Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 231 (PNJ)

Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab

2013-02-20

S.P.BANGARH, S.S.SARON

body2013
JUDGMENT Mr. S.S. Saron, J.: - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The criminal miscellaneous application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment of applicant-appellant No.1-Jarnail Singh during the pendency of the appeal. The complainant Amrik Singh on 4.12.2004 filed an application before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala praying for registration of a case against Jarnail Singh applicant-appellant No.1 and six other persons for the offences under Sections 364/302/201/148 and 149 IPC. Complainant inter alia alleged that his brother Karnail Singh (deceased) had been murdered by accused Jarnail Singh and other co-accused. On 4.11.2004 Jarnail Singh (applicant-appellant No.1.), Nachhater Singh (appellant No.2), Balkar Singh (appellant No.3) and Raghbir Singh were conspiring in the fields of Jarnail Singh (applicant-appellant No.1) to finish Karnail Singh (deceased) because he had involved them in litigation. Bachan Singh who was passing near by, heard their conversation. On the same evening i.e. on 4.11.2004 Jarnail Singh (applicant-appellant No.1), Nachhater Singh (appellant No.2), Balkar Singh (appellant No.3), Avtar Singh (appellant No.4), Raghbir Singh, Angrej Singh, Nagar Singh forcibly caught Karnail Singh (deceased) in burrow pits of Bhakra canal and beat him with fist blows. Karnail Singh became semi-conscious. The accused administered him some drugs and at the time of sunset they tied him in a plastic sheet and threw him in a Bhakra canal of village Ganda Kheri, which passes nearby village Sarala Khurd. The occurrence was witnesses by Jagdev Singh PW-7 and Gurmit Singh PW-6. Jagdev Singh PW -7 and Gurmit Singh PW-6 informed the complainant about the occurrence. A search of the dead body was made but it could not be found. Then complainant along with above said Jagdev Singh PW-7 and Gurmit Singh PW-6 and some other respectables of the village went to Police Station Ghanaur and informed SHO by filing an application. Request was also made to search the dead body of Karnail Singh from the Bhakra canal which passes nearby village Sarala Khurd, adjoining to the fields of the complainant and accused. The dead body was ultimately recovered from Bhakra canal on 10.11.2004. Post mortem was conducted by Dr. Basant Lal Sarohi PW-5. A request was thereafter made to the police to take action against the accused persons. It is alleged that due to connivance of ASI Som Nath as well as the SHO no action was taken against the accused persons on his application dated 4.12.2004. Post mortem was conducted by Dr. Basant Lal Sarohi PW-5. A request was thereafter made to the police to take action against the accused persons. It is alleged that due to connivance of ASI Som Nath as well as the SHO no action was taken against the accused persons on his application dated 4.12.2004. Even no daily diary report was made. The police has also colluded in commission of murder of Karnail Singh. On 15.11.2004 Jarnail Singh (applicant-appellant No.1), Nachhater Singh (appellant No.2), Balkar Singh (appellant No.3), and Avtar Singh (appellant No.4) went to Jagtar Singh son of Harnek Singh PW-2 and then one by one disclosed that they along with Balkar Singh, Angrej Singh and Nagar Singh after hatching a conspiracy had taken Karnail Singh (deceased) to the burrow pits of Bhakra canal forcibly on 2.11.2004. They beat him with fist blows and when he became semiconscious, some drugs was administered to him and thereafter wrapped him in a plastic bag and threw him in Bhakra canal which passes nearby village Sarala Khurd. They further stated that they had paid Rs. One lac to the police so that no action is taken against them. This occurrence was disclosed to above said Jagtar Singh by four accused persons. They further stated that the dead body of Karnail Singh(deceased) has been traced out and they have fear that brothers of Karnail Singh will initiate proceedings against them. They requested Jagtar Singh that he is a common person and he should get their compromise effected with brothers of Karnail Singh (deceased). Jagtar Singh then came to village Sarala Khurd on 16.11.2004 and disclosed the above said fact to the complainant. Complainant again went to the police station Ghanaur along with Jagtar Singh and made request to take action against accused persons. However, the Inspector of the Police Station and the ASI asked them to meet DSP Rajpura. They met DSP Rajpura on 18.11.2004 who gave them assurance of taking action against the accused persons and further advised them to meet SHO of Police Station Ghanaur again. On the said application FIR was registered after enquiry by DSP (Detective) Patiala. The police report was filed and FIR under Sections 420,447,379,467,468,471 IPC was registered against the accused persons. The appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life. On the said application FIR was registered after enquiry by DSP (Detective) Patiala. The police report was filed and FIR under Sections 420,447,379,467,468,471 IPC was registered against the accused persons. The appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Besides, pay fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment thereof further undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months each. 3. There are arguable points in the appeal which would require consideration at the time of final hearing. 4. According to learned counsel for the applicant-appellant No.1 Jarnail Singh, Gurmit Singh PW-6 and Jagtar Singh PW-7 had informed the complainant Amrik Singh on 4.11.2004 regarding the incident that had occurred, however, Amrik Singh in his statement recorded under Section 174 Cr.P.C. by H.C. Gurcharan Singh, who conducted inquest proceedings stated that he does not suspect anybody for the occurrence. ASI Dharampal PW-12 stated that body was not found wrapped in a polythene sheet, besides, it is submitted that Dr. Basant Lal Sarohi PW-5 stated that no poison was detected in the body. 5. Learned State counsel has submitted that H.C. Gurcharan Singh was not in a fit state of mind and he was not able to depose before the Court. Besides, it is submitted that the case is established from the deposition of Amrik Singh PW-3 and Jagtar Singh PW-7. They submitted that they had not stated before H.C. Gurcharan Singh that they did not want to initiate any proceedings against accused persons. 6. These aspects would require consideration at the time of final hearing. It is to be noted that applicant-appellant No.1. Jarnail Singh, is stated to be 71 years of age. In terms of the affidavit dated 5.1.2013 of Bhupinderjeet Singh Virk PPS, Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala the applicant-appellant No.1. Jarnail Singh has already under gone imprisonment of two years and three months as on 21.12.2013. He has been acquitted in other two cases registered against him for the offences under Sections 447,379,420,467 IPC by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rajpura on 16.3.2012 and under Sections 323,324,325,34 IPC by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajpura on 8.5.2012 respectively. 7. Keeping in view the above, the criminal miscellaneous application seeking suspension of sentence of applicant-appellant No.1. Jarnail Singh is allowed. 7. Keeping in view the above, the criminal miscellaneous application seeking suspension of sentence of applicant-appellant No.1. Jarnail Singh is allowed. The sentence of imprisonment of applicant-appellant No.1-Jarnail Singh, during the pendency of the appeal shall remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Patiala.