Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 941 (PNJ)

Bhola Alias Ranjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2001-08-29

A.S.GARG, HARJIT SINGH BEDI

body2001
Judgment A.S.Garg, J. 1. Satwant Singh alias Bittu (deceased) resident of village Barmalipur, within the area of Police Station Division No. 6, Ludhiana, was married with Sarabjit Kaur. Earlier to her marriage she allegedly had illicit intimacy with one Bhola alias Ranjit Singh appellant. On the intervening night of 25/26.3.1991, Bhola came to the residential house of Satwant Singh, who lived there with his father Sukhdev Singh P.W.1. Karnail Singh P.W.2 real brother of Sukhdev Singh was staying in the house. Around 5.00 A.M. on 26.3.1991, there was some hue and cry in the house and the aforesaid two brothers noticed that Ranjit Singh alias Bhola appellant was causing blows with the help of a hammer on the head of Satwant Singh alias Bittu, as a result of which he fell down and then Sarabjit Kaur his wife dealt knife blows on the chest of Satwant Singh. Bhola then snatched the knife from Sarbjit Kaur and gave 2-3 knife blows on the chest of Satwant Singh alias Bittu. As a result of this the deceased succumbed to the injuries at the spot. Sarabjit Kaur was married with Satwant Singh just about 3-1/2 months earlier to this incident. 2. On 26.3.1991, Sukhdev Singh P.W.1 met SI Sadhu Singh P.W.11, Incharge Police Post Shimlapuri, Police Station Division No. 6, Ludhiana at Chowk Dabba. The former made his statement Ex. PA before the latter at 7.20 A.M. After making his endorsement Ex. PA/1, the said Sl sent the same for registration of a case to Police Station Division No. 6, Ludhiana and on its basis formal F.I.R. Ex. PA/2 was recorded at 8.05 A.M. on the same day. The special report reached the learned Ilaqa Magistrate at 9.25 A.M. on 26.3.1991. The Investigating Officer reached the scene of occurrence. He prepared inquest report Ex. PD and sent the dead body for post mortem. He also lifted blood stained earth vide memo Ex. PB and prepared rough site plan of the scene of occurrence Ex. PZ. After post mortem, the said SI also took into possession clothes of the deceased vide memo Ex. PF. Sarabjit Kaur accused was arrested on 31.3.1992. Bhola alias Ranjit Singh appellant was arrested on 8.4.1991. In pursuance of his disclosure statement Ex. PH, Bhola appellant got recovered blood stained hammer, which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PH. On personal search of Bhola appellant letters Ex. PF. Sarabjit Kaur accused was arrested on 31.3.1992. Bhola alias Ranjit Singh appellant was arrested on 8.4.1991. In pursuance of his disclosure statement Ex. PH, Bhola appellant got recovered blood stained hammer, which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PH. On personal search of Bhola appellant letters Ex. P3 to P5 were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PJ. 3. Dr. G.P. Mangla P.W3 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Satwant Singh alias Bittu deceased on 26.3.1991 at 5.00 P.M. and found the following injuries : (1) Lacerated wound 1-1/2 x 1/2" bone deep in the middle of the left parietal region. (2) Lacerated wound 1-1/2 x 1/2" on the front of the middle of the forehead. (3) Incised wound 1-1/2 x 1 cm x bone deep, half inch lateral injury No. 2 on left side. (4) Incised wound 4" x 1/4" bone deep, half inch lateral and above the injury No. 3. (5) Lacerated wound 1" x 1/4" x bone deep on the front of the fore head 1" above and middle of the left eye brow. (6) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/2" x muscle deep on the right side of chest, 5" above the umbillicus. (7) Incised wound 1-1/4 x 1/4" x 7 deep on the left side of the chest, 3-1/2" below and medial to the left nipple. (8) Four incised wounds in the front of the chest in between the two nipples each measuring 3/4" x 1/5" x ? deep. (9) Incised wound 3/4" x 1/4" x ? deep in a left mid axillary line 4" below the mid axillary. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was as a result of haemorrhage and shock as a result of multiple injuries which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Ex. PC is the copy of the post mortem. 4 As per report of the Forensic Science Laboratory the piece of cloth and knife were stained with human blood whereas blood stains on hammer got disintegrated. 5. Appellant Ranjit Singh alias Bhola was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Sarabjit Kaur being a juvenile was tried separately by the Juvenile Court. However, Ranjit Singh alias Bhola appellant at the trial claimed that he was involved in this case on suspicion and that he had no hand in the crime. 5. Appellant Ranjit Singh alias Bhola was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Sarabjit Kaur being a juvenile was tried separately by the Juvenile Court. However, Ranjit Singh alias Bhola appellant at the trial claimed that he was involved in this case on suspicion and that he had no hand in the crime. The learned trial Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. 6. Mr. Matwinder Singh, Advocate, appearing as amicus curiae to defend the appellant has taken a number of arguments. He has taken us through the statements of Sukhdev Singh P.W.1 and Kamail Singh P.W.2. Sukhdev Singh P.W.1 is the father of the deceased and he has stated that Bhola alias Ranjit Singh, the appellant was his wifes brothers son and was already on visiting terms with the family and, therefore, he happened to come and stay at night with them. He heard the noise of wailing on the morning of 26.3.1991 and he along with Karnail Singh rushed to the Courtyard and noticed that the appellant was giving hammer blows on the head of his son while Sarabjit Kaur was inflicting knife blows to him and then virtually they exchanged the weapons and caused injuries on the person of the deceased till the deceased was dead. The witness was cross-examined at length but no material contradiction or omission could be found in his statement as such. Karnail Singh P.W.2 also appeared to have corroborated the version in all aspects. 7. The learned counsel has argued that the prosecution witnesses did not actually tryd to prevent the appellant from giving blows and did not try to catch hold the appellant. According to him, if the witnesses had actually been present on such a scene they would not have allowed the deceased to be given so many blows. Therefore, the non-intervention of the witnesses is unnatural and unbelievable. According to him, if the witnesses had actually been present on such a scene they would not have allowed the deceased to be given so many blows. Therefore, the non-intervention of the witnesses is unnatural and unbelievable. He also urged that no first aid was given to the deceased; no blood stained clothes were produced before the police and that a note book which allegedly contained some poems indicating the love of Sarabjit Kaur towards Ranjit Singh though taken into possession was not produced during the course of evidence. There was actually no evidence of illicit relations of the two. He also put up a very significant argument that if there were illicit connections Bhola alias Ranjit Singh would not have been allowed to stay for the night in that house. 8. We would have considered these arguments but in fact there is nothing to suggest on record that the father of the deceased or the deceased himself never had the knowledge that the affairs had gone to an extent that Bhola was likely to commit the murder of the deceased. There was nothing unusual for such a close relation like the appellant to stay at the house of his fathers sister. The case of the prosecution is not that the illicit relations between Sarabjit Kaur and the appellant were to the knowledge of the prosecution witnesses and Satwant Singh deceased. These are the inferences being drawn later on when the love letters were found and note-book was noticed. The motive is hardly material in the case. It suggested an inference that because of the love affairs of the two, the husband lost his life at the hands of the paramour. Knife and hammer blows were given in quick succession and there was hardly any time for any body to intervene. The intervention could be possible at the risk of getting injury without success. There was no chance for medical aid as the deceased succumbed to the injuries then and there. So there appears to be no motive for the complainant party to implicate the appellant falsely. There is consistent version of the prosecution witnesses. They are relations of the appellant and they would not involve their close relation in a false case unless they had actually seen the occurrence. So there appears to be no motive for the complainant party to implicate the appellant falsely. There is consistent version of the prosecution witnesses. They are relations of the appellant and they would not involve their close relation in a false case unless they had actually seen the occurrence. Hence, there is no chance to disturb the conviction and sentence of the appalled The appeal being without any merit is dismissed.