Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 333 (PNJ)

Lakhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab

2007-03-01

ARVIND KUMAR, MEHTAB S.GILL

body2007
JUDGMENT Mehtab S. Gill, J.:- This is an appeal against the judgment/order dated 8/9.2.2006 of the learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, wherein he convicted Lakhwinder Singh son of Darshan Singh under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Appellant was also convicted under Section 307/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Sentences were directed to run concurrently. During the course of trial, Darshan Singh son of Pala Singh died and thus appeal against him abated. Accused Dilbagh Singh son of Darshan Singh was a juvenile and was tried by with the Juvenile Court. We are left with appellant Lakhwinder Singh son of Darshan Singh only. 2. The case of the prosecution is unfolded by the statement Ex.P1 of Kuldip Singh given in the Military Hospital, Ferozepur Cantt. on 13.8.1999 at 4.00 p.m. to ASI Niranjan Singh. Kuldip Singh stated, that his Chacha (younger brother of his father) Mukhtiar Singh was working as a peon in Government High School, Bhure Khurd. Dilbagh Singh @ Kaka son of Darshan Singh of the same village studied in seventh class of the school. On 12.8.1999 an altercation took place between Mukhtiar Singh and accused Dilbagh Singh. Mukhtiar Singh narrated the incident to Jugraj Singh, the father of Kuldip Singh. Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh went to the house of Darshan Singh at about 6.30/7.00 p.m. to lodge a protest. Darshan Singh was empty handed. His two sons Lakhwinder Singh and Dilbagh Singh were armed with Kirch. On seeing them armed, both Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh turned back out of fear. Darshan Singh thereafter raised a lalkara that they should be taught a lesson for complaining. Lakhwinder Singh gave a Kirch blow to Jugraj Singh from the sharp side from the back side. The blow hit on the right side of his back. Dilbagh Singh gave a Kirch blow from the sharp side to Kuldip Singh on his back. Both Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh fell down. In the meantime, the elder brother of Kuldip Singh namely Dilbagh Singh (PW2) reached there. He also saw the occurrence. The blow hit on the right side of his back. Dilbagh Singh gave a Kirch blow from the sharp side to Kuldip Singh on his back. Both Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh fell down. In the meantime, the elder brother of Kuldip Singh namely Dilbagh Singh (PW2) reached there. He also saw the occurrence. Dilbagh Singh then took both Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh to their house. Thereafter, Dilbagh Singh after arranging the vehicle and taking Mukhtiar Singh along with him, admitted both Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh in the Military Hospital, Ferozepur Cantt., as Jugraj Singh had retired from military service. Jugraj Singh died on 13.8.1999. On the basis of this statement, FIR Ex.P1/B came into existence on 13.8.1999 at 5.00 p.m. and the special report reached the J.M.I.C., Ferozepur on the same day at 8.00 p.m. The prosecution to prove its case brought into the witness box Kuldip Singh as PW1, Dilbagh Singh as PW2, Dr. Mahesh Chander Markin as PW3, HC Joginder Singh, HC Balwinder Singh as PW5, SI Darshan Singh as PW6, ASI Naranjan Singh as PW7, Dr. A.Tyagi as PW8 and Lt. Col. Dr. R.D. Singh Ahluwalia as PW9. Accused Dilbagh Singh was produced as DW1. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued, that on the date of occurrence, appellant Lakhwinder Singh was 17 years of age, as per the charge sheet dated 2.12.1999. He being below the age of 18 years should have been tried by the Juvenile Court. The recovery memo of Kirch Ex.P11, was prepared on the disclosure statement of the appellant. As per ASI Naranjan Singh PW7, the Kirch was recovered. The prosecution could not prove that it was the same Kirch, which was used in the commission of the offence. Mukhtiar Singh qua whom the motive is alleged to have been made out, was not produced and did not state in Court, that he had an altercation with accused Dilbagh Singh. Dilbagh Singh PW2, the son of the deceased and the brother of Kuldip Singh PW1 has stated, that a number of people had collected from the locality, but strangely the prosecution did not produce anyone. 4. No explanation is coming forward from the side of the prosecution for the delay in lodging of the FIR. Dilbagh Singh PW2, the son of the deceased and the brother of Kuldip Singh PW1 has stated, that a number of people had collected from the locality, but strangely the prosecution did not produce anyone. 4. No explanation is coming forward from the side of the prosecution for the delay in lodging of the FIR. Occurrence had taken place at 6.30/7.00 p.m. on 12.8.1999 and the FIR Ex.P1/B came into existence on the next day i.e. on 13.8.1999 at 5.00 p.m. There is an unexplained delay of 11 hours. All this time was utilised by the complainant party for consultations and confabulations to falsely implicate the appellant. 5. The actual version of the occurrence has been spelt out by accused Dilbagh Singh, when he appeared as a witness as DW1. He has stated on oath, that while coming to school in a bus, Rajwant Kaur the daughter of Mukhtiar Singh, had a towel over her head, which accused Dilbagh Singh threw on the ground. This was not taken kindly by the complainant party. It is thereafter, that in the evening both Jugraj Singh deceased and Kuldip Singh PW1, cousin brother of Rajwant Kaur, came to the house of Dilbagh Singh. He caught hold of him by neck. Deceased Jugraj Singh, who was wearing an underwear only, also came inside the house and caught hold of accused Dilbagh Singh by the hair. Dilbagh Singh felt suffocated. There was a Chhuri lying there. He picked it up and gave one injury each to both Kuldip Singh PW1 and Jugraj Singh deceased in self defence. Thereafter, he informed Iqbal Singh Sarpanch about the matter, who directed him to go to the police station. Accused Dilbagh Singh went to Police Station Mamdot to register a case against the complainant party. SI Darshan Singh asked him to sit there. A false FIR was lodged against him, his brother Lakhwinder Singh and his father Darshan Singh. 6. Learned counsel for the State has argued, that the motive for commission of the offence, as per Dilbagh Singh DW1 is the dispute with Rajwant Kaur, the daughter of Mukhtiar Singh. Dilbagh Singh has admitted, that some occurrence had taken place in his house with Kuldip Singh PW1 and Jugraj Singh deceased and he picked up a Kirch and gave one blow to Jugraj Singh and one blow to Kuldip Singh PW1. Dilbagh Singh has admitted, that some occurrence had taken place in his house with Kuldip Singh PW1 and Jugraj Singh deceased and he picked up a Kirch and gave one blow to Jugraj Singh and one blow to Kuldip Singh PW1. The injury on the person of Kuldip Singh has been admitted by Dilbagh Singh DW1. Occurrence has also been admitted, but to the extent that what accused Dilbagh Singh did, was in the right of his self-defence. The statement given by accused Dilbagh Singh DW1 cannot be brushed aside, as it has been given on oath. The testimony of both Kuldip Singh PW1 and Dilbagh Singh PW2 is truthful and convincing. They get corroboration from the statement of Lt. Col. Dr. R.D.Singh Ahluwalia PW9, who examined both deceased Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh PW1 and submitted his MLR report Ex.P16. 7. There is no delay in lodging of the FIR. Occurrence had taken place on 6.30/7.00 p.m. on 12.8.1999 and injured Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh PW1 were taken to the Military Hospital, Ferozepur Cantt. The Military Hospital was 20-22 K.Ms. away from the place of occurrence. Both were in a serious condition and the first priority of Dilbagh Singh PW2 was to get them medical care. He along with his uncle Mukhtiar Singh wanted to first save the lives of deceased Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh PW1. 8. The injuries on the person of both deceased Jugraj Singh and Kuldip Singh PW1 are on the back. This clearly proves the case of the prosecution that both Kuldip Singh PW1 and Jugraj Singh deceased were empty handed and it was when they saw appellants armed with knives that they wanted to retreat to their own house, which was only three houses away, that appellant Lakhwinder Singh gave a Kirch blow on the back of deceased Jugraj Singh. 9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. 10. Appellant Lakhwinder Singh does not fall within the parameters of being a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. On the date of occurrence i.e. 12.8.1999, he was 17 years old. When the charge was framed on 2.12.1999, his age has been given as being 17 years. As per his statement in Court when he appeared as a defence witness, Dilbagh Singh DW1 on oath, has stated, that his age was 20 years. On the date of occurrence i.e. 12.8.1999, he was 17 years old. When the charge was framed on 2.12.1999, his age has been given as being 17 years. As per his statement in Court when he appeared as a defence witness, Dilbagh Singh DW1 on oath, has stated, that his age was 20 years. This statement was given on 4.9.2000 before the learned trial Court. This also shows that at the time of the occurrence i.e. on 12.8.1999, age of Lakhwinder Singh appellant was more than 16/18 years. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Partap Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, (2005) 3 Supreme Court Cases 551, the cut off date is 1.4.2001. 11. The two eye witnesses to the occurrence, Kuldip Singh PW1 and Dilbagh Singh PW2 have categorically stated, that on the date of the occurrence they had gone to the house of the appellant, met his father Darshan Singh and complained to him that Dilbagh Singh his son, had misbehaved with Mukhtiar Singh, the brother of the deceased, who was working as a peon in the Govt. High School, Bhure Khurd. Appellant, who was armed with a Kirch Ex.P12, gave a Kirch blow on the back of Jugraj Singh deceased, which proved fatal. Another Kirch blow, as per these witnesses, was given by accused Dilbagh Singh on the back of Kuldip Singh PW1. The injuries being present on the back clearly show, that both Kuldip Singh PW1 and Dilbagh Singh PW2 were retreating from the house of the appellant, after seeing that the appellant was armed with a Kirch and would attack them, along with his co-accused Dilbagh Singh. 12. The statement of both the eye witnesses, gets corroboration from the statement of Lt. Col. Dr. R.D.Singh Ahluwalia PW9, Military Hospital Ferozepur Cantt. vide his MLR Ex.P16. Dr. R.D.Singh Ahluwalia PW9 examined both deceased Jugraj Singh deceased and Kuldip Singh PW1, when they were taken to the Military Hospital, Ferozepur Cantt. Further corroboration is given to the ocular account by Dr. Mahesh Chander Markin PW3 vide his postmortem report Ex.P2. 13. Accused Dilbagh Singh while appearing as a defence witness has stated on oath, that on the date of occurrence deceased Jugraj Singh, who was wearing only his underwear and Kuldip Singh PW1 came to his house. Further corroboration is given to the ocular account by Dr. Mahesh Chander Markin PW3 vide his postmortem report Ex.P2. 13. Accused Dilbagh Singh while appearing as a defence witness has stated on oath, that on the date of occurrence deceased Jugraj Singh, who was wearing only his underwear and Kuldip Singh PW1 came to his house. They caught hold of him, as they were annoyed that he had misbehaved with Rajwant Kaur, the daughter of Mukhtiar Singh, while travelling in a bus. He started getting suffocated and thereafter, he took a Chhuri and gave one blow to Kuldip Singh PW1 and another to deceased Jugraj Singh in self defence. He (DW1) has further admitted, that both Kuldip Singh PW1 and deceased Jugraj Singh had come to his house empty handed. Blood had fallen on the ground, from the injuries caused to them by him with the Chhuri. Dilbagh Singh DW1 in fact, tried to built up a story of self defence, as he being a juvenile and was being tried by the Juvenile and Justice Court. He knew that if he was convicted, a lenient sentence would be given. We cannot look over this fact, that he has admitted in his statement, that both Kuldip Singh PW1 and Jugraj Singh deceased came to his house empty handed. He (DW1) has also admitted, that he gave two Chhuri blows, one to Kuldip Singh PW1 and one to deceased Jugraj Singh. The version spelt out by Kuldip Singh PW1 and Dilbagh Singh PW2 is truthful, cogent and convincing. 14. There is no delay in lodging of the FIR. It has been adequately explained by the prosecution. Occurrence had taken place on 12.8.1999 at 6.30/7.00 p.m. Jugraj Singh deceased being an ex- Army man was taken to Military Hospital, Ferozepur Cantt. Both Kuldip Singh PW1 and deceased Jugraj Singh were admitted in the hospital. It is thereafter, that on 13.8.1999 at 4.00 p.m., the statement of Kuldip Singh PW1 was recorded by ASI Naranjan Singh PW7. Delay, if any, was not due to that consultations and confabulations were taking place to falsely implicate the appellant, but due to administrative reasons. As first the Army authorities informed the police and it is thereafter that the statement of Kuldip Singh PW1 was recorded. We do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned trial Court. Dismissed. ------------------------------