Rasham Singh vs State of Punjab

M.L. Singhal, J. (Oral)

This Crl. Misc. petition has been filed by Satnam Singh whereby he has prayed direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to entrust the investigation of case FIR No. 55, dated 27.4.1996 under Section 324/34 IPC at PS Sadar Muktsar to some higher ranking officer.

It is averred by Satnam Singh that on 27.4.1996, parliamentary elections were going on in village Baja Mararh (formerly within the jurisdiction of PS Muktsar and now within the jurisdiction or PS Bariwala) and during the course when the casting of votes was going on, his brother Resham Singh observed that respondents 4 to 6 were coercing people to vote in favour of the candidate in whose favour they desired them to vote. Resham Singh objected to their coercing people and not allowing them to exercise their franchise freely. Scuffle ensued. Nothing tangile, however, happened. On the night of 27.4.1996, Resham Singh was attacked by respondents 4 to 6. With regard to the attack upon Resham Singh by respondents 4 to 6, case FIR No. 55, dated 27.4.1996 was registered at PS Sadar Muktsar under Section 324/34 IPC. It is averred by Satnam Singh that the doctor who performed medicolegal examination at GGS Medical College Hospital, Faridkot on 28.4.1996, found the following injuries on the person of Resham Singh:

Incised wound 5x2.5 cms. present on the back of the Rt. forearm 5 cms. below the Rt. elbow joint, obliquely placed, clotted blood present in the wound and margins of wound, margins are red and swollen. Adv. Xray.

Incised wound 4x1.5 cms. present on the posteromedia side of Rt. forearm, wound is elliptical in shape, obliquely placed, extending to Rt. wrist joint, clotted blood is present in the wound and along the margins, margins are red and swollen. Adv. Xray.

In the opinion of the doctor, these injuries were the result of sharp weapon. After injuries 1 and 2 were xrayed, the doctor sent supplementary report to S.H.O., PS Bariwala, Annexure P1, which is to the effect that the Xray of the right forearm disclosed fracture of ulna at the elbow and wrist. Doctor declared injuries 1 and 2 as grievous on their xray examination. Despite these injuries having been declared grievous caused by sharpedged weapon, the offence was not converted into one under section 326 IPC. It is averred that respondents 4 to 6 are moving freely and are not being arrested although the offence under section 326 IPC is nonbailable offence. Respondents 4 to 6 are feeling emboldened by the factum of their nonarrest although offence committed by them falls within the mischief of section 326 IPC and there is no surprise that they may repeat the attack.

This prayer of the petitioner has been opposed by the State of Punjab through affidavit sworn by Shri Sarabjit Singh, DSP, Muktsar urging that Resham Singh was never attacked by respondents 4 to 6 and the case was investigated by SI Puran Singh, S.H.C. Ranjit Singh PS Bariwala and Sarabjit Singh, DSP, Muktsar and during investigation, they found that Resham Singh had selfsufered the injuries and got recorded a false version before the police so as to implicate respondents 4 to 6 falsely. It was further urged that during investigation, injuries were found to be fabricated.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State of Punjab and learned counsel for the respondents No. 4 to 6.

Investigation is the domain of the police. If during investigation the police have found that the aforesaid injuries have been selfsuffered by Resham Singh with a view to falsely implicate respondents 4 to 6, this Court cannot direct them to switch over and say that these injuries had been authored by respondents 4 to 6 failing within the mischief of section 326 IPC. If the police are submitting report to the Magistrate cancelling the case FIR no. 55 under section 324/34 IPC of PS Bariwala, that would not take away the right of Satnam Singh to go in for complaint against the accused and invoke the jurisdiction of the Magistrate under section 190(a) Cr.P.C.

For the reasons given above, this Crl. Misc. petition fails and is dismissed.