Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1370 (PNJ)

Hakam Singh v. State Of Punjab

2002-12-10

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL

body2002
Judgment Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. 1. This order will dispose of Crl. A. No. 93-SB of 1990 filed by Hakam Singh and Shinder Singh and Crl. A. No. 96-SB of 1990 filed by Jograj Singh. All the three appellants have been convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two years each. 2. Case of the prosecution is that on 21.3.1988 at 4 P.M., deceased Hardev Singh was attacked by the three appellants along with Nihal Singh, Lakhwinder Singh and Roop Singh (since acquitted) on the suspicion that the deceased had informed the police against the accused being involved in a working still. On being injured, the deceased was carried to Primary Health Centre and then to Civil Hoptial. He succumbed to his injuries on the way and was declared brought dead in the hospital. FIR was lodged by Kartar Kaur PW 1, mother of the deceased who along with wife of the deceased Bachan Kaur are eye witnesses. Dr. H.S. Bali PW 3 conducted the autopsy on the dead body on 22.3.1988 at 11 A.M. and found following injuries : 1. An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the lateral aspect of left lower leg in its lower part. dissection left tibia and fibula bones On were fractured in its lower part On discretion left tibia and fibula bones were fractured in its lower part. Blood clots were seen in the fractured area. Muscles and vessels were cut. On pressing dark blood came out of the wound. 2. An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm running obliquely 1 cm below injury No. 1. On dissection underlying tibia and fibula bones were fractured Muscles, vessels and nerves were cut and blood clot present in the wound. 3. An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the front of left ankle joint running obliquely, bone deep. Vessels and nerves were cut. 4. An incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm on the inner aspect of left lower leg running obliquely. The tibia and fibula bones were fractured in the above injuries in such a way that the left foot could be rotated for more than half the circumstances. 5. Vessels and nerves were cut. 4. An incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm on the inner aspect of left lower leg running obliquely. The tibia and fibula bones were fractured in the above injuries in such a way that the left foot could be rotated for more than half the circumstances. 5. Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the medial aspect of right great toe. Underlying bone out. 6. An abrasion 5 cm x 2 cm in front of right knee in its lower part. 7. An abrasion 3.5 cm x 2 cm on the lateral aspect of right thigh in its upper part. 8. An incised wound 3.5 cm x 1.5 cm on the palmex aspect of right hand in its lateral part at the base of right thumb. Muscles were cut. 9. Two abrasions 3 cm x 1 cm and 2 cm x 1 cm on the back of right elbow. 10. To abrasions 2 cm x 1 cm and 4 cm x 2 cm on the lateral aspect of right upper arm in its middle. 11. An abrasion on the top of right shoulder 5 cm x 3 cm. 12. A contusion on the right shoulder in its lateral aspect 6 cm x 3 cm. 13. Two abrasions 2 cm x 1 cm, and 3 cm x 2 cm on left upper arm on lateral aspect in its middle. 14. An abrasion 3 cm x 1 cm on the back of left wrist joint on its lateral aspect. 15. Two abrasions 3 cm x 1 cm each on lateral aspect of right ankle joint. 16. A contusion on back of chest on right side 6 cm x 3 cm at the lower margin of the scapula. On dissection there was fracture of right 5th to 10th ribs on the back. The fractured pieces of the ribs were piercing lung on the right side, causing bleeding in the chest wall. Blood clots were seen in the parenchyma of right lung. 17. An abrasion 3 cm x 1 cm on the dorsal aspect of right middle finger. The cause of death, in the opinion of the doctor, was due to shock and haemorrhage, as a result of the injuries, and that combined effect of injuries No.1, 2, 3, 4 and 16 was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. An abrasion 3 cm x 1 cm on the dorsal aspect of right middle finger. The cause of death, in the opinion of the doctor, was due to shock and haemorrhage, as a result of the injuries, and that combined effect of injuries No.1, 2, 3, 4 and 16 was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The doctor further opined that injury No. 16 alone was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was within 12 hours and between death and post-mortem was within 24 hours. 3 Dr. Parbhat Kumar PW 4 sent ruqa Ex.PE to the police. After recording FIR on the statement of Kartar Kaur, investigation was carried out and six accused were challenged. They denied the allegation of the prosecution. PW 1 Kartar Kaur deposed that she was present in the street in front of her house. Hakam Singh accused came there. He was accompanied by Nihal Singh, Shinder Singh, Lakhwinder Singh, Jugraj Singh and Roop Singh and told her that he would teach Hardev Singh a lesson for getting him involved in a working still case. She told him that he was not in the house on which accused proceeded towards the fields and met Hardev Singh on the way and attacked him. Hakam Singh caused gandasa blow on the left ankle. Shinder Singh gave gandasa blow on back side of shoulder and other accused Nihal Singh gave gandasa blow from sharp side hitting on the inner side of the left ankle. Roop Singh gave a soti blow on the back of right shoulder. Jugraj Singh gave takua blow from the reverse side hitting on the right hand. Lakhwidner Singh gave gandasa blow hitting on the reverse side of right leg. On alarm being raised, accused left the spot. Bachan Kaur PW-2 who was also with Kartar Kaur PWI also corroborated the said version. Smt. Kamla Nain Kaur PW-6, Ahlmad of the court deposed that a case was registered against the accused about working still. 4. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court give benefit of doubt to Nihal Singh, Lakhwidner Singh and Roop Singh and acquitted them. It held that the case of the prosecution was fully proved against Halkam Singh, Shinder Singh and Jugraj Singh. 4. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court give benefit of doubt to Nihal Singh, Lakhwidner Singh and Roop Singh and acquitted them. It held that the case of the prosecution was fully proved against Halkam Singh, Shinder Singh and Jugraj Singh. It was further held that having regard to nature of injuries, the appellants had no intention to commit murder though they could be imputed knowledge of causing injuries likely to cause death. Accordingly, they were convicted under Section 304 Part-II read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced as above. Hence these appeals. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the eye witnesses could not be believed and Jugraj Singh had no motive, being nor connected with Hakam Singh. Learned counsel for the State supported conviction and sentence of the appellants. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record of the case. 7. Presence of eye witnesses on the scene of occurrence is quite natural as accused Hakam Singh first came near the house of the deceased where both the eye witnesses were present and since accused gave a threat of violence against Hardev Singh who was not in the house at that time, the eye witnesses followed the accused to save the deceased and thus witnessed the occurrence. The eye witnesses clearly identified the accused persons and categorically deposed about the participation of all the three appellants. All the three appellants had common intention in causing injuries. In lengthy cross examination of the eye witnesses, nothing has been elicited which may create any doubt about the veracity of their version. It has been proved from the testimony of PW-6 Smt. Kamal Nain Kaur that FIR No. 33 dated 16.3.1988 was registered against Hakam Singh under Excise Act. Medical evidence corroborates the ocular testimony and I do not find any reason to upset conviction of the appellants as recorded by the trial court. Conviction of the appellants is, thus, affirmed. 8. It was contended that liberal view on sentence may be taken in view of pendency of criminal case for the last more than 14 years and main accused being Hakam Singh, more liberal view may be taken in respect of Shinder Singh and Jugraj Singh. 9. Conviction of the appellants is, thus, affirmed. 8. It was contended that liberal view on sentence may be taken in view of pendency of criminal case for the last more than 14 years and main accused being Hakam Singh, more liberal view may be taken in respect of Shinder Singh and Jugraj Singh. 9. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, I am of the view that interests of justice will be met if sentence of imprisonment against all the three appellants is reduced to RI for five years while upholding their conviction and sentence of fine as awarded by the trial court, on the condition that all the three appellants will pay a sum of Rs. 15000/- each to the widow of the deceased within six months. If they fail to pay the said amount, sentence as awarded by the trial court will stand undisturbed. 10. Both the appeals are accordingly disposed of.