Avtar Singh vs State of Haryana

R.L. Anand, J. (Oral)

This is a criminal appeal and has been directed against the judgment dated 16.7.1987 and order dated 17.7.1987 passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, who convicted the appellant Avtar Singh son of Shri Chaman Singh, aged 33 years at the time of his conviction, and sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of five years under Section 307 IPC.

The brief facts of the case are that Kundan Singh injured was working as Granthi in the Gurdwara of village Gajlana. The appellant was the resident of that village and he wanted to be a Granthi of that Gurdwara in place of Kundan Singh. The latter refused to vacate that seat unless he was so asked by the villagers. This is the only motive in this case.

The story of the prosecution further proceeds that on 19.10.1986 at about 7.00/7.30 a.m. complainant Kundan Singh was returning to the Gurdwara after procuring milk from the village as usual. When he passed in front of the house of appellant Avtar Singh, the latter came out of his house armed with a gandasa. On seeing the complainant, appellant gave number of blows with the gandasa hitting on the head, right hand and back of the complainant, who raised alarm which attracted his son Jarnail Singh and Dalip Singh to the spot. After causing the injuries appellant Avtar Singh ran away with his gandasa inside his house.

After the occurrence, the two witnesses brought Kundan Singh complainant to Gurdwara where he became unconscious. Then he was taken to civil hospital at Ladwa. The doctor of that hospital informed the police and referred the patient to civil hospital at Kurukshetra, where the injured was medicolegally examined. In the meanwhile, SI Satnam Dass of Police Station Radaur arrived in the hospital. Since the condition of Kundan Singh was described as serious, SI Satnam Dass requested Shri U.B. Khanduja, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kurukshetra, who reached the hospital and recorded the statement of Kundan Singh after obtaining the opinion of the doctor.

SI Satnam Dass also obtained the copy of that statement and got the case registered against the appellant, who was arrested on 22.10.1986. The appellant was interrogated about the weapon of offence on 22.10.1986 and on interrogation the appellant disclosed that he had kept concealed the gandasa on the roof of his tubewell kotha and he could get the same recovered. Thereafter gandasa was recovered at the instance of the appellant.

On completion of the investigation of the case, the appellant was challaned in the court of Area Magistrate, who supplied the copies of the documents to the appellant and vide commitment order dated 13.3.1987 committed the appellant to the Court of Sessions in order to face the trial under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Vide orders dated 31.3.1987 the appellant was charge sheeted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge was read over and explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial.

In order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined PW.1 Dr. N.K. Doda of L.N.J.P. Hospital, Kurukshetra who medicolegally examined Kundan Singh on 19.10.1986 at 11.00 a.m. and found the following 8 injuries on his person :

An incised wound on the right side of the forehead, shaped in the manner indicated in the diagram, depicted in the MIR copy Ex.PA, skin in a flap of the shape shown being attached with the rest of the skin horizontally. The medial end of the flap was 1.5 cm from the middle of the eyebrow and the lateral end of the flap was 2 cms above and lateral to the lateral end of the right eye brow. Coltted blood was present. On probing and exploration, the underlying tissues and muscles they were cut and bone chips were attached on the undersurface of the skin flap.

The right little finger and right ring finger were chopped off near the base, the bone muscle and the other tissues were exposed. Fresh bleeding was present. Spurting of the blood was also present.

Right middle finger was partially chopped off. Underlying bone, muscle and tissues were cut and wound was oblique, vertically placed. Fresh bleeding and spurting of the blood from arteries was present.

Oblique incised wound 2.5 cms. x bone deep on palmar aspect of the right index finger. Fresh bleeding and spurting of the blood was present. X ray was advised.

The right thumb was chopped off at the proximal part. Fresh bleeding and spurting of the blood was present. Advised xray.

Black eye on the right side. Xray was advised.

Transverse slightly oblique bone deep incised wound 7 cms. x 1/2 cm. on the left parietal region, medial end being 5 cms from the mid line. Xray was advised.

Incised wound 5 cms. x 1/2 cm. on the superior aspect of right shoulder muscle deep.

The doctor also deposed in the M.L.R. that the condition of the patient was serious. His blood pressure and pulse were unrecordable and the patient was sweating all over the body. Ex. PA is the carbon copy of the M.L.R. Finally, injury No. 8 was declared as simple and the rest of the injuries were declared as grievous in nature. Further it was opined by the doctor that the nature of the weapon used was sharp and the injuries were caused within a duration of six hours. It has also come in the crossexamination of the doctor that blood was transfused to the injured and for that reason his condition became stable.

Shri U.B. Khanduja, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Kurukshetra, appeared as PW2. The prosecution also examined Rajesh Kumar Goel, Draftsman PW3. Injured Kundan Singh appeared as PW4. Dalip Singh, eye witness, appeared as PW5. Dr. H.R. Gutain, Medical Officer, Incharge, Civil Hospital, Ladwa appeared as PW7. Jarnail Singh, the other eye witness, who is the son of the injured, has not been examined in the trial Court.

On the closure of prosecution evidence, statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to him. Appellant denied those circumstances and stated that he was involved by Kundan Singh at the instance of Dr. Shingara Singh, who was inimical towards him due to party faction in the village.

When called upon to enter into his defence, the appellant did not lead any evidence and closed the case.

The learned trial court relies the story of the prosecution and convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner as stated above and aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, the present appeal which I am disposing of with the assistance rendered by Mr. R.S. Cheema, Sr. Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the appellant, Mr. J.S. Ahlawat, Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the State of Haryana and with their assistance I have gone through the record of this case.

Mr. Cheema has assailed the judgment of the trial court mainly on the ground that the trial court has committed an illegality in convicting the appellant under Section 307 I.P.C. He submitted that something is being suppressed by Kundan Singh and Dalip Singh with regard to the certain facts leading to the occurrence. In support of his contention, Shri Cheema has drawn my attention to the statement of Kundan Singh, PW.4, who admitted in the crossexamination that his relations with the accused were not cordial on account of the fact that accused wanted to become the Granthi of Gurdwara in his place and that the appellant had been visiting the Gurdwara for the last six months and still there was no altercation or quarrel between the appellant and the injured. From this the learned counsel for the appellant wanted to conclude that the occurrence had not taken place in the manner as suggested above. The possibility cannot be ruled out that there might be some altercation on the day of occurrence between the accused and the injured over some matter and in these circumstances the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is not made out as there was hardly any intention on the part of the appellant to take the life of Kundan Singh. Also it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that it has been admitted by Kundan Singh injured in his crossexamination that the accused was a religious minded person and this factor also goes a long way in establishing that Avtar Singh appellant would be the last person to take the life of Kundan Singh or would attack with such intention or knowledge or under such circumstances that he wanted to kill Kundan Singh. In short, Mr. Cheema wants to minimise and dilute the offence under Section 307 IPC to 308 IPC. The submissions raised by Mr. Cheema have been refuted by the learned counsel for the State.

After considering the rival contentions of the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the submissions raised by Mr. Cheema are totally devoid of any merit. It has been repeatedly said by the Hon''ble Supreme Court that motive is always locked in the heart of the accused and it is very difficult for the prosecution to precisely state what prompted the accused to commit the offence. In the present case there are certain features which will prove that Kundan Singh PW4 is a totally reliable person. Firstly, he is a stamped witness. Secondly, he was an old man of 67 years at the time of making his statement in the trial court and his profession was of a Granthi. It has further come in the evidence of Kundan Singh that he taught Avtar Singh appellant how to recite holy Guru Granth Sahib. It is the consistent statement of Kundan Singh and Dalip Singh that the appellant wanted to become the Granthi of Gurdwara Sahib but the injured was ready to vacate the seat only if the villagers so resolved in this regard. The testimony of the prosecution is very natural because Kundan Singh on that day was passing per chance in front of the house of appellant, who emerged out at the place armed with a gandasa and started giving injuries with the help of that gandasa on the different parts of the body of injures. There are eight injuries on the person of Kundan Singh including on the vital parts of the body from which a reasonable inference can always be drawn in favour of the prosecution. The statement of Kundan Singh is also supported by other probable witness Dalip Singh and also by the medical evidence of Dr. N.K. Doda, who has found 8 injuries on the person of the injured. The duration of the injuries is also suggestive of the fact that these injuries might have been caused on 19.10.1986 at about 7.00 a.m. The recovery of the weapon at the instance of the appellant is yet another piece of evidence which completes the chain of the prosecution. The defence which has been taken by the appellant is not plausible. There is no evidence led by the appellant to suggest that Kundan Singh has implicated him at the instance of Dr. Shingara Singh.

In this view of the matter, I am inclined to maintain the conviction of Avtar Singh appellant under Section 307 IPC for the reasons that there was a strong motive on the part of Avtar Singh to commit the offence and that the story of the prosecution is supported by the stamped witness whose statement has been corroborated by natural witness Dalip Singh. Besides that, there is an ample corroboration coming from the medical evidence and the recovery of the weapon. The multiple blows given by a deadly weapon on the vital part of the body of the injured are indicative of the fact that the appellant had attacked Kundan Singh with the intention to take his life. So much so, at one point of time the condition of Kundan Singh was precarious and for that reason the Magistrate was called to record his statement under Section 164 Cr.P. For all above reasons I maintain the conviction of Avtar Singh under Section 307 IPC.

Faced with the above difficulty, the learned counsel for the appellant then submitted that the sentence of five years which has been awarded to Avtar Singh appellant is on the higher side and it may be reduced especially for the reason that the appellant is facing the agony of the criminal proceedings since 1986. This request of Mr. Cheema, of course, has been opposed by the learned counsel for the State, but I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice shall suffice if the substantive sentence of the appellant is reduced to three years R.I. I order accordingly.

With above modification in the matter of sentence, the appeal is hereby dismissed.