Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 2120 (PNJ)

Swinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

2006-05-15

A.N.JINDAL, AMAR DUTT

body2006
Judgment A.N.Jindal, J. 1. The appellant Swinder Singh has been tried for causing the death of Pawanjit Singh by Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur. He while ignoring, the private defence plea set up by the accused held him guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC. Consequently, convicted him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo the corresponding sentence. 2. Charanjit Singh is resident of Prem Nagar Hardo Chani Road, Gurdaspur had four sons namely, Pawanjit Singh, Navdeep Singh, Navneet Singh and Kamaljit Singh. Charanjit Singh is employed in Sugar Mill, Paniar. He had to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- from Swinder Singh accused alias Bhilli Singh son of Jagir Singh resident of Bajwa Colony. 3. On 2.5.2001, Charanjit Singh alongwith Parminder Singh and Joginder Singh was going on motor-cycle Kawasaki bearing No.PB- 06-A6463 towards village Lakhowal via Bajwa Colony, Gurdaspur at around 3.00 P.M. They came across Swinder Singh aforesaid who stopped the motorcycle of Charanjit Singh and caused injuries to him and Parminder Singh. Consequently, both were admitted in the Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. 4. At about 5.P.M. on receiving the information, Navdeep Singh informant alongwith his brother Pawanjit Singh, Navneet Singh went to the house of Swinder Singh to lodge the protest regarding causing injuries to their father then Swinder Singh accused felt enraged and attacked Pawanjit Singh by bringing a Barchha from his house. He gave one blow near his right eye and another blow on his right shoulder and then ran away. Navdeep Singh and Navneet Singh also traced back and raised hue and cry "Marditta" Marditta" "Killed" "Killed", at this Swinder Singh ran away from the spot along with his weapons. 5. Navdeep Singh took Pawanjit Singh in his Maruti Car to the Guru Nanak Hospital, Amritsar and got him admitted there. Pawanjit Singh could not resist the injuries and died. 6. Motive behind the occurrence is that Swinder Singh had to owe a sum of Rs.5000/- to Charanjit Singh which he did not return and he, took ill of the repeated demands made by him. 7. After Pawanjit Singh was admitted in the Hospital, the Medical Officer sent ruqa to Police Station. 6. Motive behind the occurrence is that Swinder Singh had to owe a sum of Rs.5000/- to Charanjit Singh which he did not return and he, took ill of the repeated demands made by him. 7. After Pawanjit Singh was admitted in the Hospital, the Medical Officer sent ruqa to Police Station. ASI Kuljinder Singh had received the medical chit Ex.PD from Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur regarding the admission of Pawanjit Singh along with two Medico Legal Reports i.e., of Charanjit Singh and other of Pawanjit Singh went to the Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. However, he could not record the statement of Pawanjit Singh as it has been told to him by the doctor that Pawanjit Singh had been referred to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar. Though, Charanjit Singh and Parminder Singh were still there, yet they showed their inability to make the statement on that day. However, their statements were recorded on the next day i.e., 3.5.2001. 8. After registration of the case on the basis of the statement of Navdeep Singh, the Investigating Officer commenced the investigation. He prepared the enclosed report Ex.P.A in the presence of Navneet Singh and Satwant Singh and the dead body for post-mortem examination. PW 11 Dr. Ashok Chanana conducted the post-mortem examination. The Investigating Officer inspected the spot, took into possession blood stained earth from the street and took the same into possession vide memo. Ex.PT. He prepared the rough site plan of the place of occurrence EX.PT. Inspector Gazinder Singh PW 13 also conducted the part investigation. He took into possession the clothes of the deceased i.e., one shirt Ex. PI, which was taken into possession vide memo. Ex. PQ on 11.5.2001. He arrested the accused and got recovered the Barchha from the heap of straws in his residential house outside the room in pursuance of the statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. On receipt of the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh, Ex. PO/1, he completed the investigation and presented the challan against the accused in the Court. On presentation of the challan, the accused was charged under Section 302 IPC and was charged accordingly to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 9. In order to secure the conviction against the accused, the prosecution examined the following witnesses: - 10. PW 1 Dr. On presentation of the challan, the accused was charged under Section 302 IPC and was charged accordingly to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 9. In order to secure the conviction against the accused, the prosecution examined the following witnesses: - 10. PW 1 Dr. Jagjiwan Lal, Radiologist who x-rayed the injuries of Charanjit Singh on 3.5.2001 and detected vide report Ex.PB that there was a fracture of the left clerical in its middle. 11. PW2 M.S. Sandhu, Draftsman had proved the site plan of the place of occurrence. 12. PW3 Dr. Arvind Mahajan, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur proved the Chit Ex. PD (Information slip) sent to SHO Police Station Gurdaspur informing about the arrival of Charanjit Singh injured in the Hospital at Gurdaspur. 13. PW4 Dr. Vijay Kumar, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur has proved his endorsement Ex.PE/1 on the application Ex.PE that Pawanjit Singh deceased had been referred to the Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar. He also proved the police request Ex.PG and his endorsement Ex.PF/1 to the effect that Parminder Singh was fit to make the statement and also his opinion Ex.PG/1 vide which he opined that Charanjit Singh PW was also fit to make the statement. 14. PW5 Bakhshish Singh Head Constable has proved an affidavit Ex. PH in his deposition. 15. PW6 Navneet Singh, PW7 Navdeep Singh are the witnesses to the occurrence and they have deposed as per version set up by the prosecution during the trial. 16. PW8 Charanjit Singh has proved the motive as well as about the initial occurrence which took place at 3 P.M. in which he and Parminder Singh caused injuries by Swinder Singh. 17. PW9 H.C. Bipan Kumar, PW 10 Constable Om Raj have also proved the affidavits in their deposition. 18. PW 11 Dr. Ashok Chanana, Assistant Professor Department of Forensic and Medical Toxicology, Government Medical College, Amritsar who had conducted the autopsy on the corpse of Pawanjit Singh and has proved the report Ex.PM. He, in his report observed that he found the following injuries on his body: 1. A vertical sutured wound 22 cm long with 19 stitches intact was present on the front of abdomen in between xiphisternum and umblicus and right lateral aspect of umblicus. 2. An horizontal sutured wound 7 cm with 5 stitches intact was present on the front and right side of abdomen in the right hypochondrium. A vertical sutured wound 22 cm long with 19 stitches intact was present on the front of abdomen in between xiphisternum and umblicus and right lateral aspect of umblicus. 2. An horizontal sutured wound 7 cm with 5 stitches intact was present on the front and right side of abdomen in the right hypochondrium. 3. An oblique sutured, wound 2 cm long with 2 stitches intact was present in the right lumber region of abdomen. 4. An oblique sutured wound 4.5 cm long 3 stitches intact was present on the front of right shoulder region over the lateral 1/3rd part of the clavicular region. On dissection it was muscle deep. Clotted blood was present at the site. 5. An oblique sutured wound 3 cm long with 3 stitches intact was present on the front and right side of trunk in the anterior axillary line, 14.5 cm below the anterior axillary fold. 6. An incised wound 2 x 05 cm with clotted blood muscle deep was present on the left cheek 3.5 cm below the outer end of left eye brow. 19. He further opined that cut corresponding to injury No.2 and 4 were present in the shirt. Injuries Nos. 1, 3 and 5 were surgical injuries and their margins were clean cut. On dissection of injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 these communicated with the peritoneal cavity. Ribs corresponding to right lobe of liver i.e.,7th to 9th ribs had been surgically cut, thereby exposing the right lobe of liver which was having a sutured cut measuring 4.5 cm long, horizontally, placed and had 2 stitches. Clotted blood was present in the site and surroundings, the right dome of diaphagm was having a cut of 3.05 cm which was communicating with the right pleural cavity. The right pleural cavity, contained 2.5 liters of fluid and clotted blood. The peritoneal cavity contained 200 cc of fluid and clotted blood." 20. The probable time that elapsed between injury and death was as per hospital record and, between death and post-mortem examination was about 24 to 26 hours. According to him, Pawanjit Singh died as a result of hemorrhage and shock as a result of injury No.2 which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature. 21. PW 12 Sikattar Singh, SHO, Police Station City, Gurdaspur has stated that he prepared the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. 22. According to him, Pawanjit Singh died as a result of hemorrhage and shock as a result of injury No.2 which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature. 21. PW 12 Sikattar Singh, SHO, Police Station City, Gurdaspur has stated that he prepared the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. 22. PW 13 Gajinder Singh, SHO who had conducted the part investigation of the case has proved the same. 23. PW 14 ASI Kuljinder Singh who had also conducted initial investigation has proved the same. 24. PW 15 Constable Satnam Singh tendered an affidavit Ex.PO in his evidence. 25. After tendering into evidence the report of Forensic Science Laboratory, Ex. PO/1, prosecution closed his case. In his statement under S. 313 Cr. P.C., the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances put to him and explained as under: 26. I am innocent. Pawanjit Singh alone had gone to my house when I was not present at my house and my wife was alone in the house. On seeing my wife alone, Pawanjit Singh, with evil eye, had grappled with my wife with bad intention and I just came at that time as I was Amritdhari having a small kirpan and on seeing Pawanjit Singh who had thrown my wife on the bed, I took out my small kirpan and gave injuries to save my wife and her honour. 27. In his defence, he examined, Smt. Lakhwinder Kaur his wife, who while supporting the defence plea stated that his husband, in order to save her honour caused injuries to Pawanjit Singh with Gatra and ran away `from the place of occurrence. She has admitted the date and time of occurrence in her statement. After examining Lakhwinder Kaur, the accused closed his defence. The trial Court after hearing the Public Prosecutor as well as the accused while ignoring the plea of private defence set up by the accused and while accepting the contention of the prosecution, convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment as detailed in the preceding para. 28. The first submission made by the counsel for the appellant is that there is an inordinate delay of about 15 hours in lodging the FIR, the same being without plausible explanation smacks of concoction and embellishment in the prosecution case. 28. The first submission made by the counsel for the appellant is that there is an inordinate delay of about 15 hours in lodging the FIR, the same being without plausible explanation smacks of concoction and embellishment in the prosecution case. Having examined the record, we do not find any substance in it, especially when the occurrence stands admitted by the accused in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The occurrence in this case took place on 2.5.2001 at about 5 P.M. The father and one brother of the deceased had already been caused injuries by the accused just two hours before causing him injuries and, they were also admitted in the hospital. Since the injury on the body of Pawanjit Singh in the front and centre of the abdomen was deep to the peritoneal cavity, therefore, he was struggling with his life. The priority of the witnesses Navdeep Singh and Navneet Singh was to save their father and brothers Parminder Singh and Pawanjit Singh for the reasons that Pawanjit Singh had suffered serious injury which could not be treated in the hospital at Gurdaspur, therefore, he was referred to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar. Navdeep Singh while appearing in the witness-box as PW7 has deposed that they took their brother to Amritsar as he was in a serious condition. Kuljinder Singh went to Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur at about 11.00 P.M. and moved an application Ex.PE over which doctor opined vide report Ex.PE/l while Pawanjit Singh was referred to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar then on the next date, ASI Kuljinder Singh went to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar and recorded the statement of Navdeep Singh, on the basis of which, FIR Ex.PK was recorded on 3.5.2001 at 5.00 P.M. Since the accused in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. has admitted about the occurrence, therefore, the delay in FIR has become insignificant. In any case, delay in this case has been duly explained by the prosecution. We do not find any merit in the contentions raised by the counsel for the appellant that the necessary ingredient of motive is missing in this case, as facts on the record speak for themselves that the accused having felt irritated about the demand of the loan made by Charanjit Singh, resultantly first of all, he caused injuries to Charanjit Singh and Pawanjit Singh. Thereafter, when the other sons of Charanjit Singh went to lodge the protest, he caused fatal injuries to Pawanjit Singh in the presence of his brothers Navdeep Singh and Navneet Singh, Charanjit Singh while stepping into the witness-box Ex.P8 has categorically stated that on 2.5.2001 at about 3.00 P.M. when he alongwith Parminder Singh was coming to Bajwa Colony, Gurdaspur, then he came across Swinder Singh. Swinder Singh stopped them, then on demand made by him of Rs.5000/- from Swinder Singh, he inflicted injuries upon them. The medical evidence corroborates this part of incident. This motive part has been duly supported by his sons PW6 Navneet Singh and PW7 Navdeep Singh. Despite the lengthy cross-examination conducted upon all these witnesses, the accused have failed to shatter their testimonies. While testing their testimonies on the touch stone of reliability, credibility and trustworthiness, we are convinced that they have made consistent state-events regarding the motive as well as the occurrence. In any case, it is well settled by now that lack of motive can never be fatal to the prosecution case, because no body knows or can speculate but motive is being carried by the accused for inciting him to commit the crime. The motive lies hidden in the heart of the accused and it is very difficult to explore the same by going deep into it. Here in this case, the motive has been amply proved by the prosecution by leading sufficient cogent and convincing evidence. 29. We also do not find any merit in this contention of counsel for the appellant that the prosecution has tried to conceal the genesis of the occurrence; the witnesses have tried to shoulder their own misdeeds upon the accused; actually Pawanjit Singh entered the house of the accused, caught hold of his wife, outraged her modesty, therefore, the accused lost control and caused injuries to him. As such, the accused deserves to be given benefit of doubt. Because the prosecution in this particular case has not suppressed any fact and has led sufficient evidence to prove both the incidents, i.e., one dated 2.5.2001 at 3.00 P.M. in which Charanjit Singh and Parminder Singh were caused injuries. PW 1 Dr Jagjiwan Lal has proved the X- ray report regarding injuries of Charanjit Singh. PW3 Dr. Arvind Mahajan has stated that Charanjit Singh and Parminder Singh were admitted in casual ward of Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. PW 1 Dr Jagjiwan Lal has proved the X- ray report regarding injuries of Charanjit Singh. PW3 Dr. Arvind Mahajan has stated that Charanjit Singh and Parminder Singh were admitted in casual ward of Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. The callous attitude of the accused not to succumb to the protest made by Pawanjit Singh, Navdeep Singh and Navneet Singh sons of Charanjit Singh on the same day gave birth to the subsequent occurrence at 5.00 P.M. which led to the death of Pawanjit Singh at the hands of the accused has duly been estabalished by the prosecution. Therefore, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that, the prosecution concealed the genesis of the occurrence. 30. The story set up by the accused in his defence is devoid of any truth. According to the accused, Pawanjit Singh entered the house of the accused and pounced and grappled with her with bad intention while finding her alone. As he had reached his house at the nick of time, he took a small kirpan which he keeps being Amrit Dhari Sikh and gave injuries to the deceased and save his wife and her honour when he had thrown his wife on the bed. In this regard, it may be mentioned that during the course of grappling, the wife of accused might have suffered some abrasions, Co contusions or scratches on her body but he did not get her wife medically examined. No medical examination of Lakhwinder Kaur has been brought on record. It was not a small matter but it related to molesting the modesty of a woman, therefore, had he been true to his version, then he would have recorded the matter to the police, rather he kept silent for years together and came forward with this bald plea only at the time of recording of the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He did not write to the authorities about this incident at any point of time. 31. It will also be significant to mention here that the defence version set up by the accused does not fit in with his occular version. According to the accused, he caused injuries to the deceased with a gatra. (a sharp pointed weapon) which normally causes a punctured wound but as per PW 11 Dr. Ashok Chanana, none of the injuries is punctured wound but it indicates that the injuries were incised wounds. According to the accused, he caused injuries to the deceased with a gatra. (a sharp pointed weapon) which normally causes a punctured wound but as per PW 11 Dr. Ashok Chanana, none of the injuries is punctured wound but it indicates that the injuries were incised wounds. According to the accused, the occurrence had taken place over the bed inside the house. Therefore, blood must have been fallen inside the house but the Investigating Officer while appearing as PW 14 carried the blood stained earth from the street vide recovery memo. Ex. PS as clearly depicted in site plan Ex. PT, Gatra was not produced by the accused with which he had caused injuries. Even the Forensic Science Laboratory report Ex. PO/1 dated 29.6.2001 also reveals that spear used in the commission of the crime was found to have stains of human blood. The recovery of the spear from the house of the accused also attaches truthfulness to the story set up by the prosecution and belies the defence version. The matter does not end here. The accused did not set up this plea of grave and sudden provocation at the initial stage i.e. in his bail application dated 24.7.2001 and also in the request made at the time of remand. In his application dated 24.7.2001, he has mentioned that he involved in the case on account of political rivalry. 32. The accused also cannot get benefit of any of the exceptions to Section 300 IPC, the case does not fall within the ambit of any exception i.e., relating to right of private defence or of grave and sudden provocation. 33. In order to prove grave and sudden provocation the prosecution to prove whether reasonable man belonging to the same class of society as the accused who placed in the situation in which the accused was placed would be so invoked as to lose his self-control. The mental background created by the previous act of the victim may be taken into consideration in ascertaining whether the subsequent act caused grave and sudden provocation for committing the offence. The fatal blow should be clearly traced to the influence of passion arising from the provocation and not after the passion had cooled down by lapse of time or otherwise giving room and scope for premeditation. 34. The fatal blow should be clearly traced to the influence of passion arising from the provocation and not after the passion had cooled down by lapse of time or otherwise giving room and scope for premeditation. 34. In the instant case, the accused has failed to establish if there was any such occasion for the accused to attract such sudden and grave provocation as to take the life of Pawanjit Singh for following reasons. It is not the case where he saw the accused raping his wife. He only saw the accused grappling with his wife. Since the accused was inimical to the deceased, therefore, the question of entering the house of the accused for the purpose of rape did not arise. At the same time, the wife of the accused could take any step to save her husband from the consequences of the trial." 35. There is no such evidence that the accused touched the private parts of the body of Lakhwinder Kaur wife of the accused or had access (toor ?) had made such an access to molest her modesty. As a matter of fact, since, the parties were inimical, the accused had malice against Charanjit Singh and his sons, therefore, it was most improbable that the deceased would enter the house of the accused with a mala fide intention. The defence plea raised by the accused at the fag end of the trial appears to have been played as a trump card to save his own life from the clutches of law. It will also be significant to observe that in the trial Court, the accused tried to develop the plea of right of private defence but having failed in the said plea, he has now made an effort to have the shelter of the exception 1 of Section 300 IPC. 36. Before parting with the judgment, it will also not be out of the place to mention here that since the accused has held plea of admission of the crime the accused has failed to discharge the onus which stood shifted upon him, therefore, the case of the prosecution will be deemed to have been proved. 36. Before parting with the judgment, it will also not be out of the place to mention here that since the accused has held plea of admission of the crime the accused has failed to discharge the onus which stood shifted upon him, therefore, the case of the prosecution will be deemed to have been proved. It has been elaborately discussed in the preceding paras that the prosecution has led sufficient cogent and convincing evidence to prove the charge against the accused, whereas the accused has relied to establish the plea of grave and sudden provocation/private defence, therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court is bound to be maintained. No other point has been raised and no law has been cited by the council for the appellant. 37. In view of the aforementioned discussion finding no merit in the appeal, dismissed the same.