Kunda Singh v. Mr. V.K. Jindal, Addl. DAG, Punjab

to District and Sessions Judge, Faridkot was examined to prove FIR No.163 dated August 14th, 1979 registered in Police Station Sadar, Moga against Harnek Singh (PW-2) and the list of witnesses (Exhibit DE) to show that Sukhdev Singh uncle of Kunda Singh was the prosecution witness. Foja Singh, Assistant Sub-Inspector (DW-2) proved the First Information Report (Exhibit DA) recorded by him on August 28th, 1996 on the statement of Major Singh (Exhibit PX) against Darshan Singh under Section 304-A IPC for causing death of Jugraj Singh in a road accident. He also proved the statement of Harnek Singh (Exhibit DD) recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

It is not in dispute that Jugraj Singh met with an accident with tractor No. PB04-7986 on August 27th, 1996 and on account of the injuries sustained, he died.

The solitary point for adjudication in this case is: whether the tractor was being driven by Darshan Singh or Kunda Singh-appellant? and whether it was an accident or it was intentional act of Kunda Singh-appellant to kill Jugraj Singh?

Learned trial Judge after evaluating the evidence held in paragraph No.22 of the judgment as under:-

In the present case, there are certain circumstances which are indicative of the fact that the intention of Kunda Singh to cause death of Jugraj Singh by striking his tractor with his motor cycle is not established beyond the shadow of doubt.

A reading of the aforesaid observation would, therefore, go to show that learned trial Judge was of the opinion that there was no intention on the part of Kunda Singh-appellant to cause death of Jugraj Singh meaning thereby that it was a simple case of road accident. Since it was a road accident then at the most, it was a case of causing death by rash or negligent driving falling under Section 304-A IPC.

By examining Foja Singh Sub-Inspector- Investigator (DW-1) it has been proved by the appellant that on August 28th, 1996 Major Singh-complainant (PW-1) made his statement (Exhibit PX) which was signed by him and attested by Foja Singh. Major Singh while appearing in the witness box admitted the said statement but added that he never knew that a case was being registered against Darshan Singh. Foja Singh (DW-1) has also proved the statement of Harnek Singh (Exhibit DD), wherein also, it was stated by Harnek Singh that Jugraj Singh met with an accident with a tractor bearing No.PB04-7986 driven by Darshan Singh. Indeed, Darshan Singh was challaned for causing the accident but was acquitted by the learned trial Judge by judgment dated April 27th, 2000 because Major Singh did not support the prosecution. The complaint was filed by the complainant after ten days of the occurrence naming Kunda Singh to be the driver of the tractor. It was also stated by him that Kunda Singh after striking the tractor with motor cycle of Jugraj Singh, reversed the same and then again hit the motor cycle.

From the evidence of Foja Singh, it is proved to the hilt that at the first instance, complainant named Darshan Singh for causing the accident but after ten days, he changed the story and named the appellant as an accused.

In Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab 1993(3) Crimes 513, it was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that where there are two versions at variance, one in FIR and other in complaint, benefit of doubt should go to the accused.

So far as reversing of tractor and hitting the motor cycle of the deceased by the appellant is concerned, the said statement of complainant was not believed by the learned trial Judge as was observed by him while scanning the evidence as under:- “The allegation that the accused reversed the tractor and tried to crush Jugraj Singh is not established beyond shadow of doubt and the witnesses are at variance in context to the said act of the accused.”

Harnek Singh (PW-2) had to settle old scores with Kunda Singh. Kunda Singh's uncle Sukhdev Singh was a witness against him in a murder case bearing First Information Report No.163 dated August 14th, 1979 in which he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. In his statement before Foja Singh (Exhibit DD), he named Darshan Singh to be the driver of the offending tractor and not the appellant. The circumstances establishes that he was inimical towards Kunda Singh. There is no evidence on record to say that Investigator in any manner wanted to help the accused or had any animus against the complainant. No explanation worth the name has been put forth by the prosecution to probablise the latter version of Major Singh and to ignore the first one. It is obvious that the introduction of the appellant for causing the death of Jugraj Singh subsequently was an act of deliberation but without foundation.