Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 15 (PNJ)

Sher Singh v. State Of Punjab

2005-01-06

HARJIT SINGH BEDI, NIRMAL SINGH

body2005
Judgment Harjit Singh Bedi, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the following facts : 2. Jaspal Kaur daughter to Balkar Singh (PW-6) and Sher Singh accused were married in the year 1993. Sher Singh and his father Attar Singh were vendors of glass bangles and in that connection often remained away from home. Jaspal Kaur was living in her matrimonial home alongwith her husband, father-in-law Attar Singh, mother-in-law Kailash Kaur and sister-in-law Lakhwinder Kaur alias Rani all accused. At about noon time on 18.7.1994, she was present in her house when she received serious burn injuries. She was immediately rushed to the Civil Hospital, Ludhiana and information with regard to her admission was sent to the police on which ASI Hakam Singh (DW-1) rushed to the hospital and recorded her statement, Exh. DC, at 9.00 p.m. In this statement, she stated that she had caught fire accidently while preparing tea. Information was also sent to Jaspal Kaurs family in Jalandhar on which her uncle Harbhajan Singh (PW-4) reached Ludhiana and made an application, Exh. PF, on 20.7.1994 to the District Magistrate that Jaspal Kaurs statement be recorded. Sh. Raminder Singh, the Additional District Magistrate, Ludhiana directed Sh. Rajiv Prasher (PW-7), the Executive Magistrate to record her statement. Her statement, Exh. PG, was accordingly recorded at 5.15 p.m. on 20.7.1994, in which she stated that she had been burnt by the four accused and that the earlier statement made by her to ASI Hakam Singh (DW-1) had been made under duress as the accused had told her that she would be taken to the hospital only if she exonerated them and in this desperate situation, she had made a statement as per their directions. Harbhajan Singh (PW-4) also moved another application, Exh. PA on 22.7.1994 before Sh. Kanwarjit Singh, (PW-1), the DSP (Rural) pointing out that Jaspal Kaur had been compelled to make a wrong statement and the matter should be re-examined. The DSP then directed SI Arvind Puri (PW-8) to look into the matter. The said officer also recorded Jaspal Kaurs statement, Exh.PJ, at 8.05 a.m. on 22.7.1994 on its basis an FIR, Exh.PJ/2, under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. In this statement, Jaspal Kaur affirmed that the accused had set her alight after having poured kerosene oil on her. The said officer also recorded Jaspal Kaurs statement, Exh.PJ, at 8.05 a.m. on 22.7.1994 on its basis an FIR, Exh.PJ/2, under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. In this statement, Jaspal Kaur affirmed that the accused had set her alight after having poured kerosene oil on her. Jaspal Kaur succumbed to her injuries on 23.7.1994 and the offence was thereafter converted into one under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. On the completion of the investigation, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial and Sher Singh, Attar Singh and Kailash Kaur were ultimately charged for offences punishable under Section 304-B of the Code and in the alternative under Section 302 thereof whereas Lakhwinder Kaur alias Rani being a juvenile was referred to the Juvenile Court. 3. The prosecution, in support of its case relied inter alia on the evidence of PW-1 DSP Kanwarjit Singh, before whom Harbhajan Singh (PW-4) had moved application, Exh. PA, on which he had ordered the registration of a criminal case and further investigation; PW-3 Dr. Kulwant Singh of the Civil Hospital, Ludhiana, who deposed that Jaspal Kaur had been admitted to the hospital on 18.7.1994 with severe burn injuries and that information had been sent to the police post Vardhman, Ludhiana vide Chit, Exh, PC; PW-4 Harbhajan Singh, the uncle of Jaspal Kaur, who deposed that her father Balkar Singh was away to Thailand at that time and also narrated the circumstances leading to the marriage and to the incident and further deposed that on receiving information about the incident, he had rushed to the Civil Hospital, Ludhiana and received information that Jaspal Kaur had been removed to the Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana and when she reached there, she had told him that the accused had set her ablaze and also narrated the circumstances in which she had made her first statement, Exh. DC, to ASI Hakam Singh and that Balkar Singh had returned from Thailand on 22.7.1994 after receiving the information regarding Jaspal Kaurs injuries; PW-5 Dr. S.K. Sharma, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body and had found burn injuries all over except parts of the face and the lower part of the legs; PW-6 Balkar Singh, Jaspal Kaurs father, who deposed to the fact that he accused were annoyed on account of inadequate dowry; PW-7 Sh. S.K. Sharma, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body and had found burn injuries all over except parts of the face and the lower part of the legs; PW-6 Balkar Singh, Jaspal Kaurs father, who deposed to the fact that he accused were annoyed on account of inadequate dowry; PW-7 Sh. Rajiv Prasher, Executive Magistrate, who had recorded the dying declaration, Exh. PG; PW-8 St Arvind Puri, who had recorded Jaspal Kaurs statement, Exh. PJ, on 22.7.1994 leading to the registration of the FIR; and PW-11 Mohabat Pal Singh, who also corroborated the statement of Harbhajan Singh and further stated that Jaspal Kaur had made an oral dying declaration before him as well implicating the accused. 4. The prosecution case was then put to the accused and their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They denied the allegations levelled against them and took the plea that Jaspal Kaur had received injuries on 18.7.1994 as the flames had suddenly flared when she was pumping a stove and that they had tried to save her by pouring buckets of water on her. In defence, they examined ASI Hakam Singh, the officer, who had recorded the first dying declaration, Exh. DC, on 18.7.1994 in which Jaspal Kaur had exonerated the accused of any wrong doing. 5. The trial Court observed that three dying declarations in writing had been recorded; Exh. DC by ASI Hakam Singh; Exh. PG by Sh. Rajiv Prasher, the Executive Magistrate and Exh. PJ, by SI Arvind Puri and three oral dying declarations too had been made to Harbhajan Singh (PW-4), a second to Balkar Singh (PW-6) and a third to Mohabat Pal Singh (PW-11). The Court held that the statement, Exh. DC, did not appear to be a true version in view of the fact that Jaspal Kaur had been compelled to make this statement so as to enable her to receive medical aid and it was, therefore, obvious that the subsequent dying declarations, Exh. PG, and Exh. PJ, and the three oral dying declarations, appeared to be authentic reports of what had happened. The Court also observed that the conduct of the accused in not attempting to inform Jaspal Kaurs family about what had transpired showed their guilty mind. PG, and Exh. PJ, and the three oral dying declarations, appeared to be authentic reports of what had happened. The Court also observed that the conduct of the accused in not attempting to inform Jaspal Kaurs family about what had transpired showed their guilty mind. The Court accordingly held that the burn injuries had been suffered by Jaspal Kaur not by a sudden flare up of the flames but by the positive design of the accused. The Court accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, this appeal. 6. It has been argued by Mr. TPS Mann, the learned counsel for the appellants, that in the light of the fact that there were six dying declarations on record, three in writing and three oral, preference ought to have been given to the first one in point of time i.e. Exh. DC, dated 18.7.1994 made to ASI Hakam Singh in which the appellants had been exonerated of any wrong doing whereas the subsequent dying declarations were a result of deliberation on the part of the prosecution witnesses and the deceased. In this connection, he has pointed out that it was clear from Exh. PG, that it had been recorded without a certificate of fitness from the attending doctor and in the presence of Smt. Nirmal Sharma, statedly a local Congress Worker living in the ward in which Jaspal Kaur and her family were also residing and it was, therefore, obvious that this statement was the outcome of deliberation between the prosecution witnesses. He has further submitted that in the light of the fact that Jaspal Kaur had suffered 90% burn injuries, it was incumbent upon Sh. Rajiv Prasher and SI Arvind Puri to have obtained a fitness certificate from the doctor before recording their respective dying declarations. 7. Mr. Jayender S. Chandail, the learned State counsel has, however, supported the judgment of the trial Court and pointed out that the dying declaration, Exh. Rajiv Prasher and SI Arvind Puri to have obtained a fitness certificate from the doctor before recording their respective dying declarations. 7. Mr. Jayender S. Chandail, the learned State counsel has, however, supported the judgment of the trial Court and pointed out that the dying declaration, Exh. DC, was the outcome of pressure put by the appellants and that this fact had been referred to by Jaspal Kaur in the other dying declarations made by her and in this view of the matter, credence had to be given to the dying declarations, Exh. PG and Exh. PJ in preference to the dying declaration, Exh. DC. It has also been pleaded that Jaspal Kaur had died an unnatural death within a year or so of her marriage and the prosecution story with regard to a sudden flare up of the flames from the stove, was not borne out by the medical evidence. 8. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 9. Admittedly, in the statement, Exh. DC, recorded first in point of time on 18.7.1994, Jaspal Kaur had exonerated the accused-appellants by stating that she had received accidental burn injuries while preparing tea. Harbhajan Singh (PW-4) was, however, dissatisfied with what had been recorded and when he reached Ludhiana, he moved two applications, one before the Additional District Magistrate, Exh. PF, and the other before DSP Kanwarjeet Singh (PW- 1), Exh. PA, and on these applications, two dying declarations, Exh. PG and Exh. PJ, were recorded by Sh. Rajeev Prasher (PW-7) and SI Arvind Puri (PW-8) on 20.7.1994 and 22.7.1994 respectively. Undoubtedly, the statement, Exh. PG, is cryptic and does not give the elaborate details given in the statement, Exh. PJ, but in both these statements, the fact that she had been burnt by the accused finds clear mention. Likewise, three oral dying declarations had been made by Jaspal Kaur to Harbhajan Singh (PW-4), Balkar Singh (PW-6) and Mohabat Pal Singh (PW-11) and in these too, she had unequivocally stated that she had been burnt by the accused. The trial court was thus, to our mind, justified in relying upon the dying declaration, Exh. PG, which was clearly reflective of what had happened and the fact that is cryptic is an indication of its genuineness. The trial court was thus, to our mind, justified in relying upon the dying declaration, Exh. PG, which was clearly reflective of what had happened and the fact that is cryptic is an indication of its genuineness. It is true that from this dying declaration, it is not clear that any fitness certificate had been obtained from the doctor before the same had been recorded but Sh. Rajiv Prasher (PW-7) had stated that he had made an enquiry from Dr. Rajinder Kumar, who was present in the room at that time and he had opined that she was fit to make her statement. We find absolutely no reason to doubt the evidence of Sh. Rajiv Prasher. It will be seen that in essential particular (that is with regard to the involvement of all the accused in the incident) the dying declarations, Exh. PG and Exh. PJ, and the three oral dying declarations correspond to each other. It is true that in the dying declaration,. Exh. PJ, recorded by SI Arvind Puri, the details leading to the actual incident and thereafter have been more elaborately spelt out. This fact can, however, be conveniently put at the hands of an over zealous police officer but it cannot, for a moment, detract from the veracity of the dying declarations. 10. It also appears to be true, as has been contended by Mr. Mann, that Nirmal Sharma, a local Congress worker had been present when the dying declaration, Exh. PG, was being recorded. It is, however, no bodys case and not even suggested in the course of the cross-examination of Sh. Rajiv Prasher (PW-7) that she had attempted to intervene or to pressurise him to record the statement in a particular manner. On the contrary, to our mind, the veracity of the dying declaration, Exh. DC, recorded by ASI Hakam Singh (DW-1) is destroyed by this witness himself. He admitted in his cross-examination that when he had recorded Jaspal Kaurs statement, a doctor had not been present in the room though her mother-in-law had been present and that he had got the feeling that she (Jaspal Kaur) was under some pressure when she had made her statement. This clearly supports the prosecutions story that Jaspal Kaur had been compelled by the accused to make a wrong statement at the very initial stage on 18.7.1994. 11. This clearly supports the prosecutions story that Jaspal Kaur had been compelled by the accused to make a wrong statement at the very initial stage on 18.7.1994. 11. It bears reiteration that Jaspal Kaur had died little more than a year of her marriage. The defence suggestion is that she had suffered burn injuries accidentally when she was pumping the stove as a prelude to making tea. This stand is falsified by the fact that her face was not fully burnt, which would have been the case had the flames from the stove suddenly flared up. 12. In the light of what has been held above, we are of the opinion that there is no merit in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.