Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 392 (PNJ)

Harvinder Singh v. State

2006-02-09

MEHTAB S.GILL, UMA NATH SINGH

body2006
Judgment MEHTAB S. GILL, J. 1. This Court while granting bail to accused Harvinder Singh, vide its criminal Appeal No.803-DB of 2004 -2-order dated 2.12.2005 had observed as under :- "it is not disputed before us that the applicants and their co-accused were tried for the murders of Baljinder Singh and Sawinder Kaur and for giving injuries to Gurmej Singh. We had summoned the record and find that although in the present case, two persons namely, Baljinder Singh and Sawinder Kaur had been murdered, only single charge has been framed, which may vitiate the trial and require directions for de-novo trial being conducted in accordance with law, as has been held by a Division Bench of this Court in state of Haryana V/s. Brahamjit and others, Murder Reference No.5 of 2004. In this view of the matter, the office is directed to list this case for hearing on 13.1.2006 subject to and after obtaining necessary orders from HON BLE the Chief Justice. " 2. Learned counsel for the appellants has drawn our attention to the judgment rendered in Murder Reference No.5 of 2004 State of Haryana V/s. Brahamjit and others. The HON BLE Bench has observed :- "looked at from another angle, if the provisions of Section 218 and 31 Cr. P. C. had been complied with, the appellants would have been convicted under three separate heads for the murders of lakhan, Mohinder and Suresh and three sentences of imprisonment would have been imposed on them, in addition whereto the trial court would also have had to impose the sentences of fine on each count. The situation in the present case is not different. As already conceded by the learned counsel for the parties, separate charges would have to be framed in relation to offences under Sections 323,170 and 302 I. P. C. In view of this, the conviction and sentences imposed upon the appellants are set aside and the case remanded to the Sessions Judge, Faridabad to be re-tried after proper charges have been framed as is required under Sec.218 cr. P. C. It is further directed that the Sessions Judge would deal with the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months. " 3. P. C. It is further directed that the Sessions Judge would deal with the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months. " 3. In the present appeal it has come out that a common charge was framed by the trial Court for two distinct offences of murder, which is reproduced as under :- "i, Kewal Krishan, Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur hereby charge you Harvinder Singh, Gurvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and harjant Singh accused as follows :- That on 11.12.2001 at about 5.30 p. m. in the area of Village bijliwal in the furtherance of the common intention of you all you, harjant Singh committed murder by intentionally causing the death of Baljidner Singh and Sawinder Kaur and thereby committed an offence punishable under Sec.302 I. P. C. whereas you, harvinder Singh, Gurvinder Singh and Jaspal Singh committed an offence punishable under Sec.302/34 I. P. C. and within my cognizance. Secondly : On the same date, time and place in the furtherance of the common intention of you all, you, Harjant Singh caused injuries to Gurmej Singh with such intention and under the circumstances that if by that act you had caused the death of Gurmej singh, you would have been guilty of murder and thereby committed an offence punishable under Sec.307 I. P. C. , whereas you, Harvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and Gurvinder Singh committed an offence punishable under Sec.307/34 I. P. C. and within my cognizance. And, I hereby direct that you be tried on the said charge by this Court. " 4 In view of the law laid down in Murder Reference No.5 of 2004 (supra) and the observations made above, this case is remanded back to the trial court. Judgment/order dated 4.9.2004 of the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), fast Track Court, Gurdaspur is set aside. The trial Court is directed to complete the trial after framing the charge afresh, as per law. Trial Court is further directed to complete the trial within six months from receiving of a copy of this order. Registry is directed to send back the trial court file immediately. 5. Gurvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and Harvinder Singh were on bail during the trial, as pointed out to us by the counsel for the appellants. Trial Court is further directed to complete the trial within six months from receiving of a copy of this order. Registry is directed to send back the trial court file immediately. 5. Gurvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and Harvinder Singh were on bail during the trial, as pointed out to us by the counsel for the appellants. Since a denovo trial is to start, the trial Court is at liberty to pass any appropriate order, qua the bail of Gurvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and Harvinder Singh. Harvinder Singh, as pointed out by the counsel for the appellants, is already on bail. He shall not be arrested till the final decision is taken, on his bail application by the trial Court. With the above observations and direction.