Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -1 v. The State of Punjab & Ors.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL --- Present: Mr.Baldev Singh,Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Deepinder Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. N.S. Rapri, Advocate, for the petitioner in Crl. Revision. Ms. Gurveen H. Singh, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for the respondent-State. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. This order shall dispose of Crl. Appeal No.470-DB of 2001 filed by accused Darshan Singh against his conviction and sentence under Sections 302 and 201 IPC for committing the murder of Amrik Singh son of Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -2- Joginder Singh (complainant); and Criminal Revision No.289 of 2002 filed by complainant Joginder Singh against the acquittal of four accused, namely, Kamaljit Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur, Harinderjit Singh and Ranjit Singh. Learned counsel for the appellant Darshan Singh stated that appellant Darshan Singh had expired on 9.1.2002 when he was in custody. Learned counsel for the respondent-State has verified this fact and has placed on record the Death Certificate of Darshan Singh. In view of the afore-said fact, Crl.Appeal No.470-DB of 2001 filed by Darshan Singh has abated and the same is dismissed as such. Crl.Revision No.289 of 2002 filed by the complainant was not admitted but it was ordered to be listed for hearing along with Crl.Appeal No.470-DB of 2001. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the issue of acquittal of the afore-said four accused by the trial Court and have gone through the record of the case. In brief, the prosecution case is that Amrik Singh (deceased) son of Joginder Singh (complainant) was having strained relations with his wife Sarabjit Kaur (absconder) after the marriage, which had taken place two years prior to the occurrence. She had gone back to her parental house after staying for 4-5 months in her matrimonial home. The said Sarabjit Kaur (absconder) was having visiting terms with accused Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur, daughters of Prem Singh of village Ballowal. It is the case of the prosecution that these two accused had intervened in the negotiations for bringing about compromise between Amrik Singh and Sarabjit Kaur (absconder). It is further the case of the prosecution that on 17.4.1998 Amrik Singh left the house for pilgrimage but he did not turn up for a Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -3- month. Then complainant lodged a report of his disappearance on

18.5.1998. On 19.5.1998 complainant Joginder Singh came to know that the police of Police Station Jawalaji, District Kangra (H.P.) had recovered one human skeleton and the said skeleton was not being claimed by any one. On getting that information, he went to Jawalaji on 20.5.1998 and contacted the SHO of the said Police Station, who told him that the police had recovered one human skeleton on 27.4.1998 but the same had been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, therefore, he could collect the clothes of the deceased as well as the bones after one month. It was further stated by the complainant that after more than one month he went to Police Station, Jawalaji on 26.6.1998 where the police had handed over to him a packet containing certain bones and stated that the same belonged to his son. On

27.6.1998 the complainant performed the last rites of the said bones. Subsequently, after three days, on 1.7.1998 Joginder Singh (complainant) contacted Rattan Singh, a resident of Gandhi Nagar, Banga, who was his relative, who told him that he had seen Amrik Singh on 17.4.1998 at about

6.00 PM at Bus Stand, Banga in the company of accused Kamaljit Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur and at that time one more unidentified person was with them. He further told the complainant that Amrik Singh (deceased) had told him that they were waiting for accused Darshan Singh (now deceased) and his daughter Sarabjit Kaur (absconder) as the talk for compromise was to be continued and the matter had to be finished. After knowing the said fact, complainant contacted accused Kamaljit Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur and Darshan Singh to know as to what had happened to his son Amrik Singh, but they did not give any satisfactory reply. Then on 2.7.1998 the complainant moved an application to the police. Thereafter, on 15.7.1998 when he was Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -4- present in the house, one Kashmir Singh son of Karam Singh of village Moranwali (PW) came to his house at about 7.00 PM and told him that accused Darshan Singh and his daughter Sarabjit Kaur (absconder) accompanied by accused Sarbjit Kaur and Kamaljit Kaur came to his house one day earlier and all the four persons had confessed before him that on

17.4.1998 at about 8.00 PM they had committed the murder of Amrik Singh in the area of village Gobindpur, P.S. Banga because the deceased was not willing to divorce Sarabjit Kaur (absconder). On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, FIR (Ex.PD/3) was registered against the aforesaid five accused on 15.9.1998 under Sections 302/201/34 IPC at Police Station Banga. After investigation, the police filed challan against four accused, namely, Kamaljit Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur, Harinderjit Singh and Ranjit Singh and they were initially charged under Sections 302/201/34 IPC. However, during the course of trial, Darshan Singh (now deceased) and his daughter Sarabjit Kaur (absconder), wife of Amrik Singh (deceased), were also summoned as additional accused. Pursuant thereto, only Darshan Singh had appeared while Sarabjit Kaur was declared Proclaimed Offender. Thereafter, all the five accused were charge-sheeted under Sections 302/201/34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses . PW1-Dr. Suresh Sankhyan, who gave his report about skeleton (Ex.PB); PW2-Lashkar Singh, ASI is the witness of recovery of gold chain etc.; PW3-Kashmir Singh is the witness of alleged extra-judicial confession made before him by accused Darshan Singh, Sarabjit Kaur (absconder), Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur; PW3/A is Swami Ram, ASI, who had Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -5- recovered the skeleton and other clothes; PW4-Partap Singh, ASI and PW5- Ajit Singh, Chowkidar had proved the recovery memos Ex.PG and Ex.PH; PW6-Rattan Singh is a witness of last seen. He had seen Amrik Singh (deceased) in the company of accused Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur; PW7-Buta Singh, Draftsman of the scaled site-plan (Ex.PJ); PW8-Kashmir Singh is the witness before whom the alleged extra-judicial confession was made by accused Darshan Singh, Sarabjit Kaur (absconder), Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur; PW9-Charanjit Kaur and PW10-Hans Raj, the formal witnesses and PW11-Jasbir Singh, the Investigating Officer. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied all the circumstances appearing against them and pleaded false implication. The version put forth by accused Kamaljit Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur, Harinderjit Singh and Ranjit Singh was that they were innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They further stated that they did not suffer any disclosure statement and their signatures were obtained on some blank papers, and no recovery, as alleged, was made pursuant to any such disclosure statement. Accused Darshan Singh took the plea that in this case he has been falsely implicated and his daughter Sarbjit Kaur (absconder) was married to Amrik Singh (deceased) and both of them were living happily. After the death of Amrik Singh, his daughter started living with him and when she demanded her husband's share in the property of Joginder Singh (complainant), he falsely implicated him in this case. However, all the accused did not lead any evidence in defence. The trial Court after appreciating the evidence available on the record and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -6- convicted only accused Darshan Singh, as indicated above, and acquitted all the other accused. Against acquittal of the said accused, the instant criminal revision has been filed by the complainant. The learned trial Court has acquitted Harinderjit Singh and Ranjit Singh on the basis of admission made by PW2/A-Joginder Singh (complainant) in his cross-examination where he had admitted that he did not know Harinderjit Singh and Ranjit Singh. He did not name them as accused in any application moved by him before the police. He did not mention their names in the application moved by him in the High Court. These two accused were implicated in the case only on the basis of extra- judicial confession alleged to have been made before PW8-Kashmir Singh. It has been stated by Kashmir Singh that Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur accompanied by two other persons came to him, who were sitting in the car. Merely on the basis that these two accused were challaned, therefore, the trial Court disbelieved the said evidence, including the recovery effected from these accused, and given them the benefit of doubt. We do not find any illegality or perversity in the acquittal of these two accused by the trial Court. The learned trial Court has further acquitted Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur by giving them the benefit of doubt while not relying upon the evidence of extra-judicial confession alleged to have been made by them before Kashmir Singh. The only allegation against these two accused was that they were mediators in the alleged compromise between Darshan Singh and his daughter Sarabjit Kaur (absconder) wife of Amrik Singh (deceased). It has been found that actually the extra-judicial confession was made by Darshan Singh and his daughter Sarabjit Kaur (absconder). As far as these Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -7- two accused are concerned, they did not make any extra-judicial confession. The trial Court has also not relied upon the evidence of PW6-Rattan Singh, who was a witness of last seen. It has been held that though both the accused were seen on 17.4.1998 at Bus Stand, Banga with deceased Amrik Singh, but the deceased stated to have replied about the reason of his standing there as he was waiting for Darshan Singh and his wife Sarabjit Kaur for compromise. The trial Court while coming to the conclusion that merely because Kamaljit Kaur and Sarbjit Kaur were standing at Bus Stand, Banga with deceased Amrik Singh, it cannot be presumed that they were present there for committing the alleged offence. It has been further held that there was no motive for them to commit the murder of Amrik Singh. By giving all these reasonings, the trial Court has acquitted accused Kamaljit Kaur, Sarbjit Kaur, Harinderjit Singh and Ranjit Singh. In our opinion, the trial Court has rightly acquitted the said four accused while observing that against them the guilt has not established beyond shadow of reasonable doubt. We do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment of the trial Court. In our view, from the evidence on record, no other view is possible. Hence, criminal revision is also dismissed. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 03, 2010 ( MOHINDER PAL ) JUDGE Crl.Appeal No.47-DB of 2001 -8-