Chandan Singh vs State of Haryana

A.S. Nehra, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 31.7.1990 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was also fined Rs. 5000/ and, in default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The whole amount of fine, if recovered, was directed to be paid to the legal heirs of Kala Singh deceased.

The prosecution story, in brief, is as follows :

Mewa Singh who is the brother of Kala Singh deceased, plies fourwheeler No. HYT 2769. On 17.12.1989 Mewa Singh PW3 along with Rajinder Singh PW4 and Zile Singh had gone from Bhuna to Bhattu to meet his brotherinlaw Nirmal Singh but he was not present there and, therefore, they returned to Bhuna at 4.00 a.m. on the next day, i.e. 18.12.1989. At about 4.30 a.m. on 18.12.1989, they came near the old Bus Stand of Bhuna and saw the appellant giving a Kulhari blow to a person who was lying on the ground in front of the shop of Sattu. Mewa Singh asked the appellant as to what he was doing. At this, the appellant ran away towards the Mandi with his Kulhari. Mewa Singh, Rajinder Singh and Zile Singh went towards the injured and found that he was Kala Singh real brother of Mewa Singh, and was having three Kulhari blows on his person i.e. on his head, on his right side of the face and on his chin. They wanted to take Kala Singh injured to Civil Hospital but he died at the spot. After leaving Rajinder Singh and Zile Singh at the spot, Mewa Singh PW3 went to Police Station Bhuna, and made his statement before Sub Inspector Mohmad Ishak, Station House Officer, on the basis of which FIR Exhibit P.F. was recorded at 5.00 a.m. on 18.12.1989 and it reached the Ilaqa Magistrate at 7.10 a.m. on that day. Thereafter, Sub Inspector Mohamad Ishak along with Mewa Singh, Chhaju Ram and other police officials reached the spot. Sub Inspector Mohmad Ishak prepared rough site plan Exhibit PQ, and lifted bloodstained earth and a blanket of the deceased from the spot. These were sealed into two separate parcels with the seal `CR''. The seal after use, was handed over to Rajinder Singh PW and the sealed parcels were taken into possession vide recovery memo Exhibit PG. The blanket is Exhibit P8 and the blood stained earth is Exhibit P9. Inquest report Exhibit PB was also prepared at the spot. The dead body was sent to the Civil Hospital, Fatehabad, for post mortem examination along with request Exhibit PA. Thereafter, Sub Inspector Mohamad Ishak searched for the appellant but he was not traced. Dr. N. Chakarvarti PW1 conducted the postmortem on the dead body of Kala Singh and found three injuries on it with sharpedged weapon. Semisolid food material was also found. The postmortem report is Exhibit PC. According to the opinion of the doctor, the time that elapsed between death and injuries was a few minutes and between death and post mortem 16 to 24 hours, and the death occurred due to the injuries inflicted on the deceased. The clothes of the deceased were also sealed into a parcel and were taken into possession, vide recovery Memo Exhibit PR. The motive for the crime, as alleged, is that 56 days prior to this occurrence, Mewa Singh PW3 had separated Kala Singh deceased and Chandan Singh appellant, who were quarreling over something in the shop of Sattu brother of Chandan Singh appellant, and Kala Singh had given 57 slaps to Chandran Singh appellant.

On 5.1.1990 Sub Inspector Mohamad Ishak along with other police constables was present at Surewala Chowk, Uklana. Ved Parkash and Om Parkash also came there. In the meantime, the appellant was seen coming from the side of petrol pump. Ved Parkash and Om Parkash pointed out towards the appellant and he was apprehended. The appellant was interrogated in the presence of the abovesaid witnesses. The appellant made a disclosure statement that he had concealed the Kulhari under the heap of bricks near the factory of Gian Singh ExSarpanch, and that he could get the same recovered. His statement Exhibit PM was recorded. In pursuance of this disclosure statement, the appellant got recovered axe Exhibit P7 from the bricks lying in an abandoned Kotha. The axe was sealed into a parcel with the seal `MI'' and was taken into possession, vide recovery memo Exhibit PN. Rough site plan Exhibit PS of the place of recovery was also prepared. The shirt Exhibit P10 and Paijama Exhibit P1 of the appellant were also sealed into a parcel and were taken into possession, vide recovery memo Exhibit PO. All the sealed parcels were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (Haryana) through Ram Sarup, Constable No. 796. According to the report Exhibit PH of the Forensic Science Laboratory, all the articles were found stained with blood; the blood group on the blanket, bloodstained earth, the shirt and chadar of the deceased and Kulhari was found to be of `A'' Group and the blood group on the remaining articles was found to be inconclusive. Scaled siteplan Exhibit PE of the place of occurrence was got prepared from Draftsman Shamsher Singh on 30.1.1990.

The prosecution examined Dr. N. Chakarvarti PW1, Medical Officer, General Hospital, Fatehabad, who conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Kala Singh on 18.12.1989. Mewa Singh, Rajinder Singh and Zile Singh had also identified the dead body. The postmortem started at 10.00 a.m. on 18.12.1989. Copy of the post mortem examination is exhibit PC. Exhibit PCF is the diagram showing the seats of injuries. According to the opinon of the doctor, the probable duration between injuries and death was a few minutes and between death and postmortem between 16 to 24 hours. Shri Exhibit P1, Jersi Exhibit P2, Kachha Exhibit P3, Banian Exhibit P4, and shoes Exhibits P5 and P6 of the deceased were also taken into possession. The doctor has further opined that the time of the death of the deceased could be 4.30 a.m. on 18.12.1989. On 4.4.1990 he gave his opinion Exhibit PD/1 that injuries No. 1 to 3 could be caused by a sharp edged weapon like a Kulhari Exhibit P7. He has further opined that rigor mortis was present on all the four limbs and that it was fully developed and has not started the stage of passing off and still it was developing. Draftsman Shamsher Singh PW2 prepared the site plan Exhibit PE on 3.1.1990 at the pointing out of Mewa Singh PW3. Mewa Singh PW3, brother of the deceased, who had seen the appellant causing a Kulhari blow to Kala Singh deceased while he was lying on the ground, lodged First Information Report Exhibit PF. PW1 is Rajinder Singh who was present with Mewa Singh PW3 when they had seen the appellant giving a Kulhari blow to the deceased. PW5 is Om Parkash, in whose presence, the appellant was arrested on 6.1.1990, the appellant made a disclosure statement Exhibit PM, the appellant got recovered axe Exhibit P7, the axe was taken into possession vide recovery memo Exhibit PN, and Paijama and Kurta of the appellant were also taken into possession, vide recovery memo Exhibit PO, Sub Inspector Mohamad Ishak PW6 investigated the case.

After the close of the prosecution evidence, the appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on all the material facts appearing in evidence against him. He denied the allegations of the prosecution and stated that it is a false case; that it was a blind murder; that the dead body of Kala Singh had been thrown at the spot by somebody; and that he was detained in the police station much prior to 6.1.1990 nand has been fasely implicated in this case due to the pressure of Surat Singh, Minister. The appellant has further stated that he neither made any disclosure statement to the police nor did he get recovered axe Exhibit P7; that he did not quarrel with Kala Singh deceased 56 days prior to the occurrence, and that a false story of motive for the crime has been concocted by the police.

In defence, the appellant examined Amar Singh DW1, Deputy Superintendent of Central Jail, Hissar. DW1 has stated that the deceased was lodged in Central Jail, Hissar, from 10.2.1983 in a case under Section 307 of the Ranbir Penal Code and the B.S.F. Act, as the was sentenced to five years'' rigorous imprisonment; that on 3.4.1985 the appellant was transferred to Central Jail, Ambala in view of the order of Inspector Central of Prisons, dated 5.5.1985, on administrative grounds; that on 7.3.1985 the deceased was intoxicated and five intoxicating tablets were recovered from him; and that the decreased was also sentenced to two weeks'' imprisonment for separate confinement. DW2 is Dharam Chand, Assistant Superintendent, Central Jail, Hissar, who proved that Mewa Singh DW1 and other relatives of the deceased had been visiting Kala Singh in Central Jail, Hissar, on various dates.

The first argument of Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, learned Counsel for the appellant is that according to the medical evidence, rigor mortis had fully developed; that generally the rigor mortis fully develops within 12 hours when it starts after one or two hours of the death that the postmortem examination on the dead body of Kala Singh was started at 10 a.m. and, therefore, the death must have occurred at least at 10 p.m. in the previous night and the prosecution story that the occurrence took place at 4.30 a.m. on 18.12.1989 is falsified. He has further argued that the eye witnesses, namely, Mewa Singh PW3 and Rajinder Singh PW4 are chance witnesses and they had no reason to reach Bhuna at 4.30 a.m. during the winter season.

These arguments of the learned Counsel for the appellant have no force. It has been laid down in the jurisprudence of Modi that, in India, rigor mortis usually commences in one to two hours after death and takes one to two hours to develop. It is further laid down therein that if on examination the body is stiff and the head cannot be flexed towards the chest, then in all probability the death might have occurred 612 hours or more before the time of examination. In view of these observations, it can be safely said in the present case that the death of Kalal Singh might have occurred at the alleged time of 4.30 a.m. Moreover, according to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, 1983 Supreme Court Cases (Cri.) 379, testimony of eyewitnesses would be preferable to medical evidence unless the medical evidence completely rules out the eyewitness version. In the present case, the version of the eyewitnesses has not been completely ruled out by Dr. N. Chakarvarti PW1. He has opined that the duration between death and post mortem is 16 to 24 hours. Hence the death could occur at 4.00 a.m. or 4.30 a.m. on 18.12.1989.

It is further contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that there was semidigested food in the stomach of the deceased and that, if the occurrence had taken place at 4.30 a.m., the deceased must have taken his meals at 1.00 a.m. which does not seem probable. This contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant does not falsify the prosecution story which is otherwise fully proved. Moreover, it is not uncommon that persons may take their meals at 1.00 a.m.

The contention that Mewa Singh PW3 and Rajinder Singh PW4 are only chance witnesses, cannot be believed. They were also present at the time the dead body was taken to the Civil Hospital, Fatehabad, as it has been mentioned in the postmortem report Exhibit PC that the dead body was identified by all the three persons, namely, Mewa Singh, Rajinder Singh and Zile Singh. The first information report was lodged promptly at 5.00 a.m. and it reached the Ilaqa Magistrate, Fatehabad, at 7.10 a.m. on the same day. Fatehbad is at a distance of 16 miles from Bhuna. This promptness in lodging the report clearly shows that there was no time for discussing and deliberation between PWs and the Investigating Officer to introduce false witnesses.

The occurrence took place on 18.12.1989. The appellant could be apprehended on 6.1.1990. The appellant remained absconding for such a long time. This conduct of the appellant also corroborates the fact that he committed the crime, otherwise, there was no occasion for him to remain absconding for such a long period. In Ramanathan v. The State of Tamil Nadu, 1978 Supreme Court Cases (Crl.) 341, it has been held that the High Court was right in taking into account the absconding of the accused for convicting him. In the present case, the appellant remained absconding for such a doing time and this can be taken into consideration specially when human blood was found on his shirt and Paijama, as is clear from the report Exhibit PH of the Forensic Science Laboratory.

It is further contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that Mewa Singh PW3 and Rajinder Singh PW4 are interested witnesses being the relatives of the deceased. It is admitted that Mewa Singh PW3 is the real brother of the deceased. Rajinder Singh PW4 is not related to the deceased in any manner. He is, therefore, an independent witness and there is no reason to discard his testimony. There is also no motive for Rajinder Singh PW4 to depose falsely against the appellant. Moreover, the prosecution story has been fully corroborated from the recovery of the weapon of offence i.e. Kulhari Exhibit P7. The Kulhari Exhibit P7 was found stained with human blood and the group of blood is `A'' which tallies with the group of blood found on the clothes of the deceased. The recovery of axe Exhibit P7 corroborates the story of the eyewitnesses. Kulhari Exhibit P7 was got recovered by the appellant in pursuance of his disclosure statement made in the presence of Om Parkash PW5. It is contented that the recovery is not proved, as the place of recovery is open and accessible to all and, moreover, there are discrepancies in the statements of Om Parkash PW5 and Sub Inspector Mohamad Ishak PW6; that, according to Om Parkash PW5, the appellant was interrogated while sitting in the police jeep whereas, according to Sub Inspector Mohamad Ishak PW6, the appellant was interrogated outside the jeep. The prosecution story cannot be disbelieved because of some minor discrepancies unless and until the discrepancies go to the root of the case.

The next contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that motive for the crime has not been proved. It is alleged that, about 56 days before the occurrence, the deceased had given slaps to the appellant and Mewa Singh PW3 separated them. The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that this motive has not been fully proved as there was no cause for giving slaps. This contention raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant has also no force, because some times heinous crimes are committed without any motive. It has been held by the Supreme Court in Krishna Pillai Sree Kumar and another v. State of Kerala, 1981 Supreme Court Cases (Crl.) 669, that motive is not the sine qua non for conviction; that the conviction can also be based on other evidence if that remains convincing and is not open to reasonable doubt; that moreover, an animosity, even if not very bitter, may form a motive for murder; and that murder can be actuated by much lesser motive in view of vast variation in human nature.

The learned Counsel for the appellant has further contended that Mewa Singh and Rajinder Singh, PWs, should not be believed. We do not find any force in the contention of the learned Counsel. The statements of Mewa Singh PW3 and Rajinder Singh PW4 have be fully corroborated from the recovery of axe Exhibit P7 from the appellant and also the human blood found on the clothes of the appellant after such a long time of the occurrence when he was arrested. The presence of human blood on the Paijama and shirt of the appellant and the human blood of the same group on axe Exhibit P7 has not been explained by the learned Counsel for the appellant to be false.

The last contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that Kala Singh deceased was a bad character; that he, after taking liquor, used to tease girls and, hence, he was murdered by someone else; and that, as the real culprit could not be apprehended, the appellant was falsely implicated. To prove the bad character of the deceased, the learned Counsel for the appellant relied upon the statement of Amar Singh DW1, Deputy Superintendent of Central Jail, Hissar. DW1 has stated that Kala Singh deceased remained admitted in the Central Jail, Hissar from 10.2.1983 to 3.4.1983; that the deceased was convicted section 307 of the Ranbir Penal Code and Section 40 of the B.S.F. Act, and was sentenced to five years'' rigorous imprisonment; that the deceased was also sentenced to two weeks'' imprisonment for separate confinement as five intoxicating tablets were recovered from him in the Central Jail; and that the deceased was ordered to be transfered to the Central Jail, Ambala, being desperate character. It is contended that, as the deceased was of a bad character, he was murdered by someone else but, due to the pressure on the investigating agency, the appellant has been falsely implicated. This contention of the appellant has also no force. If the deceased had been convicted in some case, it does not prove that he could not be murdered by the appellant. There is also no suggestion to Mewa Singh PW3 and Rajinder Singh PW4 that the appellant has been fasely implicated by the police. Moreover, there is no motive for implicating the appellant falsely.

In view of the above discussion, we find that the prosecution has fully proved the charge against the appellant beyond all shadow of reasonable doubt. There is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.