil Suit preferred by PW-11 ended in a failure, that the name of Surjit Singh (DW-2) was duly recorded in the revenue records as owner of the lands in question and that the accused party were the sufferers at the hands of the complainant party and though a complaint was preferred at the instance of Surjit Singh (DW-2), the prosecution failed to take appropriate action in that regard.

  6. According to learned Senior Counsel, the accused party when tried to defend themselves from the attack of the complainant party they might have suffered the injuries and the prosecution failed to project the case in the proper direction. By referring to the non-examination of the other injured persons, namely, Jagtar Singh...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
4 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT