Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 703 (PNJ)

Harvinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

2005-07-06

MEHTAB S.GILL, PRITAM PAL

body2005
Judgment Mehtab S.Gill, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 11-1-1997 of Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, whereby he convicted appellant Harvinder Singh son of Gurdarshan Singh under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. 2. Sat Pal Gir (complainant) made a statement to Assistant Sub-Inspector Wassan Singh (PW-6) in the area of village Seikhupur that he has two brothers. Bal Kishan is the eldest and Grumukh Singh is the youngest. His mothers parents are residing at village Seikhupura. On 6-11-1994 complainant Sat Pal Gir along with his brother Gurmukh Singh had gone to see their maternal uncle Jagir Puri. When they reached near the Bus Stand of village Devi Garh, Krishan Gir son of Bhajan Gir, who is his Buas son (fathers sisters son) also met them. No bus was available to go to village Seikhupura. Krishan Gir suggested that they should take a three-wheeler of appellant Harvinder Singh son of Gurdarshan Singh, who was standing with his tempo at the bus stand for going to village Seikhupura. Krishan Gir hired the tempo and settled the fair at Rs. 40.00 . All three of them left for village Seikhupura on the three-wheeler. At about 7.45 P.M. when they reached ahead of village Bagran, Krishan Gir said that they had come ahead of the dera. He asked appellant Harvinder Singh to take the tempo back. At this, Harvinder Singh questioned them as to whether they were blind, they should have told him earlier. While turning the tempo, appellant got angry and started grumbling. He stopped the three wheeler and stated "You consider yourself great Chaudhary and asked me to go from this place to that place. You get down from my tempo." Deceased Gurmukh Singh told appellant Harvinder Singh that he had not been engaged free of costs. At this, appellant Harvinder Singh took out his Gatra Kirpan and stated "I am going to settle the scores today." Gurmukh Singh ran towards the field. Appellant Harvinder Singh ran after him and inflicted two kirpan blows, which hit the deceased between his legs. One of the blows hit his testicles. A tractor was plying in the field. The lights of the tractor were on. Appellant Harvinder Singh ran after him and inflicted two kirpan blows, which hit the deceased between his legs. One of the blows hit his testicles. A tractor was plying in the field. The lights of the tractor were on. Complainant Sat Pal Gir along with Krishan Gir raised an alarm. Ram Chander and Jangir Puri, who were residing in the dera, also reached the spot. Appellant Harvinder Singh ran away with his Gatra Kirpan. 3. Formal FIR, Ex. PE/2 was recorded on 6-11-1994 at 10.55 p.m. Special Report reached the Ilaqa Magistrate, Patiala on 7-11-1994 at 2.15 a.m. Distance between Police Station Julka and the house of the Ilaqa Magistrate at Patiala is about 28 Kms. 4. Prosecution, to prove its case, brought into the witness box Dr. Harish Tuli (PW-1), Prithi Singh Constable (PW-2), Sukhdev Singh, Constable (PW-3), Sat Pal Gir (PW-4), Krishan Gir (PW-5), Wassan Singh, Sub Inspector (PW-6), Daljlt Singh (PW-7), Palwinder Singh, Constable (PW-8), Karamjit Singh (PW-9), and Devinder Singh, Assistant Sub inspector (PW-10). 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant has stated that from the evidence on record, it is established that there was no pre-meditation on the part of the appellant to inflict injuries on the person of deceased Gurmukh Singh. Appellant got angry that his tempo was being taken to the wrong direction and he was being asked to turn it and it was night time. Due to this, he got angry and lost his temper and inflicted injuries on the person of the deceased. It is not the case of the prosecution that the kirpan was unsheathed at the time when the appellant and the deceased met. Appellant was wearing a Gatra Kirpan and it was after he losing his self control that he took it out from its cover. In fact, the deceased and the appellant did not know each other before the occurrence had taken place. It is a case of a sudden fight and falls within the Exception 4 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. At the most, the appellant can be punished under Section 304, Part-II of the Indian Penal Code. If the appellant had been taken immediately to the hospital, he could have been saved, but unfortunately he died due to excessive bleeding on the spot. 6. Learned counsel for the State has stated that there is no delay in lodging of the First Information Report. If the appellant had been taken immediately to the hospital, he could have been saved, but unfortunately he died due to excessive bleeding on the spot. 6. Learned counsel for the State has stated that there is no delay in lodging of the First Information Report. Occurrence had taken place on 6-11-1994 at 7.45 p.m. First Information Report was recorded on 6-11-1994 at 10.55 p.m. and the special report reached the Ilaqa Magistrate at Patiala on 7-11-1994 at 2.15 a.m. The distance between the Police Station, Julka and the house of the Ilaqa Magistrate is about 28 Kms. The prompt lodging of the First information Report goes a long way in proving the case of the prosecution. The testimony of Sat Pal Gir (PW-4) and Krishan Gir (PW-5) has gone unshattered. Both the eyewitnesses are natural witnesses as they were all going towards the dera in the tampoo, which had been hired by Krishan Gir. 7. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. 8. Sat Pal Gir (complainant) in his testimony before the Court, has stated that as there was no bus available to go to village Seikhupur, the tempo of the appellant was hired by Krishan Gir for Rs. 40.00 . When they reached some distance, Krishan Gir stated that they had gone ahead of the dera of their maternal uncle. The complainant-party requested the appellant to take his tempo back and take them back to the dera. The appellant became angry and stated that they should have told him to stop near the dera. Deceased Gurmukh Singh @ Gurmukh Gir told the appellant that the tempo had not been brought free of costs, rather the payment of Rs. 40.00 was to be made. At this, appellant got infuriated. It is after this that the appellant attacked deceased Gurmukh Singh. Similar is the statement of Krishan Gir (PW-5), the other eye-witness. It is clear from the statement of these witnesses that appellant got angry on being asked to turn back, and being told that he had been hired for Rs. 40.00 . There was no pre-meditation to commit the offence on the part of the appellant. Appellant seems to be a short tempered man, as he got angry on a very trivial matter. 9. As per the statement of Dr. 40.00 . There was no pre-meditation to commit the offence on the part of the appellant. Appellant seems to be a short tempered man, as he got angry on a very trivial matter. 9. As per the statement of Dr. Harish Tuli (PW-1), who examined Gurmukh Singh deceased on 7-11-1994 at about 11.55 a.m., he found an abrasion on the right lower inguinal region. The injury was skin deep only. The second injury was an incised wound on the right inguinal region 3 cms. outer to the base of the penis. Blood vessels underneath were cut. The cause of death according to the doctor was shock and haemorrhage due to the injuries described. It is not the case of the prosecution that the appellant deliberately aimed at the vital part in between the legs of the deceased. It seems that when the appellant caught up the deceased, he struck at random, but bad luck being on the side of the deceased, the gatra-kirpan struck in between the legs. Dr. Harish Tuli (PW-1) in his cross-examination had stated that injury No. 2 could be caused only with the tip part of the kirpan, Ex. P6. It. is clear from the statement of Dr. Harish Tuli that penetration in the inguinal region was not deep, but was with the tip of the gatra-kirpan, which unfortunately cut the vein. Deceased Gurmukh Singh died due to excessive bleeding. 10. Their Lordships of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Sukhdev Singh V/s. Delhi State (Government of NCT of Delhi), 2003 (4) Rec Cri R (Criminal) 972 : (2003 Cri LJ 4315) have held in para 15 of their judgment, which is reproduced as under :- - "On the contrary this appears be a case as noted above covered by Exception 4 to Section 300. Four requirements are to be satisfied to bring in application of Exception 4. They are as follows : (1) It was a sudden fight; (2) There was no premeditation; (3) The act was in a heat of passion; and (4) The assailant had not taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner." 11. In the case in hand, there was no pre-meditation. It was a sudden fight and the injuries inflicted on the deceased were in the heat of passion. The case of the appellant falls within Exception 4 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. 12. In the case in hand, there was no pre-meditation. It was a sudden fight and the injuries inflicted on the deceased were in the heat of passion. The case of the appellant falls within Exception 4 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. 12. Another judgment rendered by the Hon ble Apex Court in Khanjan Pal V/s. State of U. P., 1990 (3) Rec Cri R 535, wherein their Lordships of the Hon ble Supreme Court have held in para 5 thereof, which is reproduced as under :- - "We however, agree with the learned Counsel for the appellant that on the basis of the facts proved, the offence is not murder punishable under Section 302, IPC and that the act of the appellant as proved would fall only under Section 304, Part II, IPC. The appellant had in statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C. admitted that there had been an altercation between the two and the deceased received the injury in the course of a scuffle. The evidence clearly established that the whole incident was a sudden development and that the appellant had acted at the spur of the moment and without any pre-meditation. There had been no ill-will or enmity between the two. A casual remark made by the appellant provoked the deceased and the altercation ensued which culminated in the stabbing with knife. The appellant used the knife only once and did not act in any cruel manner. It was in the sudden quarrel in heat of passion that the appellant inflicted the injury on the deceased without any intention to cause death but having knowledge that such act was likely to cause the death of the deceased. In such circumstances, the act of the appellant falls under Exception 4 to Section 300, IPC and the appellant is liable to be convicted only under Section 304, Part-II, IPC." 13. Conviction of the appellant is maintained. Conviction of the appellant is modified from Section 302 to Section 304, Part-II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo 8 years rigorous imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000.00 . In default thereof, he is further directed to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. With this modification, Criminal Appeal No. 140-DB of 1997 is dismissed.