Bawa Singh vs State of Punjab

R.L. Anand, J. (Oral)

Seven appellants namely Bawa Singh, Jagtar Singh, Balkar Singh, Hardeep Singh, Gurnam Singh, Balbir Singh and Amrik Singh have filed the present criminal Appeal which has been directed against the judgment and order dated 10.7.1987 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar who convicted all the appellants under Sections 307/325/324/148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced all the appellants under section 148 of the Indian Penal Code for a period of one year each and to pay fine of Rs. 200/ each. In default of payment of fine each of the appellants was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. Further the trial Court sentenced Amrik Singh and Hardip Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ each under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, they were ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months, whereas appellants Gurnam Singh, Bawa Singh, Jagtar Singh, Balkar Singh and Balbir Singh were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ each under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. Appellant Bawa Singh was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 11/2 years with a fine of Rs. 300/ under section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months whereas appellants Bawa Singh, Hardip Singh, Jagtar Singh, Amrik Singh, Gurnam Singh and Balbir Singh were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 11/2 years each with a fine of Rs. 300/ each under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine each one of them was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months for causing injuries to Gurnam Singh. Balkar Singh and Gurnam Singh appellant were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each with a fine of Rs. 200/ each under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine each of the two appellants was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month whereas appellants Bawa Singh, Hardip Singh, Jagtar Singh, Amrik Singh and Balbir Singh were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay of fine of Rs. 200/ each, under section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, each one of them was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month each. The trial Court further held that all the sentences awarded to the appellants shall run concurrently.

The prosecution story in brief is that Gurnam Singh PW lodged F.I.R. and he stated before the police that he was resident of village Thathi Jaimal Singh and that in his village there was a common land near pond belonging to the panchayat. Out of that land some land was being cultivated by Atma Singh son of Kehar Singh and Niranjan Singh son of Natha Singh and they were giving their share to the panchayat. A resolution was passed that entire land of the village pond by given to the Gurdwara. The resolution was signed and thumb marked by the members of the panchayat and other respectables of their village. Wives of Gurnam Singh and Niranjan Singh also agreed to that resolution and attested the same. Thereafter Gurnam Singh and Niranjan Singh refused to give the land in the name of Gurdwara. Due to that dispute arose about the said land. The proceedings under Section 1078/151 Cr.P.C., were started against the parties because the villagers had installed a ''Nishan Sahib'' in the said land and also started langar. Gurnam Singh PW was working there as Sewadar.

The story of the prosecution further is that on 23.11.1985 at about 3.00/4.00 p.m. complainant was present in the langar and was doing the sewa by levelling the land. Gurnam Singh armed with a kirpan, Amrik Singh armed with a double barrel gun, Balkar Singh, Bewa Singh and Jagtar Singh alias Billa armed with taquas and Balbir Singh armed with a 315 bore rifle reached there. Amrik Singh raised a lalkara that PW Gurnam Singh be taught a lesson for taking into possession the land of village pond. At that Gurnam Singh appellant gave a kirpan blow to Gurnam Singh PW hitting on his right side of the head and Bawa Singh appellant gave a taqua blow hitting his left arm. He raised an alarm. Balkar Singh gave taqua blow hitting on back of PW Gurnam Singh, whereas Jagtar Singh appellant gave him a taqua blow from reverse side which hit him on his back. Gurnam Singh fell down on the ground, and when he was lying on the ground, Balkar Singh accused gave him another taqua blow hitting his left leg. Thereafter, Kulwant Singh PW came forward raising alarm not to kill PW Gurnam Singh, at which Hardip Singh fired from his double barrel gun at Kulwant Singh hitting him on his right side of chest near the shoulder. Amrik Singh then fired at Kulwant Singh hitting his left arm and nose. He fell down on the ground. Guro wife of Wassan Singh, also witnessed the occurrence. After that Hansa Singh father of Kulwant Singh came at the place of occurrence and he arranged for the tractor trolley and removed Gurnam Singh and Kulwant Singh to hospital Khemkaran where they were medically examined by Dr. Hukam Singh (PW6), who found the following injuries on the person of Gurnam Singh and Kulwant Singh :

Gurnam Singh

Incised wound 4.5 cms x 0.5 cms oblique on right temporal parietal region of scalp, 5 cms above right pinna. Wound was bone deep, hair was cut. Fresh bleeding was present. X.ray advised.

Incised wound 5 cms x 0.5 cms oblique on back of scalp in middle part 8 cms above the occipital protuberance. Bone deep, hair was cut. Fresh bleeding was present. Xray was advised.

Reddish contusion oblique 12 x 2.5 cms on back lower right chest. Xray advised.

Swelling was present around lower part of left forearm and wrist, extending upto upper half of hand, tender to touch. Patient was unable to lift the hand. Xray advised.

Area of tenderness was present on outer upper left leg. Xray advised.

Abrasion 8 x 0.5 cm oblique on inner middle left forearm.

Kulwant Singh

Lacerated penetrating wound 4.5 cms with inverted and contused irregular margins on front of right shoulder. Fresh bleeding was present. Xray advised.

Lacerated penetrating wound 2.5 cm x 2.00 cm with inverted and contused margins on front of right shoulder, 3 cms outer and lower the injury No. 1. Fresh bleeding was present. Xray advised.

Lacerated penetrating wound 2 x 1.5 cms with inverted and contused margins, 1 cm inner to injury No. 1. Fresh bleeding was present. Xray advised.

3 lacerated wounds 2.5 cms x 2.5 cms, 1 cm x 1 cm and 1.5 cms x 1 cm with everted and irregular margins on back of right shoulder. Fresh bleeding was present. Wounds were in an area of 10 x 8 cms.

Lacerated wound 1.5 cm x 1.00 cm on outer upper right arm with everted margins.

Lacerated puncutrued wound 6 in number of the size of 0.25 x 0.25 cms to 0.25 cms x 0.5 cm with inverted and contused margins on outer lower left arm. Blood was oozing from the wounds.

Lacerated punctured wound 14 in number of the size of 0.25 cm x 0.25 cm to .25 cm x 0.5 cm with inverted and contused margins on outer and back of upper two third of left forearm. Blood was oozing from the wound.

Lacerated punctured wound 0.25 cm x 0.5 cm with inverted margins on left side of tip of nose.

The doctor after examining the injured sent the Medico Legal Reports to the Police Station for registration of the case and ASI Jagjit Singh received the same in the adda of village Amarkot on 24.11.1985 where he was present in connection with V.I.P. duty. After he was free from V.I.P. he went to the hospital Khemkaran and moved applications Ex.PG and Ex.PH and the Doctor declared both the injured unfit to make statements as they were under sedation. Asi Jagjit Singh again went to the hospital on 25.11.1985 and this time Doctor declared Gurnam Singh fit to make statement. Similarly Kulwant Singh was declared fit to make statement. After obtaining opinion of the Doctor ASI, Jagjit Singh recorded the statement of injured Gurnam Singh which is Ex.PB. It was read over to him and he thumbmarked it in token of its correctness. The thanedar made endorsement Ex.PB/1 on the statement of Gurnam Singh and sent it for registration of the case on the basis of which formal F.I.R. Ex.PB/2 was recorded. After completing necessary formalities, challan was presented against the accused in the court of Area Magistrate, who supplied the copies of the documents to the accused and vide commitment order dated 12.5.1986 the appellants were committed to the court of Sessions to face trial. Vide order dated 25.9.1986, the appellants were chargesheeted under Sections 148, 307, 325/149, 324/149, 226, 226/149 of the Indian Penal Code to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

In order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses including Gurnam Singh and Kulwant Singh injured but need not to mention the description of the statements of these witnesses for the reason that the counsel for the appellants is not contesting the appeal on merits but his contention is otherwise which I will deal in the subsequent portion of this judgment.

The statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. All the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused to which they denied and stated that they are innocent. In defence they examined five witnesses. I skip over the relevant portion of the statements of the DWs for the reasons stated above.

The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order convicted and sentenced the appellants in the manner stated above and aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the present appeal which I am disposing of with the assistance rendered by Shri A.S. Sandhu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Shri Vikas Cuccria, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent and with their help I have gone through the record of this case.

I have just stated that the conviction of the appellants has not been assailed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants for the obvious reasons that the occurrence took place between villagers over land in dispute and the allegations of the prosecution have been supported by two stamped witnesses.

The learned counsel for the appellants only submitted that this appeal is pending in the High Court since 1987. The entire witnesses as well the appellants are relations inter se. During the pendency of the appeal, the injured witnesses have submitted a compromise before the High Court that they have compromised with the accused on account of the fact to bring everlasting amity and peace in the village. It has also been stated in the compromise that both the factions are living in the same village peacefully and they use to treat each other as friends and brothers and no untoward incident has taken place after this incident. The land is very dear to a farmer and he would like to establish his title and possession over a piece of land. It may be possible that Sarvshri Gurnam Singh and Niranjan Singh may not have left the possession of the village land inspite of the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat in favour of the Gurdwara Sahib. The appellants are suffering the agony of criminal proceedings for the last about 13 years. When the complainants have excused the appellants of their wrong, the law court should not become impediment in the way of the villagers. Rather the anxiety of the law should be that the villagers may be allowed to live peacefully in the future by forgetting their differences. In this view of the matter, I reduce the sentence of the appellants to the period already undergone by them. The fine has already been paid by the appellants. With the above modification in the matter of sentence, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.