State of Haryana vs Sukhdev Singh and Others

Amar Dutt, J.—On 22nd of July, 1991, FIR No.512 u/s 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was lodged in Police Station, Baragudha, at the behest of Makhan Singh son of Nand Singh PW5. According to the same, Makhan Singh was travelling in a jeep, which was being driven by Pohla Singh PW6 from Sirsa to Rori. On Buta Singh was sitting on the front seat while Makhan Singh was sitting on the rear seat of the jeep. At about 4.30-5.00 P.M. when the jeep crossed the liquor vend situated in village Alika, Sukhdev Singh, Gurdev Singh alias Guddar and Munna alias Joginder Singh were found standing in front of its gate. Gurdev Singh was holding a.315 bore rifle in his hand whereas Sukhdev Singh and Munna were armed with 12 bore guns. When the jeep crossed the liquor vend, all three of them started firing. A fire shot from.315 bore rifle hit the hoodpipe of the jeep and then the right shoulder of Makhan Singh. Shots from 12 bore guns hit the jeep on the Dala on the back side. Makhan Singh, who was injured, was removed by Buta Singh and Pohia Singh to General Hospital, Sirsa.

Makhan Singh was medico legally examined at 8.10 P.M. on the same day, by Dr.Narinder Chaudhari PW1, who forwarded intimation regarding the admission of Makhan Singh in an injured condition to the Incharge, Police Station City, Sirsa. On receipt of the intimation, ASI Janardhan PW7 went to the hospital, moved an application Ex.PC for ascertaining the opinion of the doctor about the fitness of Makhan Singh injured and ultimately recorded his statement at 9.00 P.M. on 22.7.1991. According to Makhan Singh, the motive for the incident was that some hot words had been exchanged between him and Gurdev Singh, Sukhdev Singh and Joginder Singh, at the time of auction of liquor vends in March, 1991. On the basis of the statement of Makhan Singh formal FIR was registered on 22.7.1991. Thereafter, ASI Janardhan visited the place of occurrence, prepared a rough site plan and recorded the statements of Buta Singh and Pohla Singh, Gurdev Singh and Joginder Singh were arrested on 25.7.1991 and 27.7.1991 respectively. After arresting Gurdev Singh his.315 bore rifle Ex.P2 along with two live cartridges Exs.P3 and P4 and licence Ex.P5 were was taken into possession through recovery memo Ex.PL. On 22.7.1991, shirt of Makhan Singh Ex.P1 was also taken into possession through recovery memo Ex.PM. On 31.7.1991, the jeep in which the injured and other witnesses were travelling was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PJ. After receipt of the report the investigation, a challan u/s 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, was presented against Sukhdev Singh, Gurdev Singh and Joginder Singh before the Ilaqa Magistrate, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions.

On perusal of the challan papers, the trial Court framed charge u/s 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the accused. As they pleaded not guilty to the charge, the prosecution was called upon to lead evidence in support of its case.

To bring home the charge, the prosecution examined Dr.Narinder Chaudhari PW1, Dr.S.L.Aggarwal PW2, Sunhera Singh PW3, Constable Jai Parkash PW4, Makhan Singh PW5, Pohla Singh PW6, ASI Janardhan PW7 and HC Kamaljit Singh PW8.

On completion of the prosecution evidence, the incriminating circumstances appearing in its case against the accused were put to them for obtaining their explanation. They denied all the allegations and further stated that they have been falsely implicated on account of old enmity and political considerations. They also denied their presence at the spot. To prove their stand, they examined Panna Lal DW1, Vinod Kumar DW2 and HC Kamal Singh DW3.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the case against the respondents was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and, consequently, acquitted them of the charge framed.

The State of Haryana, being aggrieved by this acquittal, has come up in appeal.

No one has put in appearance on behalf of the appellant-State. We have heard Mr.G.S.Sidhu, appearing on behalf of the respondents and Mr.Arshwinder Singh, appearing on behalf of the complainant and with their assistance have perused the record.

On behalf of the complainant our attention has been drawn to that part of the statement of Makhan Singh where he states that the bullet from.315 bore rifle had hit the jeep and then the right shoulder and, therefore, it is submitted that Gurdev Singh, who was carrying the rifle and had fired upon Makhan Singh could, at least, not have been acquitted of the charge u/s 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

This argument loses sight of the fact that the injury found on the person of Makhan Singh was described by Dr.Narinder Chaudhari as:-

There was a gutter injury measuring 4cm x 1.5cm oval shaped and muscle deep over the postero lateral and upper 1/3rd to the right inverted deltoid region. The entry margins were inverted and contained colour of the abrasions. The external margins were everted in nature. The wound was slightly obliquely placed. Corresponding shirt was torn around the injury. Direction was posterior to anterior of the wound. The wound was freshly bleeding. Severe tender was present. X-ray was advised.

Which would indicate that the bullet was still lodged in the shoulder but the result of radiological examination clearly shows that no radio opaque shadow was seen in the X-ray of right arm and scapula. In view of this, the prosecution version about Gurdev Singh having fired at and injured Makhan Singh does not inspire confidence and has rightly been rejected by the trial Court, which is because if the bullet had been recovered, it might have been necessary to have the same matched with a test bullet, which was fired from.315 bore rifle Ex.P2. This circumstance, in conjunction with the circumstance that