Balkar Singh vs State of Punjab

R.L. Anand, J.

Initially this criminal appeal was filed by four persons namely Balkar Singh, Didar Singh, Bikkar Singh and Nachhatar Singh and it was directed against the judgment and order dated 9.6.1987 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, who convicted the appellants under Section 307 I.P.C. with the aid of Section 149 I.P.C. and under Section 148 I.P.C. The trial Court, however, sentenced these four appellants to undergo R.I. for a period of one year each under Section 148 I.P.C. They were further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ each under Section 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. In default of payment of fine each one of them was directed to further undergo R.I. for 6 months.

Before I proceed further into the matter, I may make a mention that the challan was submitted against 8 persons including the four appellants and those four persons were Ravel Singh, Darshan Singh, Shingara Singh and Sahab Singh. During the pendency of the trial, Darshan Singh expired. The trial Court released Sahib Singh on probation. During the pendency of this appeal three appellants namely Balkar Singh, Bikkar Singh and Nachhatar Singh expired as a result of which the appeal of these three appellants has abated. Now we are only left with the appeal of Didar Singh.

The brief facts of the case are that on 8.8.1994 at about 7.00 p.m. Piara Singh PW was going along with his brother Tara Singh and father Gian Singh in order to attend his duties of Home Guard at Railway Station Bute Wala and when they reached the bridge in the area of Varpal, Balkar Singh, Nachhater Singh and Sahib Singh armed with Gandasas, Darshan Singh, Didar Singh and Bikkar Singh armed with Dangs, Shingara Singh and Ravel Singh empty handed were standing there. Balkar Singh raised a Lalkara that Piara Singh be taught a lesson for appearing as a witness against them and Balkar Singh gave a gandasa blow from the reverse side on the left leg of Piara Singh, who fell down. Nachhater Singh and Sahib Singh gave gandasa blows from the reverse side on the left leg of Piara Singh, whereas Darshan Singh, Didar Singh and Bikkar Singh gave dang blows on the right leg, right arm and hands of Piara Singh. Gian Singh and Tara Singh raised alarm. Balkar Singh accused told them to stay away otherwise they will be dealt with in the same way. After inflicting the injuries the accused fled away with their respective weapons. The injured was removed to Civil Hospital, Ferozepur where he was medically examined and referred to S.G.T.B. Hospital, Amritsar for further treatment. Ultimately the left leg of Piara Singh had to be amputated on account of the injuries. The motive for the alleged crime is that father of the Siri of Piara Singh namely Gurmit Singh was murdered by Balkar Singh and six other persons and in that case Piara Singh appeared as a witness against the accused and he was helping the complainant party.

After the completion of the investigation, the challan was presented in the Court of Special Judge under the provisions of Special Court Act against three accused Ravel Singh, Shingara Singh and Bikkar Singh. The other five accused were summoned vide order dated 15.12.1984. All the accused were charge sheeted under Sections 148, 307 read with Sections 149 and 333 read with Section 149 I.P.C. to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial. Vide order dated 13.9.1985, the Special Judge of Special Court, Ferozepur sent the challan to the Court of Sessions Judges, Ferozepur, who entrusted the case to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur for trial.

In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined Dr. H.S. Sohal PW1, who deposed that on 12.8.1984 he medically examined Piara Singh in the Orthopaedic Ward and found fracture of bones of left forearm for which intramedulary nailing was done. It was further stated by this witness that injured was having a crushed injury on the left leg and on that account gangrene of left leg was developed as a result of which his left leg had to be amputated on 30.8.1984. Further it was stated by this doctor that Piara Singh injured had a compound fracture of both bones of rights leg for which sequesterpcaton was done and skin grafting was also done. PW2 Dr. A.S. Mann medically examined Piara Singh on 9.8.1984 and found as many as 7 injuries on his person which are as under :

Reddish swelling 10 cms. wide all around the middle one third of right forearm with overlying lacerated wound 1 cm. x 1/4 cm. x 1/4 cm. on back and middle of right forearm with bleeding.

Reddish swelling 10 cms. x 7 cms. on back of right hand which was also extending to all the five fingers.

Reddish swelling all over the left forearm with lacerated wound 2.5 cm. x 1/2 cm. x muscle deep on back and middle of left forearm. Abnormal mobility, crepitus and marked tenderness was present in the middle one third of left forearm. Both bones of the left forearm were fractured clinically.

Reddish swelling on back of whole of the left hand extending on to all the five fingers with lacerated wound 1/2 cm. x 1/4 cm. x 1/2 cm. on back and centre of hand with bleeding.

Swelling on whole of the left leg with overlying six lacerated wounds on the front as follows :

(a) Lacerated wound 2 x 2 cm. x bone deep on upper one third.

(b) two lacerated wounds 2.5 cm. x 1.5 cm. each on middle one third.

(c) lacerated wound 5 cms. x 2 cms. on middle one third and bone was protruding out of the wound.

(d) two lacerated wound 1 x 1 cm. each on lower one third. Bleeding was present from all the wounds.

Swelling all over the dorsum of left foot reddish in colour and all around the left ankle.

Lacerated wound 6 cms. x 3 cms. on front and middle one third of right leg with bleeding. Wound was bone deep and there was underlying swelling of whole of the right leg and underlying bone was fractured.

Injuries No. 3 and 5 were declared grievous and the rest of the injuries were kept under observation for Xray examination. All the injuries were caused by a blunt weapon within six hours of the examination. Ex.PB is the carbon copy of the M.L.R. This doctor further stated that these injuries could be caused with a dang or from the reverse side of a gandasa. As per this doctor the condition of the injured was serious and after the receipt of the Xray report he gave his opinion Ex. PF to the effect that injuries No. 1 to 7 are grievous in nature and those injuries were collectively dangerous to life. Bakhtawar Singh PW3 is the revenue Patwari, who proved scaled site plan Ex.PG. PW4 is Piara Singh injured and he supported the allegations of the prosecution by categorically stating that the present appellant Didar Singh was armed with dang and he along with companions gave injuries to him hitting on his legs and other parts of the body. The statement of Piara Singh is further corroborated by the statement of his father Gian Sinh PW5. PW6 ASI Kishan Lal is the Investigating Officer, who partly investigated this case. Harbbhajan Singh PW7 is the other Investigating Officer of this case.

The statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to them. The plea of Didar Singh was that he was innocent.

When called upon to enter his defence, the accused examined Dara Singh DW1, Chand Singh DW2, Joginder Singh DW3 and Harbans Lal Vij DW4.

The learned trial Court convicted Didar Singh and three others under Section 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and under Section 148 I.P.C. as stated above and aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, earlier the appeal was filed by four appellants. Three have died during the pendency of the appeal and now the appeal is being contested only by Didar Singh. Shri Piara Singh has also filed Criminal Revision No. 741 of 1987 and has prayed for the enhancement of the sentence of the appellants and also for the conviction of the persons who have been acquitted by the trial Court.

Before I may proceed further into the matter, the learned Counsel Shri G.L. Jain, appearing on behalf of Piara Singh complainant, has stated that is per the instructions of his client he is not interested to prosecute the revision and the same may be dismissed. The Counsel even went to the extent that he has no objection if mercy is showered upon Didar Singh appellant. There are reasons why Shri Jain is making this statement. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, Shri Piara Singh filed a civil suit and claimed damages against appellant Didar Singh and his companions for the injuries suffered by him and that the civil Court has granted a compensation of Rs. 1 lac to the injured and this compensation in fact has been paid by Didar Singh from his personal pocket. Shri Aulakh also submitted that in view of the payment of the compensation and also in view of the compromise which has been effected between the surviving appellant and the injured, the appeal may be accepted or in the alternative the sentence awarded to Didar Singh may be reduced to the one already undergone. I am not in a position to agree with the contentions of Shri Aulakh with regard to the setting aside of the judgment in its entirety with regard to Didar Singh. What is the effect of the compromise between the complainant and the appellant and what should be the effect on this judgment with regard to the payment of compensation of Rs. 1 lac to the injured shall be dealt by me in the subsequent portion of this order while awarding the sentence to Didar Singh appellant, but at this juncture I can only say that the appeal of Didar Singh merits dismissal for the reasons that there is a sworn testimony of Piara Singh who is none else but an injured witness. His statement has to be given better weight than that of an ordinary witness being a stamped witness. There was a strong motive on the part of Didar Singh to join the hands with his coaccused in order to commit the offence because Didar Singh is the real brother of Balkar Singh against whom there was a strong motive as Piara Singh had been helping the adversary party of the present appellant. The testimony of Piara Singh has been corroborated by the testimony of Gian Singh who is a probable witness. The story of the prosecution proceeds that on the day of occurrence Piara Singh along with his father Gian Singh and his brother were proceeding together in order to attend the duty but on the way they were attacked. The testimony of Gian Singh cannot be rejected on the ground that he is the father of the injured witness. Rather a relation would be the last person to screen the real offender. Further the testimony of the two eye witnesses is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. PW2 Dr. A.S. Mann, who medically examined Piara Singh at the first instance, has found serve injuries. These injuries, according to this doctor seven could be caused from the reverse side of gandasa and dang. The learned Counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any valid defect in the impugned judgment so as to rule out the possibility of the participation of Didar Singh appellant. In this view of the matter, I maintain the conviction of the said appellant under Sections 148 and 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C.

Reverting to the sentence aspect, the learned Counsel for the appellant has repeated the argument by saying that the injured in this case has been duly compensated with a sum of Rs. 1 lac which amount has to be borne by the present appellant Didar Singh. He further submitted that the parties are co villagers. Appellant Didar Singh is suffering the agony of the criminal proceedings since 1984. In case the appellant is sent behind the bars in order to serve the remaining sentence of four years, it will further aggravate the miseries of not only of the appellant but also it will make the relations of the injured and the accused party more strained. The leaned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that irrespective of the fact that Didar Singh has paid a sum of Rs. 1 lac or that Piara Singh has been compensated or that the counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant is not interested to prosecute his revision, still Didar Singh has committed an offence not only against Piara Singh but also against the community at large. The learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that several fractures were caused upon Piara Singh. So much so his left leg had to be amputated. The payment of Rs. 1 lac by way of compensation is no price to the injuries allegedly suffered by Piara singh and in these circumstances the appellant does not deserve any concession even in the matter of sentence.

I have considered the submissions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties. No doubt, the object of the law is to award adequate sentence once the offence is proved beyond reasonable doubt. The sentence part of the case has always been left to the discretion of the Court. Here is a case with peculiar features. The parties are covillagers. The motive in this case has become stale. The occurrence has taken place in the year 1984 and 14 years have elapsed. The injured has been paid a sum of Rs. 1 lac by way of compensation and perhaps for that reason he is not interested to prosecute his revision. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has also stated at the bar that his revision may be dismissed as withdrawn. This submission has been made by Shri Jain on the instructions of his client Piara Singh clearly indicating that Piara Singh has generously pardoned the surviving appellant Didar Singh. In these circumstances, I reduce the substantive sentence of appellant Piara Singh both under Sections 148 and 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. to six months. The imposition of fine is, however, maintained which shall go to the State. With above modification in the matter of sentence, the appeal of Didar Singh is hereby dismissed and the appeal of other three appellants stands abated. The revision of Piara Singh is also hereby dismissed as withdrawn.