Jaswant Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1159202
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-07-2014
AppellantJaswant Singh and Others
RespondentState of Punjab
Excerpt:
cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -1- in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh date of decision: july 07, 2014 cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) jaswant singh and others ---appellants versus state of punjab ---respondent crr-1025 of 2003(o&m) kuldeep singh ---petitioner versus state punjab and others ---respondents coram: hon'ble mrs. justice rekha mittal present: mr. s.p.s.sidhu, advocate for the appellants as well as petitioner in revision. mr. neeraj sharma, aag, punjab for respondent-state. *** 1. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. to be referred to the reporter or not?.3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. *** rekha mittal, j.by way of this judgment, i shall dispose of cra no.594-sb of 2003 titled “jaswant singh and others vs. state of punjab”. and crr no.1025 of 2003 titled “kuldeep singh vs. state of punjab and others”. as these have emerged out of version and cross version pertaining to fir no.saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -2- 66 dated 23.6.1997 registered in police station, boha for offence under sections 307, 323, 324, 325, 148, 149 of the indian penal code (in short “ipc”.) and sections 25 and 27 of the arms act. jaswant singh and others (appellants) have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.2.2003 and 27.2.2003, respectively, passed by the additional sessions judge, bathinda camp at mansa whereby they have been convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under sections 307, 325, 324 and 148 of the indian penal code, detailed hereinbelow:_ harbhajan singh u/s307ipc seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 3000/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months u/s325ipc two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 500/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month u/s324ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year u/s148ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year jaswant singh and kuldeep singh u/s307149 ipc five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 2000/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months u/s325149 ipc two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 500/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month u/s324ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year u/s148ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year balbir singh u/s307149 ipc five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 2000/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months u/s325149 ipc two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 500/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month u/s324149 ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -3- u/s307149 ipc five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 2000/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months u/s148ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year binder singh u/s307149 ipc five years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 2000/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months u/s325149 ipc two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of rs. 500/-. in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month u/s324ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year u/s148ipc rigorous imprisonment for one year the revision petition (crr no.1025 of 2003) has been preferred by kuldeep singh to assail the judgment of even date passed by the same court vide which the cross version lodged at the behest of kuldeep singh petitioner has not been accepted and accused tara singh and others have been acquitted of the offence charged against them. for the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from cra-s-594-sb of 2003. tara singh lodged the first information report on the allegations that on 22.6.1997 at about 4.30 p.m., he went to his fields for cutting fodder (chari). gajjan singh (his father) and mehal singh(uncle) came there for a round of the field and they were sitting under the accacia (kikkar) tree. harbhajan singh armed with 12 bore single barrel gun, jaswant singh and kuldeep singh sons of mohinder singh armed with lathis, balbir singh son of kahan singh armed with gandasa came there on a tractor, driven by binder singh son of saudagar singh. binder singh exhorted that today he (tara singh) be caught hold and taught a lesson for occupying the land. on hearing exhortion, he stood up and harbhajan singh accused fired a shot towards him from his 12 bore gun with an intention to commit his murder and he sustained injuries on his face, saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -4- forehead, nose and eyes. the pallets also hit on the forehead and chest of his uncle mehal singh. the gun used by harbhajan singh belonged to mohinder singh, his father. balbir gave a gandasa blow which landed on his left wrist joint. he fell down in the water course (khal) on receipt of injuries and raised raula “mar ditta”. “mar ditta”.. when he was lying on the ground, jaswant singh, balbir singh and kuldeep singh caused injuries with their respective weapons on his left leg and as a result he sustained multiple fractures. thereafter, the accused fled away from the spot on the tractor. the motive for the occurrence is that after the death of his father-in- law santokh singh @ mali, 1¾ acres of land was mutated in the name of malkiat kaur wife of the complainant. harbhajan singh was claiming that santokh singh owed a sum of rs. 80,000/- to him and either the payment of the said amount be made or possession of land be surrendered in his favour. gajjan singh, his father took the injured to the civil hospital, mansa. the accused also sustained some injuries while they (the complainant party) were defending themselves. on the basis of statement ex. pk got recorded by injured tara singh while lying admitted in civil hospital, mansa, formal fir ex. pk/2 was registered. shirt worn by tara singh, smeared with blood was taken into possession vide memo ex. pl. the simple soil as well as soil stained with blood was lifted from the spot, converted into two separate parcels, sealed with seal bearing impression “ss”., taken into possession vide memo ex. pn. on the same day i.e. 23.6.1997, three empty cartridges were lifted from the spot and taken into possession vide memo ex. po. after sealing the case property. site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. 12 bore single barrel gun along with arms licence in the name of mohinder saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -5- singh was taken into possession vide memo ex. pr. the tractor along with its registration certificate bearing no.pb-51-1386 was taken into possession vide memo ex. ps. on receipt of report of forensic science laboratory and completion of necessary investigation formalities, challan was presented in the court of illaqa magistrate and the case was committed to the court of sessions as offence under section 307 ipc is exclusively triable by the said court. in order to substantiate the charge, the prosecution examined dr. s.p.bansal pw1, dr. parshottan goyal pw2, tara singh pw3 mehal singh pw4, hc pritam singh pw5, gajjan singh, an eye witness to the occurrence pw6, si sher singh, investigating officer pw7, jagraj singh pw8, tarlochan singh pw9 and ajaib singh pw10. the accused were examined under section 313 of the code of criminal procedure (for short “cr.p.c”.) and they denied the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against them and raised usual plea of innocence and false implication. harbhajan singh accused set up the following plea:- “i am innocent. i have been falsely implicated. the land was mortgaged with harbhajan singh for rs. 80,000/- and the complainant party wanted to take possession of the same. asha singh, santokh singh p.ws. fired from their gun towards harbhajan singh then tara singh and mehal singh p.ws. ran towards harbhajan singh saying that they should not fire and some of pellets fired by them towards harbhajan singh hit mehal singh and tara singh. none of us fired any shot towards the complainant party.”. jaswant singh, kuldeep singh, balbir singh and binder singh co-accused also adopted the plea taken up by harbhajan singh. the saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -6- accused examined dr. vijay kumar singla, medical officer, civil hospital, mansa dw1 and dr. kuldeep rai dw2. on appreciation of evidence adduced by the prosecution and bestowing its consideration to the rival submissions made by counsel for the parties, the learned trial court accepted the version brought forth by tara singh whereas the cross version lodged at the behest of kuldeep singh was negatived and as a result, jaswant singh and others were convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinbefore whereas the accused in the cross case namely tara singh and others have been acquitted of the offence charged against them. counsel for the appellants has argued with vehemence that the prosecution has miserably failed to explain the injuries sustained by harbhajan singh and kuldeep singh, therefore, the genesis of the crime becomes doubtful and this fact alone is sufficient to extend benefit of doubt to the accused. it is further submitted that harbhajan singh to whom the gun shot injury has been attributed, himself sustained gun shot injuries as proved by dr. vijay kumar examined in defence and keeping in view the nature of injuries sustained by him the same can neither be self-suffered nor the result of friendly hand. another submission made by counsel is that as per the case of the prosecution, harbhajan singh fired one shot from 12 bore single barrel gun belonging to his father and another shot was fired by gajjan singh, father of tara singh, but the investigating officer lifted three empty cartridges from the spot which further creates a doubt in the story of the prosecution. it is further argued that two empties lifted from the spot matched with gun bearing no.61899 belonging to gajjan singh and the saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -7- third empty was not proved to be fired from gun bearing no.52726 licenced in the name of mohinder singh, father of harbhajan singh, in view of the report of the forensic science laboratory. it is argued with vehemence that the learned trial court committed a serious error in ignoring failure of the prosecution to explain the injuries sustained by harbhajan singh and further holding that as the accused are proved to be aggressors, therefore, even if one of the accused namely harbhajan singh has sustained injury, he is not entitled to any benefit. counsel for the state of punjab, on the other hand, has submitted that the judgment passed by the learned trial court is based upon detailed and correct appreciation of evidence on record and no fault can be found in the well merited observations recorded by the said court. it is further submitted that the alleged injuries sustained by harbhajan singh have not been attributed to tara singh, mehal singh (injured–victims) or even to gajjan singh pw6. i have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. tara singh and mehal singh, injured-victims in the case were examined and they have corroborated each other in material particulars with regard to the manner, time, place and date of the occurrence. the injuries sustained by both of them find corroboration from the medical evidence proved by dr. parshottam goyal pw2 and dr. s.p.bansal pw1. before proceeding further, it is appropriate to refer to the statement of dr. parshotam goyal and dr. s.p.bansal. dr. parshottam goyal conducted medico legal examination of tara singh son of gajjan singh and mehal singh son of niranjan singh. on medical examination of tara singh at 8.30 p.m. on 22.6.1997, he found saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -8- 13 injuries on his person detailed hereinbelow:- 1. lacerated wound 2cm x 1cm on the anterior aspect middle of left leg muscle lacerated verticle, fresh bleeding was present. x-ray was advised.2. lacerated wound 3cmx1 cm on the left leg 1cm below injury no.1, vertical muscle lacerated fresh bleeding was present. x-ray was advised.3. lacerated wound 1cm x 1cm on the left leg 2cm below injury no.2, vertical muscle lacerated coming out of wound. x-ray was advised.4. lacerated wound 2cmx1cm on the left leg 1cm below injury no.3, vertical muscle lacerated fresh bleeding was present. x-ray was advised.5. lacerated wound 7cm x 4cm on lower end of left leg muscle lacerated bones fractured coming out of the wound. fresh bleeding was present. x-ray was advised.6. contuse swelling on the left ankle and left foot tender. x- ray was advised.7. incised wound 2cm x 1cm muscle deep medial aspect of left forearm. 5cm above the wrist joint, x-ray was advised. fresh bleeding was present.8. lacerated wound 4mm x 2mm on the lateral part of left upper eye lid with collar of abrasion on the lateral part. wound go through and through and there is lacerated wound in the sclera. 5cm lateral to cornea pupil dilated irregular fixed blood present in the anterior chamber. x-ray was advised kept for eye surgeon opinion. fresh bleeding was present.9. oval lacerated wound 3mm x 2mm on the left side of upper lip, going through and through left second upper incisor. soft is empty. injury gum present, fresh bleeding was present. 10.oval lacerated wound 3mm x 2mm on the right side of lower lip going through and through right first incisor soft saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -9- empty injury gum present. fresh bleeding was present. 11.two guttered lacerated wounds on the left side of nose horizontal on the aleanasi with two oval lacerated wound on the left cheek in line of the gutter. fresh bleeding was present. x-ray advised. kept under observation. 12.seven oval 3x 2mm lacerated wound on the forehead with collar of abrasion. fresh bleeding was present. x-ray advised. kept under observation. 13.three lacerated oval wound on the right side with collar of abrasion. fresh bleeding was present. x-ray was advised. kept under observation. he proved medico legal report ex. pc and pictorial diagramme ex. pc/1. on 18.11.1997 injuries no.1 to 5, 8 and 9 were declared as grievous and remaining injuries were declared simple vide opinion ex. ph/1. on the same day, i.e. 22.6.1997, he conducted medico legal examination of mehal singh and found following injuries on his person:- 1. lacerated wound 4mm x 3mm on the forehead in between eye brows .5 cm to the right with collar of abrasion probing not done surrounding by swelling. fresh bleeding was present. right upper lid is swollen and bluish. advised x- ray and kept under observation.2. two lacerated oval wounds 3mm x 2 mm on the left clavicle region color of abrasion was present. wound are 4 cm apart fresh bleeding was present. probing was not done. x-ray was advised. kept under observation. shirt was blood stained. corresponding whole was present in the shirt. he proved carbon copy of the medico legal report ex. pe, pictorial diagramme ex. pe/1. on 12.11.1997 on police request ex. pf, he opined injuries no.1 and 2 on the person of mehal singh to be caused with a fire arm. on 28.11.1997, on police request, he opined vide endorsement ex. saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -10- pg/1 injury no.2 on person of mehal singh to be grievous in nature. he further proved bed head tickets of tara singh and mehal singh exs. pj and lk, respectively. dr. s.p.bansal, smo, civil hospital, mansa conducted x-ray examination of tara singh and mehal singh. he proved x-ray report ex. pa, x-ray films p1 to p4 of tara singh. he further proved x-report ex. pb and x-ray films exs. p-5 to p-7 in respect of mehal singh. tara singh, injured-victim and author of the fir was examined in the case on 12.4.2001 more than three years after the occurrence dated 22.6.1997. during his cross examination, no question was put to the witness that in the occurrence, harbhajan singh and kuldeep singh also sustained injuries at the hands of the complainant party. it is for the first time during cross examination of mehal singh on 4.2.2002, it was suggested to the witness that asha singh and santokh singh fired shot towards harbhajan singh and mehal singh and tara singh were saying that they should not fire and some of the pallets hit him and tara singh. admittedly, the injuries sustained by harbhajan singh and kuldeep singh have not been attributed to tara singh, mehal singh and gajjan singh. on the contrary, those injuries have been attributed to asha singh and santokh singh. asha singh is not an accused in the cross version. during investigation, no fire arm was recovered from asha singh and santokh singh. as a matter of fact, there is no evidence on record that harbhajan singh and kuldeep singh sustained injuries in the occurrence in which tara singh and mehal singh sustained injuries in order to appreciate contention of the appellants that failure of the prosecution to explain the injuries sustained by harbhajan singh creates a doubt in the genesis of the crime. saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -11- as per case of the prosecution, the occurrence in question took place in the fields in which tara singh was cutting fodder (chari) and mehal singh and gajjan singh came there after having a round of the fields. during cross examination of tara singh, mehal singh and gajjan singh, it has been proved that tara singh was not aware that mehal singh and gajjan singh had left together from their houses for having a round of the fields and tara singh saw mehal singh and gajjan singh when they came in the fields and sat under the kikkar tree. during cross examination of the material witnesses namely tara singh, mehal singh and gajjan singh, there is no challenge to their testimony in regard to the place of occurrence. admittedly, there is no dispute between the parties in regard to the nehri field in which tara singh was working for cutting fodder crop. harbhajan singh and others could not explain as to for what purpose they came to said field which was admittedly owned and possessed by tara singh and his family. under these circumstances, no fault can be found in the findings recorded by the trial court that even if harbhajan singh has sustained any injury in the occurrence, harbhajan singh and others being the aggressors cannot escape their criminal liability for inflicting injuries to tara singh and mehal singh. the plea raised by the accused that tara singh and mehal singh sustained injuries as a result of shot fired by asha singh and santokh singh does not get substantiated from any material on record except a mere suggestion put to mehal singh which is not a substantive piece of evidence. counsel for the appellants has made an attempt to create doubt in the prosecution story by contending that none of the empties found at the place of occurrence matched with the gun of mohinder singh, father of harbhajan singh, allegedly used in the crime. the matter would have been saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -12- different had there been definite opinion of the forensic science laboratory that third empty found on the spot did not match with the licensed gun of mohinder singh bearing no.61899. the opinion of the forensic science laboratory in regard to the third empty is that no definite opinion can be given regarding firing of one meherson cartridge case marked c/1 from either of the two 12 bore sbbl guns under reference due to lack of sufficient individual characteristic marks and punctured percussion cap. in this view of matter, i find myself unable to be persuaded with the submission of counsel for the appellants that harbhajan singh did not use the gun of his father to cause injuries to tara singh and mehal singh. as per plea of the accused, harbhajan singh was admittedly present at the spot but without any explanation as to the circumstances under which he had gone to the fields belonging to the complainant party. i would hasten to add that it is not the plea of either side that the occurrence in question took place in the land earlier belonging to santokh singh, father-in-law of tara singh which was later mutated in the name of his wife. in the instance case, motive for the crime is land belonging to santokh singh. there is no evidence on record that harbhajan singh got possession of the said land being mortgagee. taken from any angle, the appellants have failed to point out any error, infirmity much less illegality in the findings recorded by the learned trial court as would call for intervention with regard to culpability of the accused for the offence charged against them. as a result, the judgment of trial court convicting the appellants, is affirmed. counsel for the appellants has submitted that the occurrence in saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -13- question took place in the year 1997 and a period of more than 17 years has elapsed in between. there is nothing on record to suggest that after this occurrence, the parties were ever involved in any other dispute or the accused have shown any aggression even in regard to land which was mortgaged in favour of harbhajan singh. counsel has humbly submitted that the accused deserve some leniency in regard to sentence. counsel for the state has fairly conceded that the accused are neither previous convicts nor any other criminal case has been registered against them. i have appreciated rival submissions made by counsel for the parties in the light of materials on record. there is nothing on record suggestive of the fact that tara singh and mehal singh have suffered any disability as a result of sustaining of injuries. admittedly, the appellants have suffered trauma of criminal proceedings for the past over 17 years. delay in conclusion of proceedings is not attributable to the accused. keeping in view cumulative effect of the facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, the substantive sentence awarded to harbhajan singh for offence punishable under section 307 ipc is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and that of jaswant singh, kuldeep singh and binder singh for offence punishable under section 307 read with section 149 ipc to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 03 years and of balbir singh for the said offence to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year as balbir singh is statedly more than 80 years of age. further, the substantive sentence awarded to balbir singh for offence punishable under section 325/ 149 ipc is also reduced to saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh cra-594-sb of 2003(o&m) -14- rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. for the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is partly allowed in terms indicated above. as a natural corollary, the revision petition filed by kuldeep singh is ordered to be dismissed. the appellants if on bail be taken in custody to suffer the remaining sentence. (rekha mittal) judge july 07, 2014 paramjit saini paramjit kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Judgment:

CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Date of Decision: July 07, 2014 CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) Jaswant Singh and others ---Appellants versus State of Punjab ---Respondent CRR-1025 of 2003(O&M) Kuldeep Singh ---Petitioner versus State Punjab and others ---Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Rekha Mittal Present: Mr. S.P.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the appellants as well as petitioner in revision. Mr. Neeraj Sharma, AAG, Punjab for respondent-State. *** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?.

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. *** REKHA MITTAL, J.

By way of this judgment, I shall dispose of CRA No.594-SB of 2003 titled “Jaswant Singh and others vs. State of Punjab”. and CRR No.1025 of 2003 titled “Kuldeep Singh vs. State of Punjab and others”. as these have emerged out of version and cross version pertaining to FIR No.Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -2- 66 dated 23.6.1997 registered in Police Station, Boha for offence under Sections 307, 323, 324, 325, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (in short “IPC”.) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Jaswant Singh and others (appellants) have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.2.2003 and 27.2.2003, respectively, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda camp at Mansa whereby they have been convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under Sections 307, 325, 324 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code, detailed hereinbelow:_ Harbhajan Singh U/S307IPC Seven years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months U/S325IPC Two years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month U/S324IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year U/S148IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year Jaswant Singh and Kuldeep Singh U/S307149 IPC five years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months U/S325149 IPC Two years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month U/S324IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year U/S148IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year Balbir Singh U/S307149 IPC five years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months U/S325149 IPC Two years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month U/S324149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -3- U/S307149 IPC five years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months U/S148IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year Binder Singh U/S307149 IPC five years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months U/S325149 IPC Two years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month U/S324IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year U/S148IPC Rigorous imprisonment for one year The revision petition (CRR No.1025 of 2003) has been preferred by Kuldeep Singh to assail the judgment of even date passed by the same court vide which the cross version lodged at the behest of Kuldeep Singh petitioner has not been accepted and accused Tara Singh and others have been acquitted of the offence charged against them. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from CRA-S-594-SB of 2003. Tara Singh lodged the first information report on the allegations that on 22.6.1997 at about 4.30 p.m., he went to his fields for cutting fodder (Chari). Gajjan Singh (his father) and Mehal Singh(uncle) came there for a round of the field and they were sitting under the Accacia (Kikkar) tree. Harbhajan Singh armed with 12 bore single barrel gun, Jaswant Singh and Kuldeep Singh sons of Mohinder Singh armed with lathis, Balbir Singh son of Kahan Singh armed with gandasa came there on a tractor, driven by Binder Singh son of Saudagar Singh. Binder Singh exhorted that today he (Tara Singh) be caught hold and taught a lesson for occupying the land. On hearing exhortion, he stood up and Harbhajan Singh accused fired a shot towards him from his 12 bore gun with an intention to commit his murder and he sustained injuries on his face, Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -4- forehead, nose and eyes. The pallets also hit on the forehead and chest of his uncle Mehal Singh. The gun used by Harbhajan Singh belonged to Mohinder Singh, his father. Balbir gave a gandasa blow which landed on his left wrist joint. He fell down in the water course (khal) on receipt of injuries and raised raula “mar ditta”. “mar ditta”.. When he was lying on the ground, Jaswant Singh, Balbir Singh and Kuldeep Singh caused injuries with their respective weapons on his left leg and as a result he sustained multiple fractures. Thereafter, the accused fled away from the spot on the tractor. The motive for the occurrence is that after the death of his father-in- law Santokh Singh @ Mali, 1¾ acres of land was mutated in the name of Malkiat Kaur wife of the complainant. Harbhajan Singh was claiming that Santokh Singh owed a sum of Rs. 80,000/- to him and either the payment of the said amount be made or possession of land be surrendered in his favour. Gajjan Singh, his father took the injured to the Civil hospital, Mansa. The accused also sustained some injuries while they (the complainant party) were defending themselves. On the basis of statement Ex. PK got recorded by injured Tara Singh while lying admitted in civil hospital, Mansa, formal FIR Ex. PK/2 was registered. Shirt worn by Tara Singh, smeared with blood was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PL. The simple soil as well as soil stained with blood was lifted from the spot, converted into two separate parcels, sealed with seal bearing impression “SS”., taken into possession vide memo Ex. PN. On the same day i.e. 23.6.1997, three empty cartridges were lifted from the spot and taken into possession vide memo Ex. PO. after sealing the case property. Site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. 12 bore single barrel gun along with arms licence in the name of Mohinder Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -5- Singh was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PR. The tractor along with its registration certificate bearing No.PB-51-1386 was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PS. On receipt of report of Forensic Science Laboratory and completion of necessary investigation formalities, challan was presented in the court of Illaqa Magistrate and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions as offence under Section 307 IPC is exclusively triable by the said court. In order to substantiate the charge, the prosecution examined Dr. S.P.Bansal PW1, Dr. Parshottan Goyal PW2, Tara Singh PW3 Mehal Singh PW4, HC Pritam Singh PW5, Gajjan Singh, an eye witness to the occurrence PW6, SI Sher Singh, Investigating Officer PW7, Jagraj Singh PW8, Tarlochan Singh PW9 and Ajaib Singh PW10. The accused were examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “Cr.P.C”.) and they denied the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against them and raised usual plea of innocence and false implication. Harbhajan Singh accused set up the following plea:- “I am innocent. I have been falsely implicated. The land was mortgaged with Harbhajan Singh for Rs. 80,000/- and the complainant party wanted to take possession of the same. Asha Singh, Santokh Singh P.Ws. fired from their gun towards Harbhajan Singh then Tara Singh and Mehal Singh P.Ws. ran towards Harbhajan Singh saying that they should not fire and some of pellets fired by them towards Harbhajan Singh hit Mehal Singh and Tara Singh. None of us fired any shot towards the complainant party.”

. Jaswant Singh, Kuldeep Singh, Balbir Singh and Binder Singh co-accused also adopted the plea taken up by Harbhajan Singh. The Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -6- accused examined Dr. Vijay Kumar Singla, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Mansa DW1 and Dr. Kuldeep Rai DW2. On appreciation of evidence adduced by the prosecution and bestowing its consideration to the rival submissions made by counsel for the parties, the learned trial court accepted the version brought forth by Tara Singh whereas the cross version lodged at the behest of Kuldeep Singh was negatived and as a result, Jaswant Singh and others were convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinbefore whereas the accused in the cross case namely Tara Singh and others have been acquitted of the offence charged against them. Counsel for the appellants has argued with vehemence that the prosecution has miserably failed to explain the injuries sustained by Harbhajan Singh and Kuldeep Singh, therefore, the genesis of the crime becomes doubtful and this fact alone is sufficient to extend benefit of doubt to the accused. It is further submitted that Harbhajan Singh to whom the gun shot injury has been attributed, himself sustained gun shot injuries as proved by Dr. Vijay Kumar examined in defence and keeping in view the nature of injuries sustained by him the same can neither be self-suffered nor the result of friendly hand. Another submission made by counsel is that as per the case of the prosecution, Harbhajan Singh fired one shot from 12 bore single barrel gun belonging to his father and another shot was fired by Gajjan Singh, father of Tara Singh, but the investigating officer lifted three empty cartridges from the spot which further creates a doubt in the story of the prosecution. It is further argued that two empties lifted from the spot matched with gun bearing No.61899 belonging to Gajjan Singh and the Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -7- third empty was not proved to be fired from gun bearing No.52726 licenced in the name of Mohinder Singh, father of Harbhajan Singh, in view of the report of the forensic science laboratory. It is argued with vehemence that the learned trial court committed a serious error in ignoring failure of the prosecution to explain the injuries sustained by Harbhajan Singh and further holding that as the accused are proved to be aggressors, therefore, even if one of the accused namely Harbhajan Singh has sustained injury, he is not entitled to any benefit. Counsel for the State of Punjab, on the other hand, has submitted that the judgment passed by the learned trial court is based upon detailed and correct appreciation of evidence on record and no fault can be found in the well merited observations recorded by the said court. It is further submitted that the alleged injuries sustained by Harbhajan Singh have not been attributed to Tara Singh, Mehal Singh (injured–victims) or even to Gajjan Singh PW6. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. Tara Singh and Mehal Singh, injured-victims in the case were examined and they have corroborated each other in material particulars with regard to the manner, time, place and date of the occurrence. The injuries sustained by both of them find corroboration from the medical evidence proved by Dr. Parshottam Goyal PW2 and Dr. S.P.Bansal PW1. Before proceeding further, it is appropriate to refer to the statement of Dr. Parshotam Goyal and Dr. S.P.Bansal. Dr. Parshottam Goyal conducted medico legal examination of Tara Singh son of Gajjan Singh and Mehal Singh son of Niranjan Singh. On medical examination of Tara Singh at 8.30 p.m. on 22.6.1997, he found Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -8- 13 injuries on his person detailed hereinbelow:- 1. Lacerated wound 2cm x 1cm on the anterior aspect middle of left leg muscle lacerated verticle, fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised.

2. Lacerated wound 3cmx1 cm on the left leg 1cm below injury No.1, vertical muscle lacerated fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised.

3. Lacerated wound 1cm x 1cm on the left leg 2cm below injury No.2, vertical muscle lacerated coming out of wound. X-ray was advised.

4. Lacerated wound 2cmx1cm on the left leg 1cm below injury No.3, vertical muscle lacerated fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised.

5. Lacerated wound 7cm x 4cm on lower end of left leg muscle lacerated bones fractured coming out of the wound. Fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised.

6. Contuse swelling on the left ankle and left foot tender. X- ray was advised.

7. Incised wound 2cm x 1cm muscle deep medial aspect of left forearm. 5cm above the wrist joint, X-ray was advised. Fresh bleeding was present.

8. Lacerated wound 4mm x 2mm on the lateral part of left upper eye lid with collar of abrasion on the lateral part. Wound go through and through and there is lacerated wound in the sclera. 5cm lateral to cornea pupil dilated irregular fixed blood present in the anterior chamber. X-ray was advised kept for eye surgeon opinion. Fresh bleeding was present.

9. Oval lacerated wound 3mm x 2mm on the left side of upper lip, going through and through left second upper incisor. Soft is empty. Injury gum present, Fresh bleeding was present. 10.Oval lacerated wound 3mm x 2mm on the right side of lower lip going through and through right first incisor soft Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -9- empty injury gum present. Fresh bleeding was present. 11.Two guttered lacerated wounds on the left side of nose horizontal on the aleanasi with two oval lacerated wound on the left cheek in line of the gutter. Fresh bleeding was present. X-ray advised. Kept under observation. 12.Seven oval 3x 2mm lacerated wound on the forehead with collar of abrasion. Fresh bleeding was present. X-ray advised. Kept under observation. 13.Three lacerated oval wound on the right side with collar of abrasion. Fresh bleeding was present. X-ray was advised. Kept under observation. He proved medico legal report Ex. PC and pictorial diagramme Ex. PC/1. On 18.11.1997 injuries No.1 to 5, 8 and 9 were declared as grievous and remaining injuries were declared simple vide opinion Ex. PH/1. On the same day, i.e. 22.6.1997, he conducted medico legal examination of Mehal Singh and found following injuries on his person:- 1. Lacerated wound 4mm x 3mm on the forehead in between eye brows .5 cm to the right with collar of abrasion probing not done surrounding by swelling. Fresh bleeding was present. Right upper lid is swollen and bluish. Advised X- ray and kept under observation.

2. Two lacerated oval wounds 3mm x 2 mm on the left clavicle region color of abrasion was present. Wound are 4 cm apart fresh bleeding was present. Probing was not done. X-ray was advised. Kept under observation. Shirt was blood stained. Corresponding whole was present in the shirt. He proved carbon copy of the medico legal report Ex. PE, pictorial diagramme Ex. PE/1. On 12.11.1997 on police request Ex. PF, he opined injuries No.1 and 2 on the person of Mehal Singh to be caused with a fire arm. On 28.11.1997, on police request, he opined vide endorsement Ex. Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -10- PG/1 injury No.2 on person of Mehal Singh to be grievous in nature. He further proved bed head tickets of Tara Singh and Mehal Singh Exs. PJ and LK, respectively. Dr. S.P.Bansal, SMO, Civil Hospital, Mansa conducted X-ray examination of Tara Singh and Mehal Singh. He proved X-ray report Ex. PA, X-ray films P1 to P4 of Tara Singh. He further proved X-report Ex. PB and X-ray films Exs. P-5 to P-7 in respect of Mehal Singh. Tara Singh, injured-victim and author of the FIR was examined in the case on 12.4.2001 more than three years after the occurrence dated 22.6.1997. During his cross examination, no question was put to the witness that in the occurrence, Harbhajan Singh and Kuldeep Singh also sustained injuries at the hands of the complainant party. It is for the first time during cross examination of Mehal Singh on 4.2.2002, it was suggested to the witness that Asha Singh and Santokh Singh fired shot towards Harbhajan Singh and Mehal Singh and Tara Singh were saying that they should not fire and some of the pallets hit him and Tara Singh. Admittedly, the injuries sustained by Harbhajan Singh and Kuldeep Singh have not been attributed to Tara Singh, Mehal Singh and Gajjan Singh. On the contrary, those injuries have been attributed to Asha Singh and Santokh Singh. Asha Singh is not an accused in the cross version. During investigation, no fire arm was recovered from Asha Singh and Santokh Singh. As a matter of fact, there is no evidence on record that Harbhajan Singh and Kuldeep Singh sustained injuries in the occurrence in which Tara Singh and Mehal Singh sustained injuries in order to appreciate contention of the appellants that failure of the prosecution to explain the injuries sustained by Harbhajan Singh creates a doubt in the genesis of the crime. Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -11- As per case of the prosecution, the occurrence in question took place in the fields in which Tara Singh was cutting fodder (chari) and Mehal Singh and Gajjan Singh came there after having a round of the fields. During cross examination of Tara Singh, Mehal Singh and Gajjan Singh, it has been proved that Tara Singh was not aware that Mehal Singh and Gajjan Singh had left together from their houses for having a round of the fields and Tara Singh saw Mehal Singh and Gajjan Singh when they came in the fields and sat under the Kikkar tree. During cross examination of the material witnesses namely Tara Singh, Mehal Singh and Gajjan Singh, there is no challenge to their testimony in regard to the place of occurrence. Admittedly, there is no dispute between the parties in regard to the nehri field in which Tara Singh was working for cutting fodder crop. Harbhajan Singh and others could not explain as to for what purpose they came to said field which was admittedly owned and possessed by Tara Singh and his family. Under these circumstances, no fault can be found in the findings recorded by the trial court that even if Harbhajan Singh has sustained any injury in the occurrence, Harbhajan Singh and others being the aggressors cannot escape their criminal liability for inflicting injuries to Tara Singh and Mehal Singh. The plea raised by the accused that Tara Singh and Mehal Singh sustained injuries as a result of shot fired by Asha Singh and Santokh Singh does not get substantiated from any material on record except a mere suggestion put to Mehal Singh which is not a substantive piece of evidence. Counsel for the appellants has made an attempt to create doubt in the prosecution story by contending that none of the empties found at the place of occurrence matched with the gun of Mohinder Singh, father of Harbhajan Singh, allegedly used in the crime. The matter would have been Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -12- different had there been definite opinion of the forensic science laboratory that third empty found on the spot did not match with the licensed gun of Mohinder Singh bearing No.61899. The opinion of the forensic science laboratory in regard to the third empty is that no definite opinion can be given regarding firing of one meherson cartridge case marked C/1 from either of the two 12 bore SBBL guns under reference due to lack of sufficient individual characteristic marks and punctured percussion cap. In this view of matter, I find myself unable to be persuaded with the submission of counsel for the appellants that Harbhajan Singh did not use the gun of his father to cause injuries to Tara Singh and Mehal Singh. As per plea of the accused, Harbhajan Singh was admittedly present at the spot but without any explanation as to the circumstances under which he had gone to the fields belonging to the complainant party. I would hasten to add that it is not the plea of either side that the occurrence in question took place in the land earlier belonging to Santokh Singh, father-in-law of Tara Singh which was later mutated in the name of his wife. In the instance case, motive for the crime is land belonging to Santokh Singh. There is no evidence on record that Harbhajan Singh got possession of the said land being mortgagee. Taken from any angle, the appellants have failed to point out any error, infirmity much less illegality in the findings recorded by the learned trial court as would call for intervention with regard to culpability of the accused for the offence charged against them. As a result, the judgment of trial court convicting the appellants, is affirmed. Counsel for the appellants has submitted that the occurrence in Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -13- question took place in the year 1997 and a period of more than 17 years has elapsed in between. There is nothing on record to suggest that after this occurrence, the parties were ever involved in any other dispute or the accused have shown any aggression even in regard to land which was mortgaged in favour of Harbhajan Singh. Counsel has humbly submitted that the accused deserve some leniency in regard to sentence. Counsel for the State has fairly conceded that the accused are neither previous convicts nor any other criminal case has been registered against them. I have appreciated rival submissions made by counsel for the parties in the light of materials on record. There is nothing on record suggestive of the fact that Tara Singh and Mehal Singh have suffered any disability as a result of sustaining of injuries. Admittedly, the appellants have suffered trauma of criminal proceedings for the past over 17 years. Delay in conclusion of proceedings is not attributable to the accused. Keeping in view cumulative effect of the facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, the substantive sentence awarded to Harbhajan Singh for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and that of Jaswant Singh, Kuldeep Singh and Binder Singh for offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 03 years and of Balbir Singh for the said offence to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year as Balbir Singh is statedly more than 80 years of age. Further, the substantive sentence awarded to Balbir Singh for offence punishable under Section 325/ 149 IPC is also reduced to Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-594-SB of 2003(O&M) -14- rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is partly allowed in terms indicated above. As a natural corollary, the revision petition filed by Kuldeep Singh is ordered to be dismissed. The appellants if on bail be taken in custody to suffer the remaining sentence. (REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE July 07, 2014 PARAMJIT Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.08.02 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh