Mr Akshay Jain Advocate Vs Jasvir Singh Jaswinder Singh Resident of Village Kallowal P S - Citation 1062985 - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 1- in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 state of punjab .........................prosecutor versus jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh resident of village kallowal, p.s.and tehsil dasuya, district hoshiarpur.........................accused-convict/respondent and cra no.d-1056-db of 201.date of decision:11. 07.2013 jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh resident of village kallowal, p.s.and tehsil dasuya, district hoshiarpur........................appellant versus state of punjab .................respondent coram:hon'ble mr.justice s.s.saron hon'ble mr.justice s.p.bangarh present:-mr.pps thethi, addl. advocate general, punjab for the prosecutor in murder reference no.09 of 2012 and respondent in cra not d-1056-db of 2012 sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 2- mr.akshay jain, advocate for the accused/convict in murder reference no.09 of 2012 and appellant in cra not d-1056-db of 2012. s.p.bangarh, j murder reference no.09 of 2012, titled state of punjab v. jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh and criminal appeal not d-1056-db of 2012, titled jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh v. state of punjab, pertain to common impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, therefore, both shall be disposed of by this common judgment. the case of the prosecution is that on 27.01.2012 at about 4.00 p.m.after bringing fire wood at her house situated in village kallowal, narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur wife of the appellant started cooking food and vegetable. prior, thereto, some employees of the punjab state electricity board came to her house who disclosed that she had not made the payment of two electricity bills and as such, the electric connection of her house has to be disconnected. her two sons were present in the house, however, her husband (appellant) had gone out of the house. when her husband returned home, she asked him to make the payment of electricity bills. her husband also took liquor at home and after hearing from her about payment of electricity bills, he raised altercation with her and told her that her parents would make the payment of the electricity bills. she told her husband that earlier also, she made the payment of bill after bringing `2000/- from her parents and this time, she would not ask for money sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 3- from her parents. thereupon, the appellant started beating her with blower pipe (bhookna in the local parlance).as also hurled invectives upon her. she took her children, as also food inside the room and, thereafter, she alongwith them went to her bed. firstly, the appellant with the help of candle set on fire the quilt and, later, he shut the door from outside. when she woke up, she saw that quilt of her elder son was burning with fire, she tried to rescue him and her clothes caught fire. she made to sit her younger son on the iron box (petti) and when the fire spread in the room she raised hue and cry, whereupon, her neighbours came to the spot and opened the door. she also cried for the safety of her children, but the appellant did not care for them and went away from the place of occurrence. she went to the house of brother of her father-in-law. many people gathered at the spot and brother of her father-in-law made arrangement for ambulance and shifted her to civil hospital dasuya. later on, she learnt that her sons had died due to this act of her husband. the appellant also tried to set her ablaze. telephonic message regarding admission of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) and her husband (appellant) in the civil hospital dasuya was sent to the police station dasuya. thereupon, surinder singh asi reached at civil hospital dasuya and moved an application for obtaining the fitness or unfitness of both the injured to make statements. both the injured were declared unfit to make statements on application ex.pw9/a. surinder singh asi also sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 4- received chit regarding the dead bodies of two children. on reaching police station, he made a report in the register. on 28.01.2012, surinder singh asi again visited the civil hospital dasuya and moved an application for obtaining the fitness or unfitness of the injured and narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) was declared fit to make statement vide report ex.pw9/b. thereafter, he (surinder singh asi) moved an application before the learned duty magistrate at dasuya for recording the statement of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) and the learned magistrate came at civil hospital dasuya and narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) was declared fit to make statement by the doctor on application, that was moved by surinder singh asi before the magistrate. thereafter, statement ex.pw2/a of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) was recorded by mrs.rajwant kaur, judicial magistrate ist class, which has been reproduced in the earlier parts of the judgment. thereafter, he (surinder singh asi) prepared the copy of the said statement of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) and made endorsement ex.pw9/c, thereon, and sent the same through gurmail singh volunteer of punjab home guard to the police station for registration of the case, on the basis, thereof, fir ex.pw9/d was recorded by mohan lal asi, who also made endoresment ex.pw9/e underneath the endorsement of surinder singh asi. thereafter, surinder singh asi prepared the inquest reports on the corpses of both the children ex.pw9/f and ex.pw9/g sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 5- respectively, that were identified as lovepreet singh and lakhwinder singh, both the sons of the appellant and narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant).thereafter, surinder singh asi moved applications ex.pa and ex.pb for getting conducted autopsy on the corpses supra. after the autopsy, corpses were handed over to om parkash and mohinder singh vide receipt ex.pw9/h. burnt clothes were produced before surinder singh asi by harvail singh hc, that were seized vide memo ex.pw9/j. onkar singh brar sho also came there, who conducted the further investigation of this case. onkar singh brar sho prepared the rough site plan ex.pw10/a of the place of occurrence. one blower pipe (bhookna) and burnt clothes were seized by him vide memo pw10/b in the presence of other witnesses namely surinder singh asi and sukhwinder singh hc. sketc.of the blower pipe (bhookna) ex.pw10/c was also prepared by onkar singh brar sho and it was made into parcel. parcel of burnt clothes was also prepared before taking that into possession. parcel of the blower pipe (bhookna) and parcel of burnt clothes were produced during the deposition of onkar singh brar sho, who appeared as pw-10. he on 02.02.2012 visited the civil hospital dasuya, where appellant was admitted and he was earlier declared fit to make statement by the doctor on the application moved by surinder singh asi. on reaching there, onkar singh brar sho recorded the statement of the appellant ex.pw10/e, that was read over and explained to him and he (appellant) signed the same. onkar singh brar sho also made endorsement ex.pw10/f on the sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 6- statement ex.pw10/e of the appellant. on reaching police station, onkar singh brar sho entered report no.44 in the register, copy ex.pw10/g. after completion of investigation, station house officer of police station dasuya, instituted police report under section 173 of the code of criminal procedure (cr.p.c - for short) against the appellant jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh before the learned illaqa magistrate to the effect that it appeared that he had committed offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 342 and 436 of the indian penal code (ipc - for short).on presentation of police report, copies of the documents as required under section 207 cr.p.c were furnished to the appellant jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh by the learned illaqa magistrate, who later committed the case to the court of session, where charge under sections 302, 307, 342 and 436 ipc were framed against the appellant, whereto, the latter, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. consequently, prosecution evidence was summoned. at the trial prosecution examined, as many as, ten witnesses whose testified as under:- pw-1 dr. didar singh testified that on 28.01.2012, he conducted the autopsy on the corpse of lakhwinvder singh son the appellant, 4 years male resident of village kallowal, police station dasuya, whose corpse was brought by harvail singh hc no.588 and avtar singh constable no.302 of police station dasuya, that was identified by om parkash son of mohinder singh resident of mohalla sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 7- gurdevpura, mukerian and mohinder singh son of milkhi ram mohalla gurdevpura, mukerian. he found the following injuries on the corpse of lakhwinder singh:- “burn injuries were present on the whole body. there was peeling of skin at places, burn injuries were superficial to deep. there were red areas underneath the peeled areas of skin. singeing of burnt hair on the head were present”.pw-1 dr. didar singh further testified that in his opinion the cause of death in this case was shock due to excessive burn injuries which were sufficient to cause death in an ordinary cours.of nature. he also testified that injuries were ante mortem in nature and an application for autopsy ex.pa was moved. he also proved the copy of the autopsy report ex.pa/1 and pictorial diagram showing the seats of injuries ex.pa/2. he also testified that on the same day, police also moved an application ex.pb for getting conducted autopsy on the corpse of lovepreet singh son of jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh (appellant).that was brought by harvail singh hc and avtar singh constable, which was identified by om parkash son of mohinder singh resident of mohalla gurdevpura, mukerian and mohinder singh son of milkhi ram mohalla gurdevpura, mukerian. he found the following injuries on the corpse of lovepreet singh:- “superficial deep burns present on the whole body except upper part of both thighs on front and back and perinial region. there was peeling of skin at places with reddish sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 8- areas underneath of peeled skin, singeing of scalp hair was present”.pw-1 dr. didar singh further testified that in his opinion the cause of death in this case was shock due to excessive burn injuries which were sufficient to cause death in an ordinary cours.of nature and injuries described were ante mortem in nature. he proved the copy of the autopsy report ex.pb/1 and pictorial diagram showing the seats of injuries ex.pb/2. pw-2 narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur-complainat testified, as per her statement ex.pw2/a, that has been reproduced in the earlier parts of this judgment and that need not to be reproduced to evite repetition. pw-3 dr. amarjit singh testified that on 27.01.2012, jaswinder singh (appellant).narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) wife of jaswinder singh (appellant) both resident of village kallowal, were brought in emergency ward, where he was on duty, as medical officer; both were admitted by him and intimation was sent to the police vide information slip ex.pw3/a. on the same day, corpses of lakhwinder singh and lovepreet singh both sons of jaswinder singh (appellant) were also brought and due to burns, information regarding the same was also sent to the police vide information slip ex.pw3/b. he further testified that on 27.01.2012 one application was moved by surinder singh asi for obtaining fitness/unfitness of jaswinder singh (appellant) and narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) wife of the appellant and both were sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 9- declared unfit to make statement vide his report ex.pw3/c. pw-3 dr. amarjit singh brought the bed head ticket of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) and testified that as per bed head ticket, patient was admitted in semi conscious condition; pulse was poor. burns were approximately 45% and there were superficial deep burns on the following parts:1. on the chest, back and front.”2. on the face and neck.”3. on the both upper lips. he also testified that the patient was discharged on 05.03.2012. the bed head ticket ex.pw3/d was in two parts. the bed head ticket of jasvir singh (appellant) ex.db was also proved by him. pw-4 dr. balwant singh testified that patient narinder kaur was admitted in the civil hospital, dasuya and was treated by him till she was discharged on 05.03.2012. board of doctors was constituted by smo, civil hospital, dasuya, on the application moved by the police, vide order ex.pw4/a and he was also the member of the board alongwith dr. vijay sharma and dr. sudesh rajan and they gave opinion that burn injuries on the person of narinder kaur (complainant) were dangerous to life, vide report ex.pw4/b. he also identified the signatures of dr. vijay sharma and dr. sudesh rai on the report ibid. pw-5 surinder kumar, draftsman testified that he prepared the site plan ex.pw5/a at the instance of surinder singh asi on sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 10- 17.03.2012, after visiting the place of occurrence. pw-6 gurdeep singh also testified that he is the press reporter of aziz newspaper; narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) is his niece from his brotherhood, who was married in village kallowal. her husband was doing labour work and used to take intoxicants. he further testified that brother of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) received a telephone call of latter, and she disclosed her brother about the beatings given by her husband (appellant) and it was told by the brother of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur, namely om parkash that they are going to village kallowal. he further testified that it was also disclosed to him by om parkash that the husband (appellant) of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) is demanding money in order to pay the electricity bills and that on 27.01.2012, respectables from the village were gathered and, thereafter, they reached at village kallowal on one vehicle at about 6.30/6.45 p.m.and reached in the house of the appellant. pw-6 gurdeep singh also testified that the main gate of the house of the appellant was open and they heard the shrieks of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) from inside the room and meanwhile, the villagers gathered there and jasvir singh (appellant) was sitting outside the room and room was bolted from the outside and he (appellant) was under the influence of liquor and smoke was coming out of the room. he further testified that when jasvir singh (appellant) opened the door, they saw fire in the room and the appellant also tried to put off the fire. two minot children sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 11- were badly burnt including narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur. he further testified that one child was lying dead on the bed and the other child was lying dead behind the iron box. he also testified that the dispute occurred several times prior to the present occurrence between the appellant and his wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur. thereafter, they took them to the civil hospital, dasuya and his statement was recorded by the police. pw-7 tarsem singh testified that on 14.02.2012, investigation of this case was entrusted to him and he arrested the appellant vide memo pw7/a. pw-8 rajwinder singh hc testified that on 28.01.2012, he was posted as mhc at police station dasuya and on that day, surinder singh asi and onkar singh brar sho deposited one parcel of clothes, ashes and one blower pipe (bhookna) with him in the malkhana. these parcels were opened during the deposition of this witness and he proved blower pipe ex.p1, clothes ex.p2 and ash ex.p3. these parcels were shown to this witness during his deposition, who also testified that seals on the parcels were intact, that were opened in the court after breaking the seals. pw-9 surinder singh asi conducted the investigation of this case and deposed on the lines of his investigation, that has been reproduced in the earlier parts of this judgment and need not to be reproduced to evite repetition. pw-10 onkar singh brar sho also deposed on the lines of investigation conducted by him, that has been reproduced in the sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 12- earlier parts of this judgment and in order to evite repetition, that need not to be reproduced. pw-11 dr. r.k.bagga testified that on 28.01.2012, he was posted as medical officer in civil hospital, dasuya and was on duty and smt. rajwant kaur, jmic, came to the hospital and surinder singh asi was accompanying her and surinder singh asi moved an application ex.pw9/b for obtaining fitness/unfitness of the injured narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur, who was under treatment in the hospital and she was declared fit to make statement on the application vide his report ex.pw11/a. the patient remained fit during recording of her statement and he (pw-11) made report ex.pw11/b and the said statement was signed by narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (complainant) wife of the appellant and, thereafter, signed by mrs.rajwant kaur, jmic. he further testified that another application at about 11.15 a.m.on 28.01.2012 was also moved prior to the abovesaid application by surinder singh asi and he made his report that narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur was fit to make statement vide report ex.pw11/c. after the closure of prosecution evidence, appellant was examined under section 313 cr.p.c., wherein, he denied the allegations of the prosecution, pleaded innocence and false implication in this case. appellant was called upon to enter in defence, but he closed the same without examining any witness in defence. after hearing both the sides, as also after perusing the sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 13- evidence and documents on record, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment of conviction, convicted the appellant for commission of offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 436 and 342 ipc and vide impugned order of sentence, sentenced him to death for commission of offence punishable under section 302 ipc; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years for commission of offence punishable under section 307 ipc; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years for commission of offence punishable under section 436 and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 year for commission of offence punishable under section 342 ipc. aggrieved, thereagainst, the appellant, who was accused before the learned trial court has come up in this appeal with prayer for acceptance, thereof, and for acquittal of the charges under sections 302, 307, 436 and 342 ipc, that were framed against him by the learned trial court and latter, also sent murder reference no.09 of 2012 under section 366 cr.p.c for confirmation of death sentence that was imposed upon the appellant jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh. learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned trial court has completely overlooked the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence and has erred in recording the conviction on the basis of unreliable and untrustworthy testimony of the prosecution witnesses. he also contended that indeed, looking from the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, the guilt of the appellant is not proved on the record and therefore, the impugned sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 14- judgment and order of sentence have resulted into complete miscarriage of justice. he also contended that the learned trial court has gravely erred in law in relying upon the testimony of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2/complainant).who is the complainant and wife of the appellant and on the fateful day, fire had accidentally occurred and in fact the appellant had also received serious burn injuries out of the said accident. he also contended that a deep scrutiny of the testimony of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) would also go to show that the appellant had not committed these offences and it was an accident. appellant had also suffered 20% burn injuries out of the said accident and, therefore, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the fire had taken place accidentally and not otherwise. he also contended that the testimony of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) does not inspire confidence due to various discrepancies, therein. rather on the contrary, it has been admitted by the said witness that she had not seen the appellant while litting the fire and from this testimony, it cannot be proved that it was the appellant who committed the offences. he also contended that rather the defence taken by the appellant would be more plausible in the light of the fact that the appellant also received 20% burn injuries on his person while saving his wife and children. he also contended that the learned trial court fell in grave error while relying upon the testimony of pw-6 (gurdeep singh).from the cross-examination of this witness, it is proved that the sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 15- appellant at the very firs.instance had tried to save his family and in that process, he received injuries. on the other hand learned additional advocate general, punjab contended that the learned trial court rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant vide impugned judgment and order of sentence, the same may be upheld and affirmed, as the same do not suffer from any illegality or impropriety. we have given our thoughtful consideration to the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned trial court with their assistance. it may be mentioned here that both, the appellant and narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) suffered burn injuries. the question arises for consideration is as to whether it was the appellant who lit the fire or not. the learned trial court came to the conclusion that it was the appellant, who intentionally committed the murder of his sons lovepreet singh and lakhwinder singh by setting them ablaze, as also, caused 45% burn injuries to narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) who fortunately was saved. the learned trial court also concluded that the appellant wrongly confined his wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) and children by bolting the door of the room from the outside, as also, he caused the destruction of building, that was being used as a place for human dwelling. now, it is to be seen, as to whether the testimonies of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) and pw-3 (gurdeep singh) inspire confidence or not. narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) in her sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 16- testimony testified that she was beaten with blower pipe (bhookna) by the appellant. now, it is to be seen as to whether there was any injury on the person of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) having been caused by a blunt weapon like blower pipe (bhookna).pw-4 dr. balwant singh medico legally examined pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur. he found only burn injuries on her person. during cross-examination, it was testified by him that there were only burn injuries on the body of narinder kaur (pw-2) and there was no contusion on her body. it is the allegation of the prosecution that before the alleged incident, pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) was beaten by the appellant with blower pipe (bhookna).this point is required to be taken to logical conclusion, as to whether there were injuries on the person of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) in addition to the burn injuries. the learned trial court overlooked this point and no where concluded that whether pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) testified a true state of affairs.that she was beaten with blower pipe (bhookna) by the appellant before setting her ablaze. this allegation of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) to the effect that she was beaten by the appellant before setting her ablaze with blower pipe (bhookna) is not proved from the record. this could be held to have been proved on the record only, if pw-4 (dr. balwant singh) who medico legally examined pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) testified that in addition to burn injuries, there was contusion on her body, which could be suffered by sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 17- an instrument like blower pipe (bhookna).so, it follows that the prosecution has failed to prove on the record that pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) was beaten by the appellant with blower pipe (bhookna).that falsifies the testimony of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).as also, her statement made before the magistrate for the purpose of registration of this case. in view of the testimony of pw-4 (dr. balwant singh).it follows that pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) was not beaten by the appellant and she received only burn injuries. it is also established from the record that the appellant was also admitted in the hospital. pw-3 (dr. amarjit singh) during cross-examination testified that it might be possible that the appellant was having contusions with the blow of iron pipe. this evidence was also overlooked by the learned trial court, which would imply that the appellant had contusions and that could be the result of blow of blower pipe. possibly, the appellant was beaten by pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) with blower pipe (bhookna).this aspect was not investigated by the investigating agency. even the statement of jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh (appellant) ex.pw10/e was recorded, that was unusual and investigating officer was not clear, as to who committed the crime, at the time of recording the statement of the accused (jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh) ex.pw10/e. version given by the appellant was never considered. even, there is huge gap between the signatures and finishing line, of the statement of jasvir singh, which shows that sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 18- blanks had been filled in. so, investigating officer was having doubt about the role of the appellant having been played by him in the incident and without taking the statement of jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh ex.pw10/e to the logical conclusion, he submitted the police report against him arraigning him. no one saw the appellant lighting the candle, as also, no one saw him setting the children and pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) ablaze. electricity had been cut of and candles were being used in the house, that must make the defence taken by the appellant probable. it appears that candle had burnt out causing burning to the plastic mat and consequently by dripping of portion of burning mat, the quilt also caught fire and they both (appellant and pw-2) tried to put off the fire, which had spread all over the bed and they received burn injuries. both the children also got serious burn injuries and died. there was no motive on the part of the appellant to kill his own children. no previous enmity has been proved. there was also no motive on the part of the appellant to set pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) ablaze, as no previous enmity has been proved and no report was lodged by pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) with the police regarding any previous quarrel between her and the appellant. there are injuries and contusion on the person of the appellant, that have not been explained by the prosecution and that creates considerable doubt in the prosecution version. it is also not proved on the record that the appellant was in an inebriated condition. he was medico legal examined by pw-4 (dr. balwant sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 19- singh).who no where testified that the appellant was in an inebriated condition. this missing of medical evidence also falsifies the statement of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) to the effect that the appellant was in an inebriated condition. this allegation levelled by pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) has not been proved by the prosecution, that must make the version doubtful. the presence of pw-6 (gurdeep singh) is not established. there is no zimni of recording his statement ex.da on 28.01.2012. in her testimony pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) testified that her husband with the help of candle set them ablaze and, thereafter, he shut the door from outside. when door was shut from outside then how, she could open the door. she further testified that her neighbourers came to the spot and opened the door. strange enough, no neighbourer has neither been joined during investigation not examined during trial, to show that they opened the door of the room, where pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) and her deceased-children were confined. in the absence of such evidence, it is arduous to hold that the appellant bolted the door from outside. so, this allegation of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) is not established from the evidence on the record. so far as, pw-6 (gurdeep singh) is concerned, he testified that the main gate of the house was opened and the door of the room was bolted from outside. he further testified that the appellant opened the door himself. this evidence is contrary to the evidence of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).who testified that some sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 20- neighbourers opened the door. it is in the testimony of pw-6 (gurdeep singh) that the appellant was in an inebriated condition and present near the door. again this evidence of pw-6 (gurdeep singh) has not been corroborated by any medical evidence, as he (appellant) was medico legally examined after the incident, if he (appellant) would have been in an inebriated condition, then pw-4 (dr. balwant singh) would have opined that at the time of his admission in the hospital, he (appellant) was smelling alcohol. ex.pw10/e statement of jasvir singh is unusual that will not bind him being hit by section 25 of the indian evidence act. pw-6 (gurdeep singh) has not mentioned the name of the person who sent him telephonic message. in fact, he did not receive the telephonic message. he stated that brother of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) received telephonic message. brother of narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) has not been brought to the box to state as to who phoned him about the incident and from which number, as also from which telephone number the message was received by him. brother of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) is om parkash. the evidence of pw-6 (gurdeep singh) is only hear- se and not direct. he (pw-6) heard about the incident, as also the happening prior, thereto, from om parkash only who has not been brought to the box. the presence of pw-6 (gurdeep singh) could be held to be established at the place of incident, if om parkash had given evidence that he received telephonic message from pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) regarding the incident that occurred sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 21- and he disclosed the said message to pw-6 (gurdeep singh) and then the latter reached at the spot. so, there is no direct evidence of om parkash, that there used to remain quarrel between the appellant and pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).it cannot be held on the basis of pw-6 (gurdeep singh) that dispute between the appellant and his wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) occurred several times prior to the incident in question, as no one else corroborated this testimony. if the dispute between the appellant and his wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) had happened prior, to the accused incident, then, she would have lodged some complaint with the police or before the respectables of the village where both the appellant and his wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) resided in a room where incident took place. in other words, no person from village kallowal where the incident took place came to the witness box to state about the strained relations between the appellant and his wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2).prior to alleged the incident. even pw-6 (gurdeep singh) himself did not see the incident. according to pw-6 (gurdeep singh).appellant opened the door. if the appellant intended to kill his wife and children, then, in that event, he would not have opened the door, as also, he would not have been present at the spot. if, he had been responsible for setting pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) and her children ablaze in that event, he would have run away from the place of incident and he would himself have not been injured in the fire. sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 22- pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) testified that her neighbourers opened the door from outside. she no where testified that pw-6 (gurdeep singh) was present outside the door or her brother om parkash was accompanied by pw-6 (gurdeep singh) and they were present there. even, she did not testify that her husband was present outside the room. pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) testified that door was opened by the neighbourers.meaning thereby, that the appellant was not present there while pw- 6 (gurdeep singh) testified that the appellant was present outside the room and the latter, opened the door of the room. both these testimonies are repugnant to each other and are not worth credence and would entitle the appellant the benefit of doubt. when, there were injuries and contusion on the person of the appellant, it was the bounden duty of the prosecution to explain those injuries. not explanation of injuries sustained by the appellant in the incident would reveal that the prosecution has suppressed the truthfulness of the incident and has not presented true version. hon'ble supreme court of india in lakshmi singh and others v. state of bihar, 1976 air (sc) 2263; held that it is the bounden duty of the prosecution to give reasonable explanation for the injuries sustained by the accused in the cours.of the occurrence. in this judgment, the accused had suffered three injuries out of which injury no.1 was grievous in nature. the other two injuries were also serious injuries, that had been inflicted by a sharp- cutting weapon. it was also held that having regard to the sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 23- circumstances of the case, there can be no doubt that the accused must have received injuries in the cours.of the assault, because it has not been suggested or contended that the injuries could be self- inflicted not it is believable. in these circumstances, it was held that, therefore, it was the bounden duty of the prosecution to give a reasonable explanation for the injuries sustained by the accused in the cours.of the occurrence. not only the prosecution has given no explanation, but some of the witnesses have made a clear statement that they did not see any injuries on the person of the accused. it was observed that the trial court as well as the high court wholly ignored the significance of the injuries found on the appellant. it was also held that the failure of the prosecution to offer any explanation in that regard shows that evidence of the prosecution witnesses relating to the incident is not true or at any rate not wholly true. in jabvir singh and another v. state of punjab, 1985 (2) rcr (criminal) 156; this court acquitted the accused by giving him benefit of doubt, as no explanation was given by the prosecution regarding injuries on the person of the accused. this judgment was rendered by placing reliance reliance on lakshmi singh & others.case (supra).so, the sole testimony of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).that has not been corroborated by any other evidence was wrongly relied upon by the learned trial court for holding the appellant guilty. the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 24- was also overlooked by the learned trial court, who did not appreciate the circumstances, whereunder, the appellant received contusion, as also, burn injuries. one thing is very certain that, if the appellant had a motive to set her wife narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) and children ablaze, in that event, he could easily escape the wrath of receiving burn injuries. so, the burn injuries on the person of the appellant would reveal that he was not a person, who lit the fire. as also, he was not the person who lit the candle. the incident took place on 27.01.2012. it was winter season, there was no electricity in the house indubitably. so, the candle had to be used and all the family members slept inside the room. firing incident might have taken place due to that candle, that was not put off by narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur (pw-2) and the appellant, at the time of going to sleep. pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) herself could take the responsibility of putting off the candle at the time of going to sleep and in that event, the incident could be evited it is no doubt true that pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) testified that her husband (appellant) lit the candle, but she did not categorically depose that when she went to sleep alongwith her children, she put off the candle. it is no doubt true that her husband (appellant) lit the candle and from this testimony, it can be inferred that when the night fell, he lit the candle and not after putting off, thereof, by pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).even no villager came to the box to state that pw-2 sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 25- (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) and the appellant were not taken together to the hospital, after the incident of fire. according, to pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).earlier the fight had taken place between her and her husband (appellant) but strange enough, she did not bring this incident in the notice of any other person. she narrated that there were contusions on her backside due to beatings by her husband (appellant).but contusions have not been found by pw-1 (dr. didar singh).who examined her medically. she further testified that she was taken to hospital by the paternal uncle of her husband in an ambulance called by him, but he was not brought to the box. even, she testified during cross-examination that he had not seen the appellant while lightining the fire. so, according to this testimony of pw-2, it can be safely held that the fire was not lit by the appellant. she testified during cross-examination that earlier also, the appellant gave her head injury, but there is no medical evidence or any other evidence in this regard, except her own statement that could be relied upon, only if corroborated by any other evidence. she also testified that her parents lodged a complaint against the appellant in the police station. again this evidence is missing. the case was investigated by the police and they did not produce any record relating to the complaint of parents of pw-2, lodged against the appellant. she testified during cross-examination that the appellant used to give her regular beatings, that evidence has also not been corroborated by any medical evidence. sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh murder reference no.09 of 2012 - 26- so, the testimony of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) suffers from various infirmities, that was wrongly relied upon by the learned trial court for basing conviction upon the appellant. we therefore, are of the view that the evidence of pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur).that has not been supported by any other evidence, does not inspire confidence and on the basis, thereof, it is arduous to uphold the view taken by the learned trial court, that the candle was lit by the appellant for setting pw-2 (narinder kaur @ bhajan kaur) and her children lovepreet singh and lakhwinder singh ablaze, as also, that he (appellant) bolted the door from outside. resultantly, appeal i.e.cra not d-1056-db of 2012 succeeds and is, hereby accepted; jasvir singh @ jaswinder singh (appellant) is acquitted of the charges, wherefor, he has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial court, by according him benefit of doubt. murder reference no.09 of 2012 has become infructuous with the acceptance of appeal of the appellant. (s.p.bangarh) (s.s.saron) judge judge 1 july, 2013 sham 1. to be referred to the reporters no/yes 2. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. no/yes. sunder sham 2013.07.25 16:52 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

Judgment:

Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 State of Punjab .........................Prosecutor versus Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh resident of Village Kallowal, P.S.and Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur.........................Accused-Convict/Respondent AND CRA NO.D-1056-DB OF 201.Date of decision:

11. 07.2013 Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh resident of Village Kallowal, P.S.and Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur........................Appellant versus State of Punjab .................Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SARON HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.P.BANGARH Present:-Mr.PPS Thethi, Addl.

Advocate General, Punjab for the prosecutor in Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 and respondent in CRA not D-1056-DB of 2012 Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 2- Mr.Akshay Jain, Advocate for the accused/convict in Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 and appellant in CRA not D-1056-DB of 2012.

S.P.BANGARH, J Murder Reference No.09 of 2012, titled State of Punjab v.

Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh and Criminal Appeal not D-1056-DB of 2012, titled Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh v.

State of Punjab, pertain to common impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, therefore, both shall be disposed of by this common judgment.

The case of the prosecution is that on 27.01.2012 at about 4.00 p.m.after bringing fire wood at her house situated in village Kallowal, Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur wife of the appellant started cooking food and vegetable.

Prior, thereto, some employees of the Punjab State Electricity Board came to her house who disclosed that she had not made the payment of two electricity bills and as such, the electric connection of her house has to be disconnected.

Her two sons were present in the house, however, her husband (appellant) had gone out of the house.

When her husband returned home, she asked him to make the payment of electricity bills.

Her husband also took liquor at home and after hearing from her about payment of electricity bills, he raised altercation with her and told her that her parents would make the payment of the electricity bills.

She told her husband that earlier also, she made the payment of bill after bringing `2000/- from her parents and this time, she would not ask for money Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 3- from her parents.

Thereupon, the appellant started beating her with blower pipe (Bhookna in the local parlance).as also hurled invectives upon her.

She took her children, as also food inside the room and, thereafter, she alongwith them went to her bed.

Firstly, the appellant with the help of candle set on fire the quilt and, later, he shut the door from outside.

When she woke up, she saw that quilt of her elder son was burning with fire, she tried to rescue him and her clothes caught fire.

She made to sit her younger son on the iron box (petti) and when the fire spread in the room she raised hue and cry, whereupon, her neighbours came to the spot and opened the door.

She also cried for the safety of her children, but the appellant did not care for them and went away from the place of occurrence.

She went to the house of brother of her father-in-law.

Many people gathered at the spot and brother of her father-in-law made arrangement for ambulance and shifted her to Civil Hospital Dasuya.

Later on, she learnt that her sons had died due to this act of her husband.

The appellant also tried to set her ablaze.

Telephonic message regarding admission of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) and her husband (appellant) in the Civil Hospital Dasuya was sent to the Police Station Dasuya.

Thereupon, Surinder Singh ASI reached at Civil Hospital Dasuya and moved an application for obtaining the fitness or unfitness of both the injured to make statements.

Both the injured were declared unfit to make statements on application Ex.PW9/A.

Surinder Singh ASI also Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 4- received chit regarding the dead bodies of two children.

On reaching police station, he made a report in the register.

On 28.01.2012, Surinder Singh ASI again visited the Civil Hospital Dasuya and moved an application for obtaining the fitness or unfitness of the injured and Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) was declared fit to make statement vide report Ex.PW9/B.

Thereafter, he (Surinder Singh ASI) moved an application before the learned Duty Magistrate at Dasuya for recording the statement of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) and the learned Magistrate came at Civil Hospital Dasuya and Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) was declared fit to make statement by the doctor on application, that was moved by Surinder Singh ASI before the Magistrate.

Thereafter, statement Ex.PW2/A of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) was recorded by MRS.Rajwant Kaur, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, which has been reproduced in the earlier parts of the judgment.

Thereafter, he (Surinder Singh ASI) prepared the copy of the said statement of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) and made endorsement Ex.PW9/C, thereon, and sent the same through Gurmail Singh Volunteer of Punjab Home Guard to the Police Station for registration of the case, on the basis, thereof, FIR Ex.PW9/D was recorded by Mohan Lal ASI, who also made endoresment Ex.PW9/E underneath the endorsement of Surinder Singh ASI.

Thereafter, Surinder Singh ASI prepared the inquest reports on the corpses of both the children Ex.PW9/F and Ex.PW9/G Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 5- respectively, that were identified as Lovepreet Singh and Lakhwinder Singh, both the sons of the appellant and Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant).Thereafter, Surinder Singh ASI moved applications Ex.PA and Ex.PB for getting conducted autopsy on the corpses supra.

After the autopsy, corpses were handed over to Om Parkash and Mohinder Singh vide receipt Ex.PW9/H.

Burnt clothes were produced before Surinder Singh ASI by Harvail Singh HC, that were seized vide memo Ex.PW9/J.

Onkar Singh Brar SHO also came there, who conducted the further investigation of this case.

Onkar Singh Brar SHO prepared the rough site plan Ex.PW10/A of the place of occurrence.

One blower pipe (bhookna) and burnt clothes were seized by him vide memo PW10/B in the presence of other witnesses namely Surinder Singh ASI and Sukhwinder Singh HC.

Sketc.of the blower pipe (bhookna) Ex.PW10/C was also prepared by Onkar Singh Brar SHO and it was made into parcel.

Parcel of burnt clothes was also prepared before taking that into possession.

Parcel of the blower pipe (bhookna) and parcel of burnt clothes were produced during the deposition of Onkar Singh Brar SHO, who appeared as PW-10.

He on 02.02.2012 visited the Civil Hospital Dasuya, where appellant was admitted and he was earlier declared fit to make statement by the doctor on the application moved by Surinder Singh ASI.

On reaching there, Onkar Singh Brar SHO recorded the statement of the appellant Ex.PW10/E, that was read over and explained to him and he (appellant) signed the same.

Onkar Singh Brar SHO also made endorsement Ex.PW10/F on the Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 6- statement Ex.PW10/E of the appellant.

On reaching police station, Onkar Singh Brar SHO entered report No.44 in the register, copy Ex.PW10/G.

After completion of investigation, Station House Officer of Police Station Dasuya, instituted police report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C - for short) against the appellant Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh before the learned Illaqa Magistrate to the effect that it appeared that he had committed offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 342 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC - for short).On presentation of police report, copies of the documents as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C were furnished to the appellant Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh by the learned Illaqa Magistrate, who later committed the case to the Court of Session, where charge under Sections 302, 307, 342 and 436 IPC were framed against the appellant, whereto, the latter, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

Consequently, prosecution evidence was summoned.

At the trial prosecution examined, as many as, ten witnesses whose testified as under:- PW-1 Dr.

Didar Singh testified that on 28.01.2012, he conducted the autopsy on the corpse of Lakhwinvder Singh son the appellant, 4 years male resident of village Kallowal, Police Station Dasuya, whose corpse was brought by Harvail Singh HC No.588 and Avtar Singh Constable No.302 of Police Station Dasuya, that was identified by Om Parkash son of Mohinder Singh resident of Mohalla Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 7- Gurdevpura, Mukerian and Mohinder Singh son of Milkhi Ram Mohalla Gurdevpura, Mukerian.

He found the following injuries on the corpse of Lakhwinder Singh:- “Burn injuries were present on the whole body.

There was peeling of skin at places, burn injuries were superficial to deep.

There were red areas underneath the peeled areas of skin.

Singeing of burnt hair on the head were present”.PW-1 Dr.

Didar Singh further testified that in his opinion the cause of death in this case was shock due to excessive burn injuries which were sufficient to cause death in an ordinary couRs.of nature.

He also testified that injuries were ante mortem in nature and an application for autopsy Ex.PA was moved.

He also proved the copy of the autopsy report Ex.PA/1 and pictorial diagram showing the seats of injuries Ex.PA/2.

He also testified that on the same day, police also moved an application Ex.PB for getting conducted autopsy on the corpse of Lovepreet Singh son of Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh (appellant).that was brought by Harvail Singh HC and Avtar Singh Constable, which was identified by Om Parkash son of Mohinder Singh resident of Mohalla Gurdevpura, Mukerian and Mohinder Singh son of Milkhi Ram Mohalla Gurdevpura, Mukerian.

He found the following injuries on the corpse of Lovepreet Singh:- “Superficial deep burns present on the whole body except upper part of both thighs on front and back and perinial region.

There was peeling of skin at places with reddish Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 8- areas underneath of peeled skin, singeing of scalp hair was present”.PW-1 Dr.

Didar Singh further testified that in his opinion the cause of death in this case was shock due to excessive burn injuries which were sufficient to cause death in an ordinary couRs.of nature and injuries described were ante mortem in nature.

He proved the copy of the autopsy report Ex.PB/1 and pictorial diagram showing the seats of injuries Ex.PB/2.

PW-2 Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur-complainat testified, as per her statement Ex.PW2/A, that has been reproduced in the earlier parts of this judgment and that need not to be reproduced to evite repetition.

PW-3 Dr.

Amarjit Singh testified that on 27.01.2012, Jaswinder Singh (appellant).Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) wife of Jaswinder Singh (appellant) both resident of Village Kallowal, were brought in Emergency Ward, where he was on duty, as Medical Officer; both were admitted by him and intimation was sent to the police vide information slip Ex.PW3/A.

On the same day, corpses of Lakhwinder Singh and Lovepreet Singh both sons of Jaswinder Singh (appellant) were also brought and due to burns, information regarding the same was also sent to the police vide information slip Ex.PW3/B.

He further testified that on 27.01.2012 one application was moved by Surinder Singh ASI for obtaining fitness/unfitness of Jaswinder Singh (appellant) and Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) wife of the appellant and both were Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 9- declared unfit to make statement vide his report Ex.PW3/C.

PW-3 Dr.

Amarjit Singh brought the bed head ticket of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) and testified that as per bed head ticket, patient was admitted in semi conscious condition; pulse was poor.

Burns were approximately 45% and there were superficial deep burns on the following parts:

On the chest, back and front.”

2. On the face and neck.”

3. On the both upper lips.

He also testified that the patient was discharged on 05.03.2012.

The bed head ticket Ex.PW3/D was in two parts.

The bed head ticket of Jasvir Singh (appellant) Ex.DB was also proved by him.

PW-4 Dr.

Balwant Singh testified that patient Narinder Kaur was admitted in the Civil Hospital, Dasuya and was treated by him till she was discharged on 05.03.2012.

Board of doctors was constituted by SMO, Civil Hospital, Dasuya, on the application moved by the police, vide order Ex.PW4/A and he was also the member of the board alongwith Dr.

Vijay Sharma and Dr.

Sudesh Rajan and they gave opinion that burn injuries on the person of Narinder Kaur (complainant) were dangerous to life, vide report Ex.PW4/B.

He also identified the signatures of Dr.

Vijay Sharma and Dr.

Sudesh Rai on the report ibid.

PW-5 Surinder Kumar, Draftsman testified that he prepared the site plan Ex.PW5/A at the instance of Surinder Singh ASI on Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 10- 17.03.2012, after visiting the place of occurrence.

PW-6 Gurdeep Singh also testified that he is the Press Reporter of Aziz Newspaper; Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) is his niece from his brotherhood, who was married in Village Kallowal.

Her husband was doing labour work and used to take intoxicants.

He further testified that brother of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) received a telephone call of latter, and she disclosed her brother about the beatings given by her husband (appellant) and it was told by the brother of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur, namely Om Parkash that they are going to village Kallowal.

He further testified that it was also disclosed to him by Om Parkash that the husband (appellant) of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) is demanding money in order to pay the electricity bills and that on 27.01.2012, respectables from the village were gathered and, thereafter, they reached at village Kallowal on one vehicle at about 6.30/6.45 p.m.and reached in the house of the appellant.

PW-6 Gurdeep Singh also testified that the main gate of the house of the appellant was open and they heard the shrieks of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) from inside the room and meanwhile, the villagers gathered there and Jasvir Singh (appellant) was sitting outside the room and room was bolted from the outside and he (appellant) was under the influence of liquor and smoke was coming out of the room.

He further testified that when Jasvir Singh (appellant) opened the door, they saw fire in the room and the appellant also tried to put off the fire.

Two minot children Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 11- were badly burnt including Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur.

He further testified that one child was lying dead on the bed and the other child was lying dead behind the iron box.

He also testified that the dispute occurred several times prior to the present occurrence between the appellant and his wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur.

Thereafter, they took them to the Civil Hospital, Dasuya and his statement was recorded by the police.

PW-7 Tarsem Singh testified that on 14.02.2012, investigation of this case was entrusted to him and he arrested the appellant vide memo PW7/A.

PW-8 Rajwinder Singh HC testified that on 28.01.2012, he was posted as MHC at Police Station Dasuya and on that day, Surinder Singh ASI and Onkar Singh Brar SHO deposited one parcel of clothes, ashes and one blower pipe (Bhookna) with him in the malkhana.

These parcels were opened during the deposition of this witness and he proved blower pipe Ex.P1, clothes Ex.P2 and ash Ex.P3.

These parcels were shown to this witness during his deposition, who also testified that seals on the parcels were intact, that were opened in the court after breaking the seals.

PW-9 Surinder Singh ASI conducted the investigation of this case and deposed on the lines of his investigation, that has been reproduced in the earlier parts of this judgment and need not to be reproduced to evite repetition.

PW-10 Onkar Singh Brar SHO also deposed on the lines of investigation conducted by him, that has been reproduced in the Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 12- earlier parts of this judgment and in order to evite repetition, that need not to be reproduced.

PW-11 Dr.

R.K.Bagga testified that on 28.01.2012, he was posted as Medical Officer in Civil Hospital, Dasuya and was on duty and Smt.

Rajwant Kaur, JMIC, came to the hospital and Surinder Singh ASI was accompanying her and Surinder Singh ASI moved an application Ex.PW9/B for obtaining fitness/unfitness of the injured Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur, who was under treatment in the hospital and she was declared fit to make statement on the application vide his report Ex.PW11/A.

The patient remained fit during recording of her statement and he (PW-11) made report Ex.PW11/B and the said statement was signed by Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (complainant) wife of the appellant and, thereafter, signed by MRS.Rajwant Kaur, JMIC.

He further testified that another application at about 11.15 a.m.on 28.01.2012 was also moved prior to the abovesaid application by Surinder Singh ASI and he made his report that Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur was fit to make statement vide report Ex.PW11/C.

After the closure of prosecution evidence, appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein, he denied the allegations of the prosecution, pleaded innocence and false implication in this case.

Appellant was called upon to enter in defence, but he closed the same without examining any witness in defence.

After hearing both the sides, as also after perusing the Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 13- evidence and documents on record, the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment of conviction, convicted the appellant for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 436 and 342 IPC and vide impugned order of sentence, sentenced him to death for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years for commission of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years for commission of offence punishable under Section 436 and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 year for commission of offence punishable under Section 342 IPC.

Aggrieved, thereagainst, the appellant, who was accused before the learned trial Court has come up in this appeal with prayer for acceptance, thereof, and for acquittal of the charges under Sections 302, 307, 436 and 342 IPC, that were framed against him by the learned trial Court and latter, also sent Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 under Section 366 Cr.P.C for confirmation of death sentence that was imposed upon the appellant Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh.

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned trial Court has completely overlooked the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence and has erred in recording the conviction on the basis of unreliable and untrustworthy testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

He also contended that indeed, looking from the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, the guilt of the appellant is not proved on the record and therefore, the impugned Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 14- judgment and order of sentence have resulted into complete miscarriage of justice.

He also contended that the learned trial Court has gravely erred in law in relying upon the testimony of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2/complainant).who is the complainant and wife of the appellant and on the fateful day, fire had accidentally occurred and in fact the appellant had also received serious burn injuries out of the said accident.

He also contended that a deep scrutiny of the testimony of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) would also go to show that the appellant had not committed these offences and it was an accident.

Appellant had also suffered 20% burn injuries out of the said accident and, therefore, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the fire had taken place accidentally and not otherwise.

He also contended that the testimony of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) does not inspire confidence due to various discrepancies, therein.

Rather on the contrary, it has been admitted by the said witness that she had not seen the appellant while litting the fire and from this testimony, it cannot be proved that it was the appellant who committed the offences.

He also contended that rather the defence taken by the appellant would be more plausible in the light of the fact that the appellant also received 20% burn injuries on his person while saving his wife and children.

He also contended that the learned trial Court fell in grave error while relying upon the testimony of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh).From the cross-examination of this witness, it is proved that the Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 15- appellant at the very fiRs.instance had tried to save his family and in that process, he received injuries.

On the other hand learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab contended that the learned trial Court rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant vide impugned judgment and order of sentence, the same may be upheld and affirmed, as the same do not suffer from any illegality or impropriety.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned trial Court with their assistance.

It may be mentioned here that both, the appellant and Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) suffered burn injuries.

The question arises for consideration is as to whether it was the appellant who lit the fire or not.

The learned trial Court came to the conclusion that it was the appellant, who intentionally committed the murder of his sons Lovepreet Singh and Lakhwinder Singh by setting them ablaze, as also, caused 45% burn injuries to Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) who fortunately was saved.

The learned trial Court also concluded that the appellant wrongly confined his wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) and children by bolting the door of the room from the outside, as also, he caused the destruction of building, that was being used as a place for human dwelling.

Now, it is to be seen, as to whether the testimonies of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) and PW-3 (Gurdeep Singh) inspire confidence or not.

Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) in her Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 16- testimony testified that she was beaten with blower pipe (Bhookna) by the appellant.

Now, it is to be seen as to whether there was any injury on the person of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) having been caused by a blunt weapon like blower pipe (Bhookna).PW-4 Dr.

Balwant Singh medico legally examined PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur.

He found only burn injuries on her person.

During cross-examination, it was testified by him that there were only burn injuries on the body of Narinder Kaur (PW-2) and there was no contusion on her body.

It is the allegation of the prosecution that before the alleged incident, PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) was beaten by the appellant with blower pipe (Bhookna).This point is required to be taken to logical conclusion, as to whether there were injuries on the person of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) in addition to the burn injuries.

The learned trial Court overlooked this point and no where concluded that whether PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) testified a true state of affaiRs.that she was beaten with blower pipe (Bhookna) by the appellant before setting her ablaze.

This allegation of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) to the effect that she was beaten by the appellant before setting her ablaze with blower pipe (Bhookna) is not proved from the record.

This could be held to have been proved on the record only, if PW-4 (Dr.

Balwant Singh) who medico legally examined PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) testified that in addition to burn injuries, there was contusion on her body, which could be suffered by Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 17- an instrument like blower pipe (Bhookna).So, it follows that the prosecution has failed to prove on the record that PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) was beaten by the appellant with blower pipe (Bhookna).that falsifies the testimony of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).as also, her statement made before the Magistrate for the purpose of registration of this case.

In view of the testimony of PW-4 (Dr.

Balwant Singh).it follows that PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) was not beaten by the appellant and she received only burn injuries.

It is also established from the record that the appellant was also admitted in the hospital.

PW-3 (Dr.

Amarjit Singh) during cross-examination testified that it might be possible that the appellant was having contusions with the blow of iron pipe.

This evidence was also overlooked by the learned trial Court, which would imply that the appellant had contusions and that could be the result of blow of blower pipe.

Possibly, the appellant was beaten by PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) with blower pipe (Bhookna).This aspect was not investigated by the investigating agency.

Even the statement of Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh (appellant) Ex.PW10/E was recorded, that was unusual and investigating officer was not clear, as to who committed the crime, at the time of recording the statement of the accused (Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh) Ex.PW10/E.

Version given by the appellant was never considered.

Even, there is huge gap between the signatures and finishing line, of the statement of Jasvir Singh, which shows that Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 18- blanks had been filled in.

So, investigating officer was having doubt about the role of the appellant having been played by him in the incident and without taking the statement of Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh Ex.PW10/E to the logical conclusion, he submitted the police report against him arraigning him.

No one saw the appellant lighting the candle, as also, no one saw him setting the children and PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) ablaze.

Electricity had been cut of and candles were being used in the house, that must make the defence taken by the appellant probable.

It appears that candle had burnt out causing burning to the plastic mat and consequently by dripping of portion of burning mat, the quilt also caught fire and they both (appellant and PW-2) tried to put off the fire, which had spread all over the bed and they received burn injuries.

Both the children also got serious burn injuries and died.

There was no motive on the part of the appellant to kill his own children.

No previous enmity has been proved.

There was also no motive on the part of the appellant to set PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) ablaze, as no previous enmity has been proved and no report was lodged by PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) with the police regarding any previous quarrel between her and the appellant.

There are injuries and contusion on the person of the appellant, that have not been explained by the prosecution and that creates considerable doubt in the prosecution version.

It is also not proved on the record that the appellant was in an inebriated condition.

He was medico legal examined by PW-4 (Dr.

Balwant Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 19- Singh).who no where testified that the appellant was in an inebriated condition.

This missing of medical evidence also falsifies the statement of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) to the effect that the appellant was in an inebriated condition.

This allegation levelled by PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) has not been proved by the prosecution, that must make the version doubtful.

The presence of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) is not established.

There is no zimni of recording his statement Ex.DA on 28.01.2012.

In her testimony PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) testified that her husband with the help of candle set them ablaze and, thereafter, he shut the door from outside.

When door was shut from outside then how, she could open the door.

She further testified that her neighbourers came to the spot and opened the door.

Strange enough, no neighbourer has neither been joined during investigation not examined during trial, to show that they opened the door of the room, where PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) and her deceased-children were confined.

In the absence of such evidence, it is arduous to hold that the appellant bolted the door from outside.

So, this allegation of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) is not established from the evidence on the record.

So far as, PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) is concerned, he testified that the main gate of the house was opened and the door of the room was bolted from outside.

He further testified that the appellant opened the door himself.

This evidence is contrary to the evidence of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).who testified that some Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 20- neighbourers opened the door.

It is in the testimony of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) that the appellant was in an inebriated condition and present near the door.

Again this evidence of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) has not been corroborated by any medical evidence, as he (appellant) was medico legally examined after the incident, if he (appellant) would have been in an inebriated condition, then PW-4 (Dr.

Balwant Singh) would have opined that at the time of his admission in the hospital, he (appellant) was smelling alcohol.

Ex.PW10/E statement of Jasvir Singh is unusual that will not bind him being hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act.

PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) has not mentioned the name of the person who sent him telephonic message.

In fact, he did not receive the telephonic message.

He stated that brother of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) received telephonic message.

Brother of Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) has not been brought to the box to state as to who phoned him about the incident and from which number, as also from which telephone number the message was received by him.

Brother of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) is Om Parkash.

The evidence of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) is only hear- se and not direct.

He (PW-6) heard about the incident, as also the happening prior, thereto, from Om Parkash only who has not been brought to the box.

The presence of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) could be held to be established at the place of incident, if Om Parkash had given evidence that he received telephonic message from PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) regarding the incident that occurred Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 21- and he disclosed the said message to PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) and then the latter reached at the spot.

So, there is no direct evidence of Om Parkash, that there used to remain quarrel between the appellant and PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).It cannot be held on the basis of PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) that dispute between the appellant and his wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) occurred several times prior to the incident in question, as no one else corroborated this testimony.

If the dispute between the appellant and his wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) had happened prior, to the accused incident, then, she would have lodged some complaint with the police or before the respectables of the village where both the appellant and his wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) resided in a room where incident took place.

In other words, no person from village Kallowal where the incident took place came to the witness box to state about the strained relations between the appellant and his wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2).prior to alleged the incident.

Even PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) himself did not see the incident.

According to PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh).appellant opened the door.

If the appellant intended to kill his wife and children, then, in that event, he would not have opened the door, as also, he would not have been present at the spot.

If, he had been responsible for setting PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) and her children ablaze in that event, he would have run away from the place of incident and he would himself have not been injured in the fire.

Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 22- PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) testified that her neighbourers opened the door from outside.

She no where testified that PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) was present outside the door or her brother Om Parkash was accompanied by PW-6 (Gurdeep Singh) and they were present there.

Even, she did not testify that her husband was present outside the room.

PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) testified that door was opened by the neighboureRs.meaning thereby, that the appellant was not present there while PW- 6 (Gurdeep Singh) testified that the appellant was present outside the room and the latter, opened the door of the room.

Both these testimonies are repugnant to each other and are not worth credence and would entitle the appellant the benefit of doubt.

When, there were injuries and contusion on the person of the appellant, it was the bounden duty of the prosecution to explain those injuries.

not explanation of injuries sustained by the appellant in the incident would reveal that the prosecution has suppressed the truthfulness of the incident and has not presented true version.

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Lakshmi Singh and others v.

State of Bihar, 1976 AIR (SC) 2263; held that it is the bounden duty of the prosecution to give reasonable explanation for the injuries sustained by the accused in the couRs.of the occurrence.

In this judgment, the accused had suffered three injuries out of which injury No.1 was grievous in nature.

The other two injuries were also serious injuries, that had been inflicted by a sharp- cutting weapon.

It was also held that having regard to the Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 23- circumstances of the case, there can be no doubt that the accused must have received injuries in the couRs.of the assault, because it has not been suggested or contended that the injuries could be self- inflicted not it is believable.

In these circumstances, it was held that, therefore, it was the bounden duty of the prosecution to give a reasonable explanation for the injuries sustained by the accused in the couRs.of the occurrence.

not only the prosecution has given no explanation, but some of the witnesses have made a clear statement that they did not see any injuries on the person of the accused.

It was observed that the trial Court as well as the High Court wholly ignored the significance of the injuries found on the appellant.

It was also held that the failure of the prosecution to offer any explanation in that regard shows that evidence of the prosecution witnesses relating to the incident is not true or at any rate not wholly true.

In Jabvir Singh and another v.

State of Punjab, 1985 (2) RCR (Criminal) 156; this Court acquitted the accused by giving him benefit of doubt, as no explanation was given by the prosecution regarding injuries on the person of the accused.

This judgment was rendered by placing reliance reliance on Lakshmi Singh & OtheRs.case (supra).So, the sole testimony of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).that has not been corroborated by any other evidence was wrongly relied upon by the learned trial Court for holding the appellant guilty.

The law laid down in the aforementioned judgments Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 24- was also overlooked by the learned trial Court, who did not appreciate the circumstances, whereunder, the appellant received contusion, as also, burn injuries.

One thing is very certain that, if the appellant had a motive to set her wife Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) and children ablaze, in that event, he could easily escape the wrath of receiving burn injuries.

So, the burn injuries on the person of the appellant would reveal that he was not a person, who lit the fire.

As also, he was not the person who lit the candle.

The incident took place on 27.01.2012.

It was winter season, there was no electricity in the house indubitably.

So, the candle had to be used and all the family members slept inside the room.

Firing incident might have taken place due to that candle, that was not put off by Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur (PW-2) and the appellant, at the time of going to sleep.

PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) herself could take the responsibility of putting off the candle at the time of going to sleep and in that event, the incident could be evited It is no doubt true that PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) testified that her husband (appellant) lit the candle, but she did not categorically depose that when she went to sleep alongwith her children, she put off the candle.

It is no doubt true that her husband (appellant) lit the candle and from this testimony, it can be inferred that when the night fell, he lit the candle and not after putting off, thereof, by PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).Even no villager came to the box to state that PW-2 Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 25- (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) and the appellant were not taken together to the hospital, after the incident of fire.

According, to PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).earlier the fight had taken place between her and her husband (appellant) but strange enough, she did not bring this incident in the notice of any other person.

She narrated that there were contusions on her backside due to beatings by her husband (appellant).but contusions have not been found by PW-1 (Dr.

Didar Singh).who examined her medically.

She further testified that she was taken to hospital by the paternal uncle of her husband in an ambulance called by him, but he was not brought to the box.

Even, she testified during cross-examination that he had not seen the appellant while lightining the fire.

So, according to this testimony of PW-2, it can be safely held that the fire was not lit by the appellant.

She testified during cross-examination that earlier also, the appellant gave her head injury, but there is no medical evidence or any other evidence in this regard, except her own statement that could be relied upon, only if corroborated by any other evidence.

She also testified that her parents lodged a complaint against the appellant in the police station.

Again this evidence is missing.

The case was investigated by the police and they did not produce any record relating to the complaint of parents of PW-2, lodged against the appellant.

She testified during cross-examination that the appellant used to give her regular beatings, that evidence has also not been corroborated by any medical evidence.

Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 - 26- So, the testimony of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) suffers from various infirmities, that was wrongly relied upon by the learned trial Court for basing conviction upon the appellant.

We therefore, are of the view that the evidence of PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur).that has not been supported by any other evidence, does not inspire confidence and on the basis, thereof, it is arduous to uphold the view taken by the learned trial Court, that the candle was lit by the appellant for setting PW-2 (Narinder Kaur @ Bhajan Kaur) and her children Lovepreet Singh and Lakhwinder Singh ablaze, as also, that he (appellant) bolted the door from outside.

Resultantly, appeal i.e.CRA not D-1056-DB of 2012 succeeds and is, hereby accepted; Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh (appellant) is acquitted of the charges, wherefor, he has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court, by according him benefit of doubt.

Murder Reference No.09 of 2012 has become infructuous with the acceptance of appeal of the appellant.

(S.P.BANGARH) (S.S.SARON) JUDGE JUDGE 1 July, 2013 sham 1.

To be referred to the Reporters No/Yes 2.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

No/Yes.

Sunder Sham 2013.07.25 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Court	Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On	Jul-11-2013
Appellant	Mr. Akshay JaIn Advocate
Respondent	Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh Resident of Village Kallowal P.S.

Mr. Akshay JaIn Advocate Vs. Jasvir Singh @ Jaswinder Singh Resident of Village Kallowal P.S. - Court Judgment