Kuldip Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Dewan, J.

Kuldip Singh aged 44 years, a resident of Amritsar was tried for committing the murder of Ajit Singh and Waryam Kaur deceased by Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. He was convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2500/ or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months on two counts. He was also convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. The substantive sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently.

The motive for the crime is stated to be that Ajit Singh deceased had illicit relations with Waryan Kaur deceased, daughter of Kuldip Singh accused. The prosecution case is that on 561985, Sharm Singh along with his mother Mehar Kaur and his two sons, namely, Ajit Singh deceased and Rajinder Pal Singh were sleeping on the rooftop of their house which they had taken on rent from one Gurbax Singh. It about 130 A.M, Sharm Singh got up to urinate but he found that his son Ajit Singh was not present on his bed. Since Ajit Singh had illicit relations with Waryam Kaur, daughter of Kuldip Singh, suspicion aroused in the mind of sharam Singh that Ajit Singh might have gone to Kuldip Singh''s house. Sharm Singh and Rajinder Pal Singh went to the house of Kuldip Singh and there they found present Kuldip Singh with a double barrel gun in his hand and Ajit Singh and Waryam Kaur were also present there in a room on the third floor. On seeing Sharm Singh and Rajinder Pai Singh, the accused fired two shots from his gun which hit his daughter Waryam Kaur and Ajit Singh, as a result of which they both fell down and died at the spot. On hearing the commotion, Manohar Singh, Jagdish Rai and Ashok Kumar tenants of the accused were also attracted to the spot and they witnessed the occurrence. Thereafter, the accused ran away from the spot. Shram Singh set out for the police station and on the way he met Rajinder Singh Assistant SubInspector and made a statement before him and on that basis F.I.R. Ex. PN/2,,as recorded at Police Station B Division Amritsar at 3 10 A.M. Rajinder Singh went to the house of the accused and found the dead bodies of Ajit Singh and Waryam Kaur lying there. He held inquests and sent the dead bodies to the mortuary for autopsy. He also prepared the visual plan Ex. PD of the place of occurrance lifted bloodstained earth from the spot. The accused was arrested and gun Ex. P. 10 was recovered from his possession. He was interrogated by the Investigating Officer and he suffered disclosure statement leading to the recovery of two empty cartridges from the specified place of concealment.

Dr. Ashok Kumar PW I conducted autopsy on the dead body of Waryam Kaur on 561985 at 10.10 A.M. and found three firearm injures as detailed in the postmortem report Ex. PA. Death was coined to be due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of injury No. 3 which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. On the same day at about 2 P.M., the doctor conducted postmortem examination on the body of Ajit Singh deceased and found one injury as detailed in the postmortem report Ex. PC. Death was opined to be due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the said injury which. "was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. In both the cases, the probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was stated to immediate and between death arid postmortem within 14 hours. After necessary investigation the accused were challenged an committed.

The ocular testimony consists of Sharm Singh PW 6, Manohar Lal PW 7, Ashok Kumar PW 8 and Rajinder Pal Singh PW 9. Rajinder Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector PW 10 is the Investigating Officer in the case. The remaining evidence is of formal nature. When examined tinder Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code, the accused denied the prosecution allegations and pleaded false implication in the case due to misguided suspicion no evidence was, however, led in defence.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at sufficient length and after doing so, we are firmly of the view that this appeal must be allowed. We find that the trial Court has not approached this case from a proper angle with the result that it fell in error and passed a worng order of conviction against the appellant It is true that the appellant had admitted that the dead bodies of her daughter Waryam Kaur and that of Ajit Singh were recovered by the Investigating Officer from his house but this admission on his part, in our opinion, is not sufficient to fasten the guilt of murder on him. The burden which rests on the prosecution to establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt is neither neutralised nor shifted because of the said circumstance The accused can be convicted only when the prosecution succeeds in proving that the incident in question had taken place in the way as alleged by it. The prosecution must stand on its own legs and cannot take advantage of the weaknesses of the defence. Nor can the Court on its own, make out a new case for the prosecution and convict the accused on that basis. It is now well established that when the substratum of the evidence given by the eyewitnesses examined by the prosecution is found to be false, then the only prudent course left to the Court is to throw away the prosecution case in its entirety. In the instant case, we find that the eyewitnesses examined by the prosecution did not support the prosecution at the trial and went upon their previous statements made before the police. They thus discredited themselves by their own previous contradictory statements and were rightly disbelieved by the trial Court. If that is so. then it means that the deceased did not die of the gun shots fired by the appellant. Obviously, therefore, they died of shots that had been fired by somebody else. The prosecution story that Ajit Singh and Waryam Kaur deceased died of the shots fired by the appellant is therfore, patently false.

The falsity of the prosecution case becomes apparent from another facts also. The medical evidence does not appear to us to support the prosecution case. In this connection, the First thing to be pointed out is that according to the record the appellant fires two shots from his gun, one hit Ajit Singh and the other hit Waryan Kaur, as a result of which hot died at the spot. Dr. Ashok Kumar PW I who conducted autopsy of the dead bodies has clearly stated in his crossexamination that injuries No. 1 and 2 on the dead body of Waryam Kaur could be caused by one shot and injury No. 3 being a separate injury, could not be caused by the same shot. As such, the medical evidence affords no assistance to the prosecution at all.

In view of the above, we hold that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of tile appellant. Hence, we accept the appel setaside his convictions and sentences awarded by the trial Court and while giving him the benefit of doubt, acquit him.