Gurwinder Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bagga …… v. State of Punjab State of Punjab
Case Details
(O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 1 ) FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES IN THE HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH CRA CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.09.2025 Date of Decision: Gurwinder Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bagga ……....Appellant Versus State of Punjab State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Jatin Bansal, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, Mr. Jatin Bansal, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, for the appellant. Mr. Sidharth Attri, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sidharth Attri, AAG, Punjab. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. 1. Gurwinder Singh @ Bagga Gurwinder Singh @ Bagga assails judgment passed by judgment dated 04.02.2018 passed by learned Additional Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur he has been held Sangrur, vide which he has been held guilty of having committed offence punishable guilty of having and punishable under Sections 302 IPC and has been sentenced sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine imprisonment and also to pay a fine amounting to Rs.25,000/-. amounting to Rs.2 2. The matter arises out of FIR matter arises out of FIR No.74 dated dated 20.08.2017, under Section 30 2 IPC, Police Station Police Station Cheema, lodged at the instance of , wherein at the instance of Jagsir Singh, wherein , he alongwith his brother Jodha Singh it is stated that on 19.08.2017, he alongwith his brother Jodha Singh , he alongwith his brother Jodha Singh it is stated that on to get (deceased) and Harbans Singh had gone to village Aspal Kalan to get (deceased) and Harbans Singh had gone to (deceased) and Harbans Singh had gone to cycle, which was being driven by medicine for Jodha Singh on a motor-cycle, which was being driven by cycle, which was being driven by medicine for Jodha Singh Jodha Singh. When they were returning back at about Jodha Singh. 4.45 PM and were a rning back at about 4.45 PM and were a VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 2 ) came from opposite little short of minor canal, then Bagga Singh (accused) came from opposite little short of minor canal, then Bagga Singh little short of minor canal, then Bagga Singh cycle and stopped the same in front of them and took out an side on a motor-cycle and stopped the same in front of them and took out an cycle and stopped the same in front of them and took out an side on a motor iron rod from his motor-cycle and raised a ‘ iron rod from his motor ) to teach raised a ‘lalkara’ (exhortation) to teach Jodha Singh a lesson for having prevented Jodha Singh a lesson for in his having prevented him from selling liquor in his The complainant alleged that Bagga Singh gave a blow residential area. The complainant alleged that Bagga Singh gave a blow The complainant alleged that Bagga Singh gave a blow residential area. with iron rod on the head of Jodha Singh with an intention to kill him as a with iron rod on the head of Jodha Singh with an intention to kill him as a with iron rod on the head of Jodha Singh with an intention to kill him as a with iron rod on the head of Jodha Singh with an intention to kill him as a ngh fell down on the road and blood started oozing result of which Jodha Singh fell down on the road and blood started oozing ngh fell down on the road and blood started oozing result of which Jodha Si out of his head. The complainant and his companion (Harbans Singh) out of his head. cried The complainant and his companion (Harbans Singh) cried ran away from the spot on his not to give beatings upon which the accused ran away from the spot on his not to give beatings upon which the accused not to give beatings upon which the accused ans Singh took cycle alongwith iron rod. The complainant and Harbans Singh took cycle alongwith iron rod. The complainant and Harb motor-cycle alongwith iron rod. The complainant and Harb Jodha Singh to a private hospital and from where he was later shifted to Jodha Singh to a private hospital and from where he was later shifted to Jodha Singh to a private hospital and from where he was later shifted to Jodha Singh to a private hospital and from where he was later shifted to Amar Hospital, Patiala. However, Jodha Singh could not survive and Amar Hospital, Patiala. However, Jodha Singh could not survive and Amar Hospital, Patiala. However, Jodha Singh could not survive and Amar Hospital, Patiala. However, Jodha Singh could not survive and breathed his last at about 8.30 PM. The complainant alleged that breathed his last at about 8.30 PM. motive The complainant alleged that motive hat the accused used to sell liquor near their behind the occurrence was that the accused used to sell liquor near their hat the accused used to sell liquor near their behind the occurrence was t houses and used to keep an evil eye on the ladies of their families to which houses and used to keep an evil eye on the ladies of their families to which houses and used to keep an evil eye on the ladies of their families to which houses and used to keep an evil eye on the ladies of their families to which Jodha Singh objected and on account of the same, the accused had murdered Jodha Singh objected and on account of the same, the accused had murdered Jodha Singh objected and on account of the same, the accused had murdered Jodha Singh objected and on account of the same, the accused had murdered Jodha Singh. Jodha Singh
Facts
Pursuant to lodging of FIR, the matter was investigated by the police. 3. Pursuant to lodging of FIR, the matter was investigated by the police. Pursuant to lodging of FIR, the matter was investigated by the police. Pursuant to lodging of FIR, the matter was investigated by the police. mortem examination on the Inquest proceedings were conducted. The post-mortem examination on the Inquest proceedings were conducted. The post Inquest proceedings were conducted. The post conducted. The police visited the place dead body of Jodha Singh was got conducted. The police visited the place conducted. The police visited the place dead body of Jodha Singh was of occurrence from where blood stained of occurrence taken into soil was lifted and taken into possession. A rough site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. possession. A rough site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. possession. A rough site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. possession. A rough site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. Gurwinder Singh @ Statements of the witnesses were recorded. Accused Gurwinder Singh @ Statements of the witnesses were recorded Statements of the witnesses were recorded Bagga was and upon interrogation, he made a as arrested on 10.09.2017 and upon interrogation, he made a and upon interrogation, he made a VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 3 ) disclosure statement (Ex.P statement (Ex.PK) pursuant to which he got recovered an iron rod ) pursuant to which he got recovered an iron rod from the disclosed place, which was taken into possession. from the disclosed place Upon further taken into possession. Upon further cycle used in commission of interrogation, accused disclosed that the motor-cycle used in commission of interrogation, accused disclosed that the motor interrogation, accused disclosed that the motor crime was already in Police Station Bhikhi crime was already in connection in Police Station Bhikhi, District Mansa in connection with another case i.e. FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 with another case i.e. FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017. accused Upon conclusion of investigation, challan was presented against the accused Upon conclusion of investigation, challan was presented against 4. Upon conclusion of investigation, challan was presented against on 27.10.2017 27.10.2017 in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sunam, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sunam who committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide order dated who committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide order dated who committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide order dated who committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 15.12.2017. . Learned Additional Sessions Judge, framed charges Sessions Judge, Sangrur, framed charges on against the accused for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC on against the accused for offence punishable under Section against the accused for offence punishable under Section 15.01.2018 to which he pleaded not guilty and 15.01.2018 pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. PWs. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 13 PWs. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 1 5. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 1 The gist of their testimonies is being briefly referred to herein under:- The gist of their testimonies is being briefly referred to herein under: The gist of their testimonies is being briefly referred to herein under: PW-1 Jagsir Singh (complainant) Jagsir Singh (complainant) while in the witness box narrated the while in the witness-box narrated the occurrence in the same manner as described by him in the FIR. He occurrence in the same manner as described by him in the FIR. He occurrence in the same manner as described by him in the FIR. He occurrence in the same manner as described by him in the FIR. He specifically stated that on the day of occurrence, when he alongwith specifically stated that on the day of occurrence, when he alongwith specifically stated that on the day of occurrence, when he alongwith specifically stated that on the day of occurrence, when he alongwith Aspal Jodha Singh and Harbans Singh was returning from village Aspal Jodha Singh and Harbans Singh was returning Jodha Singh and Harbans Singh was returning Kalan on a motor-cycle bearing registration No.PB Kalan on a motor 2210, cle bearing registration No.PB-31-N-2210, which was driven by Jodha Singh, then accused Bagga Singh came which was driven by Jodha Singh, then accused Bagga Singh came which was driven by Jodha Singh, then accused Bagga Singh came which was driven by Jodha Singh, then accused Bagga Singh came from the opposite side on a motor- from the opposite to the -cycle and raised a lalkara to the effect that he will not spare Jodha Singh, as Jodha Singh had been effect that he will not spare Jodha Singh, as Jodha Singh had been effect that he will not spare Jodha Singh, as Jodha Singh had been effect that he will not spare Jodha Singh, as Jodha Singh had been objecting to sale of liquor by the accused. objecting to sal 1 specifically stated e of liquor by the accused. PW-1 specifically stated that Bagga Singh gave a blow with an iron rod hitting the back side that Bagga Singh gave a blow with an iron rod hitting the back side that Bagga Singh gave a blow with an iron rod hitting the back side that Bagga Singh gave a blow with an iron rod hitting the back side of head of Jodha Singh on account of which he fell on the road and of head of Jodha Singh on account of which he fell on the road and of head of Jodha Singh on account of which he fell on the road and of head of Jodha Singh on account of which he fell on the road and started bleeding from his head and when he (complainant) and started bleeding from his head and when he (complainant) and started bleeding from his head and when he (complainant) and started bleeding from his head and when he (complainant) and s Singh raised alarm, the accused ran away from the spot. Harbans Singh raised alarm, the accused ran away from the spot. Harban VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 4 ) Harbans Singh, who was also with the complainant at the time of PW-2 Harbans Singh, who was also with the complainant at the time of Harbans Singh, who was also with the complainant at the time of Harbans Singh, who was also with the complainant at the time of occurrence, stated about the occurrence identically as stated by PW- occurrence, stated about the occurrence identically as stated by PW occurrence, stated about the occurrence identically as stated by PW occurrence, stated about the occurrence identically as stated by PW He further added that the accused even gave kick 1 Jagsir Singh. He further added that the accused even gave kick He further added that the accused even gave kick 1 Jagsir Singh blows to the deceased. blows to the deceased. Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, PW-3 Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, stated that he was comprised in the Medical Board which Sunam, stated that he was comprised in the Medical Board which stated that he was comprised in the Medical Board which Sunam had conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of had conducted post Jodha mortem examination on the dead body of Jodha Singh. He proved post-mortem report as Ex.P Singh. He , wherein injuries mortem report as Ex.PE, wherein injuries found on the dead body have been described and it has been opined found on the dead body have been described and it has been opined found on the dead body have been described and it has been opined found on the dead body have been described and it has been opined that the cause of death was hemorrhage that the cause of death was and shock, which was hemorrhage and shock, which was death in ordinary course of nature. sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. sufficient PW-4 Baldev Singh, retired Inspector, Baldev Singh, retired Inspector, stated that on 20.08.2017, he was stated that on 20.08.2017, he was Cheema and on the said day, posted as SI/SHO at Police Station Cheema and on the said day, posted as SI/SHO at Police Station posted as SI/SHO at Police Station when he alongwith other police officials were patrolling near the when he alongwith other police officials were patrolling near the when he alongwith other police officials were patrolling near the when he alongwith other police officials were patrolling near the hen Jagsir Singh approached them and got bus-stand Cheema, then Jagsir Singh approached them and got hen Jagsir Singh approached them and got bus on the basis of which formal FIR recorded his statement Ex.PA on the basis of which formal FIR on the basis of which formal FIR recorded his statement Ex.PA Ex.PA/2 was recorded. He stated with regard to Ex.PA/2 preparation of was recorded. He stated with regard to the preparation of inquest report (Ex.PF) and also deposed with regard to his visit to inquest report (Ex.PF) and also deposed with regard to his visit to inquest report (Ex.PF) and also deposed with regard to his visit to inquest report (Ex.PF) and also deposed with regard to his visit to the place of occurrence and conducting investigation in the matter. the place of occurrence and conducting investigation in the matter. the place of occurrence and conducting investigation in the matter. PW-5 ASI Joga Singh stated that on 20.08.2017, he was present alongwith ASI Joga Singh stated that on 20.08.2017, he was present alongwith 20.08.2017, he was present alongwith plainant had approached them SI/SHO Baldev Singh when the complainant had approached them SI/SHO Baldev Singh when the com SI/SHO Baldev Singh when the com . He stated in corroboration and got recorded his statement (Ex.PA). He stated in corroboration and got recorded his statement (Ex.PA) and got recorded his statement (Ex.PA) 4 Baldev Singh and proved various to the statement of PW-4 Baldev Singh and proved various 4 Baldev Singh and proved various to the statement of PW documents and memos prepared during the course of investigation. documents and memos prepared during the course of investigation. documents and memos prepared during the course of investigation. PW-6 Gurjit Singh, Patwari Halqa Togawal, proved the scaled site plan Gurjit Singh, Patwari Halqa Togawal, proved the scaled site plan Togawal, proved the scaled site plan Ex.PO prepared by him. Ex.PO prepared by him. PW-7 ASI Gurmail Singh , who had conducted investigation in case FIR ASI Gurmail Singh, who had conducted investigation in case FIR , who had conducted investigation in case FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police ng to Station Bhikhi, produced the original register of FIR pertaining to Station Bhikhi, produced the original register of FIR pertaini Station Bhikhi, produced the original register of FIR pertaini FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017. He FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 cycle bearing He stated that motor-cycle bearing VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 5 ) 7881, being case property in the said case, registration No.PB-31-N-7881, being case property in the said case, 7881, being case property in the said case, registration No. was taken into possession by him from Satnam Singh on was taken into possession by him from Satnam Singh on was taken into possession by him from Satnam Singh on was taken into possession by him from Satnam Singh on 20.08.2017. 20.08.2017. PW-8 HC Gurdarshan Singh HC Gurdarshan Singh, apart from producing the original register , apart from producing the original register 10.09.2017, No.19 pertaining to Police Station Bhikhi, stated that on 10.09.2017, No.19 pertaining to Police Station Bhikhi No.19 pertaining to Police Station Bhikhi when he was posted as MHC at Police Station Bhikhi, ASI Joga when he was posted as MHC at Police Station Bhikhi, ASI Joga when he was posted as MHC at Police Station Bhikhi, ASI Joga when he was posted as MHC at Police Station Bhikhi, ASI Joga Singh alongwith accused Gurwinder Singh came to him and on the Singh alongwith accused Gurwinder Singh came to him and on th Singh alongwith accused Gurwinder Singh came to him and on th Singh alongwith accused Gurwinder Singh came to him and on th said day, motor-cycle bearing registrati said 7881 was cycle bearing registration No.PB-31-N-7881 was already lying in the police malkhana in connection with case FIR already lying in the police malkhana in connection with case FIR already lying in the police malkhana in connection with case FIR already lying in the police malkhana in connection with case FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017. No.92 dated 18.08.2017 produced Mukesh Kumar, Junior Assistant, Office of SDM, Mansa, produced Mukesh Kumar, Junior Assistant, Office of SDM, Mansa, PW-9 Mukesh Kumar, Junior Assistant, Office of SDM, Mansa, cycle bearing No.PB- the record pertaining to registration of motor-cycle bearing No.PB the record pertaining to registration of motor the record pertaining to registration of motor 31-N N-7881 and stated that the said motor cycle was registered in the 7881 and stated that the said motor-cycle was registered in the name of Satnam Singh. name of Satnam Singh. PW-10 HC Ravel Singh stated that he was posted as MHC at Police Station HC Ravel Singh stated that he was posted as MHC at Police Station he was posted as MHC at Police Station He tendered into evidence his affidavit Cheema on 20.08.2017. He tendered into evidence his affidavit He tendered into evidence his affidavit Cheema on Ex.PW-10/A, wherein he deposed Ex.PW with regard to the case property 10/A, wherein he deposed with regard to the case property having been deposited in the malkhana and that the same had not having been deposited in the malkhana and that the same had not having been deposited in the malkhana and that the same had not having been deposited in the malkhana and that the same had not been tampered with. been tampered with. PW-11 Constable Sukhdarshan Singh Constable Sukhdarshan Singh also tendered his affidavit PW 11/A also tendered his affidavit PW-11/A in evidence, wherein he deposed with regard to deposit of a parcel in evidence, wherein he deposed with regard to deposit of a parcel in evidence, wherein he deposed with regard to deposit of a parcel in evidence, wherein he deposed with regard to deposit of a parcel containing blood stained earth in the office of FSL, Mohali and also containing blood stained earth in the office of FSL, Mohali and also containing blood stained earth in the office of FSL, Mohali and also containing blood stained earth in the office of FSL, Mohali and also as regards deposit of an iron rod. as regards deposit of an iron rod. 20.08.2017, he was present ASI Karam Singh stated that on 20.08.2017, he was present ASI Karam Singh stated that on PW-12 ASI Karam Singh stated that on stand Cheema, when alongwith SI/SHO Baldev Singh at bus-stand Cheema, when alongwith SI/SHO Baldev Singh alongwith SI/SHO Baldev Singh complainant Jagsir Singh came there and got recorded his statement complainant Jagsir Singh came there and got recorded his statement complainant Jagsir Singh came there and got recorded his statement complainant Jagsir Singh came there and got recorded his statement Ex.PA. He stated with regard to the investigation conducted in the Ex.PA. He stated with regard to the investigation conducted in the Ex.PA. He stated with regard to the investigation conducted in the Ex.PA. He stated with regard to the investigation conducted in the matter by the Investigating Officer, matter by the Investigating Officer aving been associated with him having been associated with him and broadly proved various documents prepared during the course and broadly proved various documents prepared during the course and broadly proved various documents prepared during the course and broadly proved various documents prepared during the course of investigation, which bear his attestation as well. of investigation, which bear his attestation as well. of investigation, which bear his attestation as well. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 6 ) PW-13 Dr. Arun Bansal 19.08.2017, he was posted as Senior Dr. Arun Bansal stated that on 19.08.2017, he was posted as Senior 19.08.2017, he was posted as Senior Patiala when Jodha Singh had Resident Doctor at Amar Hospital, Patiala when Jodha Singh had Resident Doctor at Amar Hospital, Resident Doctor at Amar Hospital, been brought to the said hospital in serious condition. He stated that been brought to the said hospital in serious condition. He stated that been brought to the said hospital in serious condition. He stated that been brought to the said hospital in serious condition. He stated that the patient was operated upon, but could not survive and was the patient was operated upon, but could not survive and was the patient was operated upon, but could not survive and was the patient was operated upon, but could not survive and was declared dead at about 8.30 PM. declared dead at about 6. as Upon closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused was Upon closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of Upon closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he pleaded false recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he pleaded false recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he pleaded false recorded in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he pleaded false implication. . The accused took a plea that in fact cycle bearing The accused took a plea that in fact the motor-cycle bearing had already been taken into possession by the registration No.PB-31-N-7881 had already been taken into possession by the had already been taken into possession by the registration No. police in connection with FIR No.92 dated police in connection wi and that the police th FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 and that the police cycle in the present had falsely shown the involvement of the said motor-cycle in the present had falsely shown the involvement of the said motor had falsely shown the involvement of the said motor falsely implicated him. The accused, however, did not case and had, thus, falsely implicated him. The accused, however, did not falsely implicated him. The accused, however, did not case and had lead any evidence in his defence. lead any evidence in his defence. 7. The learned trial Court, upon appraisal of evidence on record The learned trial Court, upon the evidence on record, held that the d led sufficient evidence to establish the charge of murder prosecution had led sufficient evidence to establish the charge of murder d led sufficient evidence to establish the charge of murder prosecution ha consequently, while holding him guilty of having against the accused and consequently, while holding him guilty of having consequently, while holding him guilty of having against the accused and committed offence under Section 302 IPC, committed offence under Section life 302 IPC, sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment vide impugned judgment. imprisonment vide impugned judgment. 8.
Legal Reasoning
As far as ocular version is concerned, we find that the manner of occurrence 14. As far as ocular version is concerned, we find that the manner of occurrence As far as ocular version is concerned, we find that the manner of occurrence As far as ocular version is concerned, we find that the manner of occurrence as stated by the complainant (PW-1 Jagsir Singh) while in the witness as stated by the complainant (PW is Jagsir Singh) while in the witness-box is absolutely in tune with the version got recorded in the FIR. His statement is absolutely in tune with the version got recorded in the FIR. His statement is absolutely in tune with the version got recorded in the FIR. His statement is absolutely in tune with the version got recorded in the FIR. His statement is 2 Harbans Singh, who has also corroborated from the statement of PW-2 Harbans Singh, who has also corroborated from the statement of PW also corroborated from the statement of PW ffect that on stated identically on all the material aspects of the case to the effect that on stated identically on all the material aspects of the case to the e stated identically on all the material aspects of the case to the e VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 10 ) the day of occurrence, when he alongwith the day of occurrence, when the he alongwith deceased - Jodha Singh and the complainant - Jagsir Singh were returning from complainant , they were returning from village Aspal Kalan, they were waylaid by the accused who had come from the opposite side on a were waylaid by the accused who had come from the opposite side on a were waylaid by the accused who had come from the opposite side on a were waylaid by the accused who had come from the opposite side on a motor-cycle and the accused cycle and the accused while raising a by saying that he will while raising a lalkara by saying that he will , as he had been objecting his sale of not spare Jodha Singh (deceased), as he had been objecting his sale of , as he had been objecting his sale of not spare Jodha Singh (deceased) liquor, had inflicted a blow on the head of the deceased with an iron rod and liquor, had inflicted a blow on the head of the deceased with an iron rod and liquor, had inflicted a blow on the head of the deceased with an iron rod and liquor, had inflicted a blow on the head of the deceased with an iron rod and spite their that when they raised alarm, he fled away from the spot. Despite their that when they raised alarm, he fled away from the spot. De that when they raised alarm, he fled away from the spot. De testimonies could not be shattered on any lengthy cross-examinations, their testimonies could not be shattered on any testimonies could not be shattered on any lengthy cross material aspect of the case. Although we do find that PW material aspect of the case Singh do find that PW-2 Harbans Singh has tried to make an improvement by saying that the accused had also given has tried to make an improvement by saying that the accused had also given has tried to make an improvement by saying that the accused had also given has tried to make an improvement by saying that the accused had also given kick blows to the deceased, but the said improvement is not of a nature kick blows to the deceased, but the said improvement is not of a nature kick blows to the deceased, but the said improvement is not of a nature kick blows to the deceased, but the said improvement is not of a nature Since the ocular version is which would demolish the case of prosecution. Since the ocular version is which would demolish the case of prosecution. which would demolish the case of prosecution. l evidence as well, we do not find any ground strengthened from the medical evidence as well, we do not find any ground l evidence as well, we do not find any ground strengthened from the medica 1 Jagsir to doubt the veracity of their statements. The mere fact that PW-1 Jagsir to doubt the veracity of their statements. The mere fact that PW to doubt the veracity of their statements. The mere fact that PW to be Singh happens to be the real brother of the deceased cannot ipso facto to be Singh happens to be the real brother of the deceased cannot Singh happens to be the real brother of the deceased cannot a ground to discard his statement, when his statement is o a ground to discard his therwise found to statement, when his statement is otherwise found to 2 Harbans be truthful and is also corroborated from the testimony of PW-2 Harbans be truthful and is also corroborated from the testimony of PW be truthful and is also corroborated from the testimony of PW Singh as well as from the medical evidence. Singh as well as from the medical evidence. Singh as well as from the medical evidence. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant also tried 15. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant also tried During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant also tried During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant also tried ting that the version of the prosecution to assail the case of prosecution by stating that the version of the prosecution ting that the version of the prosecution to assail the case of prosecution by is falsified from the fact that the motor-cycle is falsified from the fact that the motor used by the accused in the cycle used by the accused in the commission of crime in the present case commission fact already in the in the present case, was in fact already in the possession of the police in connection with possession of the police , but in connection with FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017, but cycle is a case property in another we find that even though the said motor-cycle is a case property in another cycle is a case property in another we find that even though the said motor VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 11 ) cycle was case, but nothing has been shown to this Court that the said motor-cycle was case, but nothing has been shown to this Court that the said motor case, but nothing has been shown to this Court that the said motor already in the police custody on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. already in the police custody on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. already in the police custody on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. already in the police custody on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. 19.08.2017. . Rather, from the testimony of PW ASI Gurmail Singh, who rom the testimony of PW-7 ASI Gurmail Singh, who had conducted investigation in case FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under had conducted investigation in case FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under had conducted investigation in case FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under had conducted investigation in case FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 under that the Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police Station Bhikhi, it is revealed that the Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police Station Bhikhi, Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC, Police Station Bhikhi, motor-cycle bearing registration No.PB cycle bearing registration No.PB-31 7881, being case property in 31-N-7881, being case property in the said case, was in fact taken into possession on 20.08.2017 the said case, was i.e. a day after taken into possession on 20.08.2017 i.e. a day after the present occurrence. As such, the said contention is sans the present occurrence merit and As such, the said contention is sans any merit and cannot be accepted. accepted. The material question that still survives before this Court is as to whether it 16. The material question that still survives before this Court is as to whether it The material question that still survives before this Court is as to whether it The material question that still survives before this Court is as to whether it is a case which would fall within the ambit of Section 300 IPC or it is a case is a case which would fall within the ambit of Section 300 IPC or it is a case is a case which would fall within the ambit of Section 300 IPC or it is a case is a case which would fall within the ambit of Section 300 IPC or it is a case where the of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It is a case where the of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. a single injury with an iron road on the accused is alleged to have caused a single injury with an iron road on the a single injury with an iron road on the accused is alleged to h stated to have been repeated. No head of the deceased. The injury is not stated to have been repeated. No stated to have been repeated. No head of the deceased. The injury is not attempt whatsoever is stated to have been made by the accused to cause any attempt whatsoever is stated to have been made by the accused to cause any attempt whatsoever is stated to have been made by the accused to cause any attempt whatsoever is stated to have been made by the accused to cause any be safe to infer other injury to the deceased. From the said facts, it will not be safe to infer other injury to the deceased. From the said fact other injury to the deceased. From the said fact that the injury had been caused by the accused with an intention to cause his that the injury had been caused by the accused with an intention to cause his that the injury had been caused by the accused with an intention to cause his that the injury had been caused by the accused with an intention to cause his the weapon used was a blunt edged weapon. death. As already stated, the weapon used was a blunt edged weapon. the weapon used was a blunt edged weapon. death. As already stated mortem report also shows another injury on chest, but in Although, the post-mortem report also shows another injury on chest, but in mortem report also shows another injury on chest, but in Although, the post the FIR and also in the statement IR and also in the statements of PW-1 Jagsir Singh and 1 Jagsir Singh (complainant) and 2 Harbans Singh only one blow with iron rod was inflicted. 2 Harbans Singh only one blow with iron rod was inflicted. PW-2 Harbans Singh only one blow with iron rod was inflicted. 17. Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gurmukh Singh Vs. State of Haryana, 2009 (15) Hon’ble the Apex Court in Gurmukh Singh Vs. State of Haryana, 2009 (15) Gurmukh Singh Vs. State of Haryana, 2009 (15) SCC 635 in a case of a single ‘ ’ blow resulting in death, held the in a case of a single ‘lathi’ blow resulting in death, held the ’ blow resulting in death, held the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 12 ) II IPC, while accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 304-II IPC, while accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 304 accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 304 observing as under: observing as under: “21. of the In the instant case, the occurrence had taken place at the spur of the In the instant case, the occurrence had taken place at the spur lathi moment. Only the appellant Gurmukh Singh inflicted a single lathi moment. Only the appellant Gurmukh Singh inflicte overt act. There blow. The other accused have not indulged in any overt act. There blow. The other accused have not indulged in any was no intention or pre-meditation in the mind of the appellant to meditation in the mind of the appellant to as were likely to cause death in inflict such injuries to the deceased as were likely to cause death in inflict such injuries to the deceased the ordinary course of nature. 22. On consideration of the entire evidence including the medical On consideration of the entire evidence including the medical On consideration of the entire evidence including the medical evidence, we are clearly of the view that the conviction of the evidence, we are clearly of the view that the conviction of the evidence, we are clearly of the view that the conviction of the ode, appellant cannot be sustained under section 302 Indian Penal Code, appellant cannot be sustained under section 302 Indian Pena be but the appropriate section under which the appellant ought to be but the appropriate section under which the appellant convicted is Section 304 Part II Indian Penal Code. convicted is Section 304 Part II Indian Penal 23. Before we part with the case, we would like to clearly observe that Before we part with the case, we would like to clearly observe that blow or injury, the we are not laying down that in no case of single blow or injury, the we are not laying down that in no case of single ode. accused cannot be convicted under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. accused cannot be convicted under facts and circumstances of each case In cases of single injury, the facts and circumstances of each case facts and circumstances of each case consideration before arriving at the conclusion has to be taken into consideration before arriving at the conclusion consideration before arriving at the conclusion accused should be appropriately convicted under whether the accused should be appropriately convicted under accused should be appropriately convicted under Section 302 Indian Penal Code or under Section 304 Par t II Indian Indian Penal Code or under Section 304 Part II Indian Penal Code.” , the Chamru Budhwa Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 652, the Chamru Budhwa Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 18. In Chamru Budhwa Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, and which appellant dealt a blow on the head of the deceased with a lathi and which appellant dealt a blow on the head of the deceased with a appellant dealt a blow on the head of the deceased with a proved fatal. The injury was medically opined sufficient in the ordinary proved fatal. The injury was medically opined sufficient in the ordinary proved fatal. The injury was medically opined sufficient in the ordinary proved fatal. The injury was medically opined sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death. Hon’ble Supreme Court while altering the c course to cause death. onviction Hon’ble Supreme Court while altering the conviction under Section 302 IPC to offence under Section 304 Part under Section 302 IPC observed as to offence under Section 304 Part-II IPC, observed as follows: “5. remains to consider whether the offence which he committed It now remains to consider whether the offence which he committed remains to consider whether the offence which he committed falls within the first part or the second part of Section 304 of the falls within the first part or the second part of Section 304 of the falls within the first part or the second part of Section 304 of the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 13 ) Indian Penal Code. When the fatal injury was inflicted by the Indian Penal Code. When the fatal injury was inflicted by the Indian Penal Code. When the fatal injury was inflicted by the appellant on the head of the deceased by only one blow given in the appellant on the head of the deceased by only one blow given in th appellant on the head of the deceased by only one blow given in th manner alleged by the prosecution it could as well be that the act by manner alleged by the prosecution it could as well be that the act by manner alleged by the prosecution it could as well be that the act by which death was caused was not done with the intention of causing which death was caused was not done with the intention of causing which death was caused was not done with the intention of causing death or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. death or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. death or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. ge that it was The act appears to have been done with the knowledge that it was The act appears to have been done with the knowled likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death or to likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death or to likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death within the cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death within the cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death within the meaning of Part II of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. meaning of Part II of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. 6.
Arguments
assailing the impugned judgment, Learned counsel for the appellant, while assailing the impugned judgment, assailing the impugned judgment, Learned counsel for the appellant, while submitted that it is a case where the complainant (PW submitted that is it is a case where the complainant (PW-1 Jagsir Singh) is interested none else but the real brother of the deceased and as such, was an interested none else but the real brother of the deceased and as such, was an none else but the real brother of the deceased and as such, was an accepted as gospel truth, when witness and that his statement could not be accepted as gospel truth, when witness and that his statement could not be witness and that his statement could not be admittedly there was some friction between the deceased and the accused on admittedly there was some friction between the deceased and the accused on admittedly there was some friction between the deceased and the accused on admittedly there was some friction between the deceased and the accused on account of alleged sale of liquor in the village account of alleged sale which would furnish reason of liquor in the village which would furnish reason for false implication of accused by the complainant being brother of the for false implication of accused by the complainant being brother of the for false implication of accused by the complainant being brother of the for false implication of accused by the complainant being brother of the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 7 ) Learned counsel further submitted that the falsity of the case of deceased. Learned counsel further submitted that the falsity of the case of Learned counsel further submitted that the falsity of the case of Learned counsel further submitted that the falsity of the case of cycle of the prosecution would also be evident from the fact that the motor-cycle of the prosecution would also be evident from the fact that t prosecution would also be evident from the fact that t accused shown to have been used in the present case was in fact already in accused shown to have been used in the present case was in fact already in accused shown to have been used in the present case was in fact already in accused shown to have been used in the present case was in fact already in another case i.e. FIR No.92 the possession of police in connection with another case i.e. FIR No.92 the possession of police in connection with the possession of police in connection with dated 18.08.2017. dated 18.08.2017. 9. Learned counsel also made an alternate submission that in any case even if Learned counsel also made an alternate submission that in any case even if Learned counsel also made an alternate submission that in any case even if Learned counsel also made an alternate submission that in any case even if all the allegations are taken to be correct, the offence would not fall within all the allegations are taken to be correct, the offence would not fall within all the allegations are taken to be correct, the offence would not fall within all the allegations are taken to be correct, the offence would not fall within the ambit of Section 300 IPC and at best could be said to be a case of the ambit of Section 300 IPC and at best could be said to be a case of the ambit of Section 300 IPC and at best could be said to be a case of the ambit of Section 300 IPC and at best could be said to be a case of to murder. Learned counsel, thus, prayed culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Learned counsel, thus, prayed to murder. Learned counsel, thus, prayed culpable homicide not amounting for setting aside of for setting aside of for setting aside of for setting aside of impugned impugned impugned impugned judgment and acquittal of judgment and acquittal of judgment and acquittal of judgment and acquittal of the the the the accused/appellant. accused/appellant. 10. Opposing the appeal, learned Opposing the appeal, learned State counsel submitted that it is a case State counsel submitted that it is a case wherein there are two eye there are two eye-witnesses to the occurrence 1 Jagsir to the occurrence i.e. PW-1 Jagsir Singh (complainant) and PW-2 Harbans Singh, Singh (complainant) and PW who have both stated 2 Harbans Singh, who have both stated identified the accused at the spot and since their consistently and had identified the accused at the spot and since their identified the accused at the spot and since their consistently and ha consistent ocular version is also borne out from the medical record, there is consistent ocular version is also borne out from the medical record, there is consistent ocular version is also borne out from the medical record, there is consistent ocular version is also borne out from the medical record, there is prosecution, which stands fully established no room to doubt the case of prosecution, which stands fully established prosecution, which stands fully established no room to doubt the case of from the evidence collected by the investigating agency. It has been from the evidence collected by the investigating agency. It has been from the evidence collected by the investigating agency. It has been from the evidence collected by the investigating agency. It has been cycle of the accused was submitted that even if it is assumed that the motor-cycle of the accused was submitted that even if it is assumed that the motor submitted that even if it is assumed that the motor is not involved in another case i.e. FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017, but it is not involved in another case i.e. FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 involved in another case i.e. FIR No.92 dated 18.08.2017 was in the possession of shown anywhere from record that the motor-cycle was in the possession of shown anywhere from record that the motor shown anywhere from record that the motor the police on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. on 19.08.2017 the police on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. the police on the day of occurrence in the present case i.e. 19.08.2017. Learned State counsel submitted that the factum of the accused having Learned State counsel submitted that the factum of the accused having Learned State counsel submitted that the factum of the accused having Learned State counsel submitted that the factum of the accused having inflicted a blow with an iron rod on the vital inflicted a blow with an iron rod on the part of the body i.e. on the head vital part of the body i.e. on the head VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 8 ) with such a a great force which led to death, would clearly make it a case of , would clearly make it a case of of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and not merely a case of culpable homicide not amounting to of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and not merely a case In this regard, learned State counsel has placed reliance upon murder. In this regard, learned State counsel has placed reliance upon In this regard, learned State counsel has placed reliance upon In this regard, learned State counsel has placed reliance upon Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of A.P. (2006) 11 SCC Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of A.P. (2006) 11 SCC Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of A.P. (2006) 11 SCC Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of A.P. (2006) 11 SCC 13 SCC 131, State of Rajasthan Vs. Leela Ram @ Leela Dhar (2019) 13 SCC 131 State of Rajasthan Vs. Leela Ram @ Leela Dhar ( 444, State of Rajasthan Vs. Leela Ram @ Leela Dhar ( f Rajasthan through the Secretary Vs. Kanhaiya Lal (2019) 5 SCC State of Rajasthan through the Secretary Vs. Kanhaiya Lal (2019) 5 SCC f Rajasthan through the Secretary Vs. Kanhaiya Lal (2019) 5 SCC f Rajasthan through the Secretary Vs. Kanhaiya Lal (2019) 5 SCC (2020) 9 SCC Stalin Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police (2020) 9 SCC Stalin Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police 639, Stalin Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police (2019) 6 SCC State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kalicharan & others (2019) 6 SCC State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kalicharan & others 524 and State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kalicharan & others blow, offence of murder to contend that even in a case of single blow, offence of murder to contend that even in a case of single 809, to contend that even in a case of single IPC can very well be attracted. punishable under Section 302 IPC can very well be attracted. punishable under Section 30 We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and 11. We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and We have considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court and with the assistance of learned counsel have also perused the record of the with the assistance of learned counsel have also perused the record of the with the assistance of learned counsel have also perused the record of the with the assistance of learned counsel have also perused the record of the case. it is a case of death on account of an injury allegedly having been 12. Since it is a case of death on account of an injury allegedly having been it is a case of death on account of an injury allegedly having been it is a case of death on account of an injury allegedly having been , it is apposite to first of all refer to inflicted to the deceased with an iron rod, it is apposite to first of all refer to , it is apposite to first of all refer to inflicted to the deceased The prosecution the medical evidence led by the prosecution in this regard. The prosecution the medical evidence led by the prosecution in this regard. the medical evidence led by the prosecution in this regard. andeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil has examined PW-3 Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil andeep Singh Rekhi, Medical Officer, Civil has examined PW , who was comprised in the Medical Board which had Hospital, Sunam, who was comprised in the Medical Board which had , who was comprised in the Medical Board which had Hospital, Sunam mortem examination on the dead body of Jodha Singh. mortem examination on the dead body of Jodha Singh conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Jodha Singh conducted post While proving the post-mortem report as Ex.PE, PW While proving the post 3 Dr. Chamandeep mortem report as Ex.PE, PW-3 Dr. Chamandeep his affidavit Ex.PD, wherein he Singh Rekhi tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PD, wherein he his affidavit Ex.PD, wherein he Singh Rekhi described the following injuries found on the dead body described the following injuries found on the dead body: “1. Stiched wound of 6 cm present on left parieto occipital region. On Stiched wound of 6 cm present on left parieto occipital region. On Stiched wound of 6 cm present on left parieto occipital region. On dissection underlying bone fractured. Clotted blood present. dissection underlying bone fractured. Clotted blood present. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.09.30 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CRA-D-80-2019 (O&M) ( 9 ) 2. Stiched wound of 2 cm present bilateral on lateral chest wall. On Stiched wound of 2 cm present bilateral on lateral chest wall. On Stiched wound of 2 cm present bilateral on lateral chest wall. On dissection multiple ribs fractured. Clotted blood present. dissection multiple ribs fractured. Clotted blood present. 3. Multiple abrasions present on right frontal region. Multiple abrasions present on right frontal region.” 13. PW-3 Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi Chamandeep Singh Rekhi opined that cause of death in this ca se opined that cause of death in this case was on account of and shock which is sufficient to cause death on account of hemorrhage and shock which is sufficient to cause death and shock which is sufficient to cause death examined on in ordinary course of nature. The witness was briefly cross-examined on in ordinary course of nature. The witness was in ordinary course of nature. The witness was behalf of the accused during the course of which behalf of the accused he stated that the during the course of which he stated that the possibility of injury having been received possibility of injury having been under the received due to fast driving under the influence of liquor and by fall and hitting influence of liquor and hard surface could not be ruled hitting hard surface could not be ruled out. A perusal of the post mortem report shows that an injury had been A perusal of the post-mortem report shows that an injury had been mortem report shows that an injury had been region and received by the deceased on his head i.e. on left parietal occipital region and received by the deceased on his head i.e. on left parietal occipital received by the deceased on his head i.e. on left parietal occipital that a blow with some blunt the underlying bone fractured, which indicates that a blow with some blunt the underlying bone fractured, which indicates the underlying bone fractured, which indicates edged weapon had been inflicted with great force. There is nothing on edged weapon had been inflicted with great force. There is nothing on edged weapon had been inflicted with great force. There is nothing on edged weapon had been inflicted with great force. There is nothing on As such, the to show the presence of alcohol in the dead body. As such, the to show the presence of alcohol in the dead body. record to show the presence of alcohol in the dead body. Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi on behalf of the suggestion given to the PW-3 Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi on behalf of the Dr. Chamandeep Singh Rekhi on behalf of the suggestion given to the PW accused regarding the possibility of injuries having been caused on account accused regarding the possibility of injuries having been caused on account accused regarding the possibility of injuries having been caused on account accused regarding the possibility of injuries having been caused on account of fast driving under the influence of liquor and hitting a hard surface would of fast driving under the influence of liquor and hitting a hard surface would of fast driving under the influence of liquor and hitting a hard surface would of fast driving under the influence of liquor and hitting a hard surface would not carry any relevance. Thus, we have no hesitation in not carry any relevance. affirming that it is a Thus, we have no hesitation in affirming that it is a injury inflicted to the deceased on his case of homicidal death on account of injury inflicted to the deceased on his injury inflicted to the deceased on his case of homicidal death on account of head with some blunt edged weapon. head with some blunt edged weapon.
Decision
We accordingly allow the appeal to this ext ent that the conviction of We accordingly allow the appeal to this extent that the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence of transportation for life awarded to him will be set aside, sentence of transportation for life awarded to him will be set aside, sentence of transportation for life awarded to him will be set aside, but the appellant will be convicted of having committed the offence but the appellant will be convicted of having committed the offence but the appellant will be convicted of having committed the offence of the Indian Penal Code and will be under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and will be of the Indian Penal Code and will be sentenced to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment.” sentenced to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment.” Jugut Ram Vs. The State of The aforesaid view has been reiterated in Jugut Ram Vs. The State of The aforesaid view has been reiterated in 19. The aforesaid view has been reiterated in