Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 229 (PNJ)

Jagir Singh v. State of Punjab

2004-02-25

MEHTAB S.GILL

body2004
JUDGMENT Mehtab S. Gill, J. - This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 27.9.1991 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar whereby Jagir Singh, Dilbag Singh, Balbir Sing and Balwant Singh were convicted under Section 304(I) read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each or in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for two months each. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that Mohinder Singh (PW-4) made a statement Ex.PA before the police that on 24.7.1989 at 3 p.m., appellants/accused Jagir Singh, Dilbag Singh, Balbir Singh and Balwant Singh attacked him when he was going from his house towards his fields. All the appellants gave fist and kick blows to him. His wife Gurcharan Kaur came and fell upon him to save him. She was also given fist and kick blows. Shingara Singh (PW-5) and Pal Singh saw the occurrence and intervened. 3. The prosecution to prove its case, brought into the witness-box PW-1 Dr. N.P. Aggarwal, PW-2 Dr. Mrs. Harjit Kaur Sangha, PW-3 Rishi Ram Draftsman, PW-4 Mohinder Singh, PW-5 Shingara Singh and PW-6 Amarjit Singh. 4. On appreciation of evidence, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated above. Feeling aggrieved, the appellants have come up in this appeal. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the State and perused the file with their assistance. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants has stated that the medical evidence does not corroborate the ocular account. This is a serious discrepancy which goes to the very root of the case. He has further stated that the motive aspect is not believable. Motive is a double-edged weapon. It is not believable that Shingara Singh (PW-5) paid Rs. 100/- to Chanan Singh as earnest money regarding sale of some land. No writing was executed. The appellant also wanted to purchase this piece of land. Mohinder Singh, the husband of the deceased, was helping Shingara Singh to have the sale-deed executed in favour of Shingara Singh. 7. Learned counsel for the State has stated that the statements of PW-4 Mohinder Singh, husband of the deceased and PW-5 Shingara Singh, an eye- witness, corroborate the version given in the F.I.R. He has further stated that the lodging of F.I.R. is prompt. 7. Learned counsel for the State has stated that the statements of PW-4 Mohinder Singh, husband of the deceased and PW-5 Shingara Singh, an eye- witness, corroborate the version given in the F.I.R. He has further stated that the lodging of F.I.R. is prompt. No consultations or confabulations took place between the complainant party to falsely implicate the appellants. Appellants have been rightly named in the F.I.R. The medical evidence also corroborates the ocular account, where Dr. N.P. Aggarwal (PW-1) has stated in his testimony that Gurcharan Kaur died because of a heart attack. 8. The testimonies of Dr. N.P. Aggarwal (PW-1) and Dr. Mrs. Harjit Kaur (PW-2) are very relevant in the context of this case. 9. PW-1 Dr. N.P. Aggarwal, Medical Officer, Subsidiary Health Centre, Mudhal, has stated in his testimony that he examined deceased Gurcharan Kaur on 25.7.1989 at 12.00 p.m. Rigor Mortis was present. Post-mortem staining was also present on the back of the body. He has further stated that death in his opinion was due to coronary insufficiency as a result of athero-sclelosis changes in the coronary and aorta. The time between death and post-mortem was about 20 hours. Death in this case was immediate or instantaneously. Ex.PA is the carbon copy of the post-mortem report. He has further stated that possibility cannot be ruled out that if the husband is given injury and later on his wife is also given injury with fist and kick blows, death could be caused due to tension which would lead to heart failure immediately. In his cross-examination, a very material aspect of the case comes out when he states that he did not find any external or internal injury on the person of the deceased on his examining the deceased. He has further stated that heart attack could occur under any type of tension. 10. Similarly, PW-2 Dr. Mrs. Harjit Kaur Sangha, Professor of Pathology, Medical College, Amritsar has stated in her testimony that heart and coronary pieces from the heart showed irregular large areas of fibrosis scattered through the wall of the left ventricle wall of coronaries showing atherosclerosis changes with calcification and marked narrowing of their lumina. 11. PW-4 Mohinder Singh, husband of the deceased has stated in his testimony that all the accused attacked him and they started giving him fist blows. 11. PW-4 Mohinder Singh, husband of the deceased has stated in his testimony that all the accused attacked him and they started giving him fist blows. He fell down and his wife Gurcharan Kaur rushed to the spot and fell on him to save him. All the accused gave kick blows, knee blows and fist blows to him and his wife. The occurrence last about 20/25 minutes. He has further stated that there were no external injuries on his body. He received internal injuries on account of fist blows and kick blows etc. Fist blows were given on his face, chest, abdomen and other parts of his body. 12. PW-5 Shingara Singh has stated in his testimony that on reaching the place of occurrence, he saw the accused/appellants giving fist blows, kick blows to Gurcharan Kaur who had fallen on her husband Mohinder Singh (PW-4). Earlier to this, the appellants had given fist blows, kick blow to Mohinder Singh. He has repeated the motive that the appellants suspected that Mohinder Singh was helping in the transaction and purchase of land and for this reason they gave injuries to him. The occurrence lasted for 10/15 minutes. 13. As per the testimony of Mohinder Singh (PW-4), the occurrence lasted for 20/25 minutes. Shingara Singh (PW-5) stated in his testimony that the occurrence lasted for 10/15 minutes. The appellants who were four in number as per the prosecution version, gave fist and kick blows to Mohinder Singh and his wife Gurcharan Kaur (deceased) for not less than in 10 minutes and not more than 25 minutes. From the collective testimony of both these witnesses, the period of injuries being given to Mohinder Singh and deceased Gurcharan Kaur was 10 to 25 minutes. It goes beyond comprehension that young person in the age groups of 25 to 45 years giving fist, kick and knee blows would not cause any external or internal injury on the person attacked. As per the testimony of the witnesses, blows were given on the face also. No injuries have been found on the nose, cheek, eye, or any part of the face. As per the prosecution version, injuries were given on the abdomen and other parts of the body. No external or internal injuries have been found on the person of the deceased or that of Mohinder Singh (PW-4). 14. Dr. No injuries have been found on the nose, cheek, eye, or any part of the face. As per the prosecution version, injuries were given on the abdomen and other parts of the body. No external or internal injuries have been found on the person of the deceased or that of Mohinder Singh (PW-4). 14. Dr. N.P. Aggarwal (PW-1) who conducted the post-mortem, has stated in his testimony that rigor mortis was present. The period that had elapsed between death and post-mortem was 20 hours. No plausible reason is coming forward from the side of the prosecution as to why the body was kept and why the post- mortem was not conducted for 20 hours. The occurrence in this has taken place at 3 p.m. on 24.7.1989 which is broad day light. The F.I.R. was registered at 9.45 p.m. and the autopsy took place on 25.7.1989 at 12.00 p.m. meaning thereby that consultations and confabulations were taking place between the complainant party and the Investigating Agency to falsely implicate the appellants. 15. The motive is double-edged weapon. As per the prosecution witnesses Mohinder Singh and Shingara Singh (PWs 4 and 5 respectively), the motive for attacking Mohinder Singh was that the appellants were angry that Mohinder Singh wanted a sale-deed to be executed in favour of Shingara Singh (PW-5) by one Chanan Singh. 16. Prosecution has failed to prove its case against accused-appellants beyond reasonable doubt. 17. Appellant No. 1 Jagir Singh son of Amar Singh expired on 17.1.2000. The appeal has, thus, abated against him. The other appellants are acquitted. The order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar dated 27.9.1991 is set aside. Fine, if paid, shall be refunded. Appeal is allowed. Appeal allowed.