Nachhtar Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Grewal, J.

This appeal is directed against the order of Sessions Judge, Bathinda, dated 2.11.1993 whereby Nachhattar Singhappellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for intentionally committing the murder of Mohinder Singh of his village and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

In brief facts of the prosecution case as emerge from the first information report lodged by Nikki PW, are that on 20.2.1989 she along with her brother Mohinder Singh (since deceased) went to village Khiwa Khurd on a scooter in the morning in order to see her sister Smt. Palo. After meeting her she and her brother Mohinder Singh were returning to their village. At about 11 or 12 noon, as they reached the Sarson field of Mohinder Singh son of Harnam Singh, Nachhattar Singh appellant armed with a Gandasa, his brothers Mewa Singh, Darshan Singh and Gurdev Singh armed with Ghops, their brother Labh Singh armed with a Dang, and Bhaura Singh son of Nahar Singh who belongs to village Shahpur and relation of Nachhattar Singh appellant armed with Dang emerged from the field and came on the road. Nachhattar Singhraised lalkara challenging Mohinder Singh deceased that they would teach him a lesson for not giving possession of the land. Hearing this Mohinder Singh deceased threw his scooter and started running. All the aforesaid accused surrounded him in the wheat field belonging to Maghar Singh. Nachhattar Singh opened the attack and gave a Gandasa blow from its sharp side on the head of Mohinder Singh who on receipt of the said injury fell down on the ground. While Mohinder Singh was lying fallen on the ground all the aforesaid accused continued inflicting injuries indiscriminately with their respective weapons, to Mohinder Singh with intention to kill him. Nikki raised alarm NA MARO NA MARO in a loud voice. On hearing this Gurdial Singh her father and Kewal Singh her brother came running from their field known as Mugli Wala. They too raised alarm ''NA MARO NA MARO'' hearing which all the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons. While running away Nachhtar Singh appellant gave a Gandasa blow to Nikki PW from its reverse side hitting on her right arm. The motive for the crime is that a case regarding land of Prem Singh is pending in the Court between the two parties. Police got the security proceedings initiated against both the parties, who, were bound down.

Gurdial Singh took Mohinder Singh injured to Civil Hospital, Sunam whereas, Nikki accompanied by her uncle Dial Singh went to Police Station Bhikhi after covering a distance of 8 miles and lodged the first information report at 1.15 p.m. on the same day. After recording the first information report SI Gian Singh along with other police officials left for the spot in a government jeep. Dial Singh and Nikki also accompanied the police party in that jeep. As the police jeep reached near the bus stand Bir Kalan, constable Nasib Singh of police station, Sunam produced ruqa from the Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Sunam concerning the death of Mohinder Singh injured in the Hospital on 20.2.1989 at 1.00 p.m. where Mohinder Singh injured was earlier on admitted. On the basis of the said ruqa the offence was converted to one under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. SI Gian Singh along with other police officials then went to Civil Hospital, Sunam, prepared inquest report and sent the dead body for postmortem examination through constables Gurdev Singh and Gurmit Singh. Thereafter the said SI went to the spot and lifted blood stained earth from near the spot which was duly sealed and taken into possession, through seizure memo. He also prepared rough site plan of the place of occurrence and recorded the statements of the witnesses. Nachhattar Singh appellant was arrested on 26.2.1989. In pursuance of his disclosure statement Nachhattar Singh appellant got recovered Gandasa which was blood stained concealed in Kotha Turi adjoining his house. After completion of the investigation, Nachhattar Singh appellant and Darshan Singh (since acquitted) were challaned and tried as Mawa Singh, Gurdev Singh, Labh Singh and Bhaura Singh were murdered before the commencement of the trial. After obtaining the report, the learned trial Court vide its order dated 12.1.1990 framed charge under Section 302 of the I.P.C. against Nachhattar Singh and under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against Darshan Singh. Nachhattar Singh appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated earlier whereas Darshan Singh accused was acquitted by the learned trial Court.

On 20.2.1989, Dr. V.K. Sobat, conducted medicolegal examination of Nikki PW at 7.15 p.m. and found the following injury on her person :

Pinkish contusion 5 cms x 3 cms on the front of right upper arm in the middle."

This injury in the opinion of the said doctor could be caused by a blunt weapon. This injury was simple in nature and it could be caused from the reverse side of a Gandasa within a probable duration of eight hours, as per opinion of the said doctor.

Dr. J.S. Bhullar, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Mohinder Singh on 21.2.1989 and found the following injuries.

Incised wound 2" x 1/2 x bone deep on the right occipito parietal region near the midline. The anterior end was near the midline while the posterior end was 1" away from he midline. On dissection of the wound the subcutaneous tissue was filled with clotted blood. The bone underneath was cut. The underlying brain matter and memberanes were cut in the dimension 1 1/4 x 1/4". The clotted blood was present all around it.

Abrasion 1" x 1/2" on the right scapular region.

Abrasion 1" x 1/4" x 1/2" above injury No. 2.

Abrasion 1" x 1/4" on the spine of right scapular in its middle part.

Contusion 4" x 2" on the right scapular region.

Punctured wound 1/2" x 1/2" x bone deep on the outer side of left elbow.

Abrasion 11/2" x 1" on the back and middle of left arm.

Abrasion 1/2" x 1/2" 1/2" in front of injury No. 7.

Contusion 4" x 2" on the outer and middle part of left arm.

Multiple abrasion varying in sizes from 1/2" x 1/4" 1/4" x 1/4" in an area of 2" x 2" just above the wrist of left.

On dissection clotted blood was present in the sub cutaneous and muscles and both bone of the forearm were fractured in its lower part.

Punctured wound 3/4" x 1/4" x bone deep on the outer side of left elbow.

Thirteen abrasions measuring 1" x 1/4" 1/2" x 1/4" in an area of back of right forearm and right hand. The whole area was contused.

Contusion in an area of 1" x 1" at the junction of upper 2/3 and lower 1/3 of right leg. On dissection Tibia and fibula were fractured underneath.

Incised wound 3/4" x 1/4" x bone deep on the inner and middle part of right leg.

Lacerated wound 1" x 3/4" on the front and middle of right leg.

Abrasion varying in size from 1/2" x 1/4" to 1/4" x 1/4" in an area of 3" x 2" on the front and upper part of right leg.

Incised wound 3/4" x 1/2" x bone deep on the left leg at the junction of upper 1/3rd and lower 2/3rd.

Incised wound 1" x 1/4" x bone deep on the front and middle of left leg.

Multiple abrasion 1/2" x 1/41/2" x 1/6" in sizes in the lower and inner part of left leg.

Death in the opinion of the said doctor was due to shock and haemorrhage, as a result of multiple injuries. Injury No. 1 was individually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. In the opinion of the said doctor injury No. 1 i.e injury on the head of the deceased could be caused with a Gandasa from its reverse side where as injuries No. 6 and 11 could be caused with Ghops.

The learned counsel for the parties were heard.

According to the ocular account given in Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs, the occurrence took place at about 11 or 12 noon on 20.2.1989. After the occurrence Kewal Singh PW and his father Gurdial Singh went on the scooter to their house and brought tractor trolley in which Kewal Singh and Gurdial Singh took Mohinder Singh injured to Civil Hospital, Sunam, where he died. Meanwhile Nikki PW accompanied by her uncle Dial Singh went to Police Station, Bhikhi, after covering a distance of eight miles and lodged the first information report at 1.15 p.m. on the same day and a case under Sections 307/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant and his coaccused. After recording the first information report SI Gian Singh along with other police officials and Nikki PW left for Civil Hospital, Sunam. On the way at bus stop of Bir Kalan constable Nasib Singh met them and handed over ruqa to the said Sub Inspector to the effect that Mohinder Singh died at 1.30 p.m. at Civil Hospital, Sunam. The said Sub Inspector sent ruqa at 3 p.m. on that very evening to Police Station, Bhikhi for covering the offence to one under Sections 302/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code. The special report sent in this case reached the Ilaqa Magistrate at Mansa situated at a distance of 14/15 Kilometres from Police Station, Bhiki at 5.40 p.m. The first information report in this case contains all the wealth of details i.e. the names of the eyewitnesses, the names of the accused, the weapons carried by them and the manner in which the occurrence took place. In view of the circumstances referred to above, it is quite patent that the first information report, in the instant case, has been lodged with all promptitude. These circumstances further indicate that the special report too had reached the Ilaqa Magistrate at Mansa without any undue delay.

From the evidence on the record, it is significant to note that there are strained relations between the parties who are first cousins. The enmity between the parties concerns land of Prem Singh (father''s brother of Mohinder Singh deceased) who died issueless. Possession of that land was with the complainant party and Nachhattar Singh appellant wanted to take possession of that land on the basis of Civil Court decree. Gurdial Singh father of Mohinder Singh deceased challenged that decree in the Civil Court. Thereafter hurt cases and security proceedings against the rival party were initiated culminating in the death of Mohinder Singh. The matter did not end here. Even after the present occurrence four members of the accused party namely Mewa Singh, Gurdev Singh, Labh Singh and Bhaura Singh were murdered. Gurdial Singh an eyewitness and father of Mohinder Singh deceased and Kewal Singh and Nikki PWs is also stated to have been murdered. All these facts indicate that there is grave enmity between the parties. In these circumstances the motive which is a double edged weapon, cannot be said to be entirely on the side of the accused party to commit the crime.

In view of the enmity between the parties, it would be prudent to seek independent corroboration on material aspects of the prosecution story, concerning the ocular account given by Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs so as to separate grain from the chaff or to disentangle truth from falsehood. The ocular account in the instant case rests on the testimony of two close relations of Mohinder Singh deceased i.e. Nikki PW real sister and Kewal Singh real brother of the deceased. The first and the foremost question which arises for determination is as to whether the presence of Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs at the spot at the time of the occurrence is natural, probable and convincing. Both these witnesses have given cogent and plausible reasons for their presence at the spot at the time of the occurrence. Nikki PW.4 has given consistent version. According to her marriage of Mohinder Singh deceased was solemnised only about eight days prior to the present occurrence. On the morning of the occurrence she and her brother Mohinder Singh went on a scooter to village Khiwa Khurd in order to meet their sister Palo who was married there. After meeting their sister Palo both Mohinder Singh deceased and Nikki PW left for their village on a scooter. On the way back at about 11 or 12 noon Mohinder Singh since deceased and his sister Nikki were returning to their village when they were way laid by the present appellant, his brothers Darshan Singh, Mewa Singh, Labh Singh and Gurdev Singh and Bhaura Singh sister''s son of the appellant. On hearing alarm Kewal Singh PW and his father Gurdial Singh who were working in their nearby field known as Maraliwala came there. Thus presence of both Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs at the spot at the time of the occurrence is quite natural, probable and convincing.

The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant that it is a case of blind murder of that Mohinder Singh who did not know how to drive a scooter, fell down and received injuries as a result of the accident, is a cock and bull story, which does not inspire any confidence and,we have not the least hesitation in rejecting the defence plea set up by the appellant in the instant case. The occurrence took place in broad day light. Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs produced by the prosecution who are close relations of the accused party had witnessed the same. Thus there does not seem to be any chance of mistaken identity about the real culprits.

Faced with this situation, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that Darshan Singh brother and coaccused of the present appellant had been acquitted by the learned trial Court on the basis of contradiction of ocular account with the medical evidence and on same evidence it would not be safe to base conviction of Nachhattar Singh appellant.

The learned trial Court gave benefit of doubt to Darshan Singh accused mainly on the ground that out of the injuries of Mohinder Singh deceased there were only two punctured wounds and one lacerated wound which could be caused by Ghops. Three of the members of the accused party were stated to be armed with Ghops including Darshan Singh accused. The other two namely Mewa Singh and Gurdev Singh are stated to have been murdered after the present occurrence. Nikki PW who is the first informant introduced for the first time during the trial that Darshan Singh accused had given a blow with a Ghop on the left side of the elbow of Mohinder Singh deceased which fact is conspicuous by its absence from the first information report lodged by Nikki PW. The trial Court also took into consideration that five of the accused are real brothers and their coaccused Bhaura Singh is their sister''s son and in view of the established enmity between the parties, innocent names could be introduced without any difficulty rightly gave benefit of doubt to Darshan Singh accused, and acquitted him.

The ocular account concerning the role attributed to Nachhattar Singh appellant on the material aspects of the prosecution case has been consistent throughout. On seeing Mohinder Singh deceased and his sister Nikki PW coming back on scooter the accused party which was variously armed came out of their hiding place. Nachhattar Singh appellant was armed with a Gandasa whereas other members of the accused party were either armed with Ghops or dangs. Nachhattar Singh appellant raised lalkara that he would teach a lesson to Mohinder Singh for not giving possession of the land. In order to save his life Mohinder Singh threw away the scooter and started running. He was, however, surrounded by the accused party in the field of Maghar Singh. Nachhattar Singh opened the attack and gave a Gandasa blow from its sharp side on the head of Mohinder Singh who fell down on receipt of the said injury. Medical evidence on the record shows an incised wound on the right occipital parietal region near the midline. The bone underneath the said injury was cut and the underlying brain matters and membranes were cut. The nature and extent of head injury reveals that the same could be caused by heavy cutting weapon like Gandasa. According to the ocular account after Mohinder Singh fell down on the ground on receipt of the head injury all the accused gave further injuries to the deceased. Injury No. 15 in the opinion of the doctor could be caused from the reverse side of Gandasa. Besides width of other incised injuries i.e. injury Nos. 14, 17 and 18 are similar to the width of injury No. 1 on the head of the deceased referred to above. All these injuries could be caused by Nachhattar Singh appellant who alone was armed with gandasa, a sharp edged weapon.

The medical evidence on the record further shows a pinkish contusion 5 cm x 3 cm on the front of the right upper arm of Nikki PW, which injury according to Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs was received when Nachhattar Singh accused while running away gave a Gandasa blow to Nikki PW. There is discrepancy about the manner in which Nikki PW received the said injury. According to Nikki PW she received the said injury from the right side of the Gandasa whereas, according to Kewal Singh PW the said injury was received by her at the hands of Nachhattar Singh appellant from the reverse side of the Gandasa. We would prefer the statement of Kewal Singh PW on this point as the same finds independent corroboration from the medical evidence on the record. The possibility that the injury of Nikki PW could be selfsuffered is less as opined by Dr. V.K. Sobat who had medically examined Nikki PW. Opinion of Dr. J.S. Bhullar on this point to the contrary, who did not examine Nikki PW, cannot be preferred to the opinion given by Dr. V.K. Sobat. Thus the medical evidence on the record lends independent corroboration to the ocular account given by Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs, as far as presence and participation of Nachhattar Singh appellant in the main occurrence is concerned.

As already discussed in the earlier part of the judgment we are satisfied that the first information report in this case has been lodged with all promptitude and mere omission on the part of SI Gian Singh in not getting Nikki PW immediately medically examined at Primary Health Centre, Bhikhi and the fact that she was examined at Civil Hospital, Sunam (which is in Sangrur district) would hardly make any material difference particularly when on learning about the death of her brother at Sunam, it would be quite natural for Nikki PW to go to Sunam to share the grief with her father and other close relations. Rather in the circumstances of the case, it would be quite natural for the Investigating Officer to leave the Police Station to carry out further investigation in this case.

The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant that Dr. V.K. Sobat was interested in the complainant party or for that reason Mohinder Singh deceased and Nikki were taken to Civil Hospital, Sunam instead of taking them either to Civil Hospital, Mansa or Primary Health Centre, Bhikhi is hardly tenable. There is no reliable material on the record that Dr. V.K. Sobat was either interested or was under the influence of the complainant party. Taking into consideration the fact that distances of place of occurrence from Mansa or Sunam would be almost equal and the anxiety on the part of the close relations of Mohinder Singh deceased like Kewal Singh PW and Gurdial Singh to save the life of Mohinder Singh, it cannot be reasonably inferred that the complainant party brought Mohinder Singh injured or subsequently got Nikki PW examined at Sunam with any ulterior motive.

It was further submitted on behalf of the appellant that according to Kewal Singh PW police recovered turban and Parna from the house of Nachhattar Singh, whereas, according to the Investigating Officer no Parna was found and only turban was taken into possession from the spot on the next date of the occurrence. Such like discrepancies pale into insignificance, in view of the fact that the testimony of the witnesses was recorded after about four years of the occurrence. Kewal Singh himself is facing trial in a murder case and was brought to the trial Court from Central Jail, Sangrur. The learned trial Court rightly did not place any reliance on the recovery of Parna or the turban and weapons of offence in this case.

The argument advanced on behalf of the appellant that no injury was received either by Kewal Singh PW, or his father Gurdial Singh from the accused who were their arch enemies and the accused party had as much grievance against Kewal Singh PW and Gurdial Singh as against Mohinder Singh deceased is devoid of any merit. Mohinder Singh deceased had been encircled by the accused party and they caused injuries to him which subsequently resulted in his death. In these circumstances mere fact that the accused party did not cause any injury to Kewal Singh PW or Gurdial Singh would not in any manner be sufficient to disbelieve the ocular account given by Kewal Singh and Nikki PWs particularly when it is the case of the prosecution that both Kewal Singh PW and Gurdial Singh watched the occurrence from some distance and merely raised alarm to save Mohinder Singh at the hands of the accused party.

No other point has been urged.

Taking into consideration the overall circumstances of the case, the ocular account given by Nikki and Kewal Singh PWs concerning the presence and participation of Nachhattar Singh appellant is credit worthy. The same reads consistent with the first information report which has been lodged with all promptitude and finds independent corroboration from the medical and other circumstantial evidence on the record.

For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this appeal and upholding the order of conviction and sentence passed by learned trial Court against the appellant, this appeal is hereby dismissed.