Palwinder Singh v. State of Punjab
FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J. 1. This
appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench
of Punjab & Haryana High Court- at Chandigarh dated
12.09.2008 in Criminal Appeal No.350-DB of 1998.
2. The case of the prosecution as projected before the
PALWINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 1123
[FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J.]
Court below was that the deceased Dr. Jasbir Singh was A
running a chemist shop in the village Wadala Banger, that on
20.08.1996 at 08:00 pm, the cousin of the deceased P.W.2
Gurmeet Singh, along with one Baldev Singh wanted to meet
the deceased, that he was proceeding from Kalanaur in his
scooter and that near Mir Kachana, near a brick kiln, they found
people gathered around on the road and learnt that somebody
was murdered. When they went to the spot P.W.2 found that
his cousin Dr. Jasbir Singh was found dead with stab wounds
and blood was oozing out. He also found the scooter belonging
to the deceased lying nearby. He further found 100 rupee c
currency notes were also lying scattered around the deceased.
P.W.2, thereafter, asked his companion Baldev Singh to remain
at the spot and proceeded to lodge a report, which came to
be registered as FIR No.115 under Section 302, 392 read with
34 IPC on 20.8.1996. D
3. P.W.11 the Assistant Sub-Inspector visited the place
of occurrence, examined the body of the deceased, prepared
the inquest report and sent the body for postmortem. He also
collected the currency notes, which were in 100 rupee
denomination, the scooter and a rope measuring about 24 E
fe~t. which was lying near the dead body. Blood stained earth
-wrs also collected from the spot.
"4. P.W.1 Dr. Kulwant Singh, conducted the postmortem
examination on the body of the deceased on 21.08.1996. F
Exhibit PA is the postmortem certificate issued by him wherein,
as many as 8 injuries were noted by him. At the instance of
P.W.14, Om Prakash, P.W.12, the Investigating Officer,
arrested four accused including the appellant on 26.08.1996.
Based on the admissible portion of the confessional statement G
of the appellant, as well as the other accused, various
recoveries were made including weapons, cash, two gold rings
with the inscription 'JSK' and one wrist watch.
5. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses and marked
PA postmortem certificate, PV and PX Report of Chemical H
1124 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013) 5 S.C.R.
A Examiner and PY and PZ report of Serologists. When the
incriminating circumstances were put against the appellant and
the other accused under Section 313, they denied the same
and pleaded that they have been falsely implicated. They also
examined D.Ws.1 and 2 on their side. P.Ws.3 and 4 were
B examined as eye-witnesses of whom P.W.4 was treated hostile.
6. Having considered the evidence of the prosecution, in
particular the version of P.Ws.1 to 4, the medical report, the
serologist report, chemical examiner's report and the recoveries
made at the instance of the accused, the trial Court found all
C the accused guilty of the offences alleged against them and
while convicting them for the said offences, imposed the
sentence of life with fine of Rs.2500/- each and in default to
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under
Section 302 read with 34 IPC. For the offence proved under
D Section 392 read with 34 IPC, sentence of 10 years rigorous
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for three months was imposed. The
sentences were directed to run concurrently.
E 7. On appeal by all the four accused, the High Court by
the judgment impugned in this appeal confirmed the conviction
and sentence imposed on the appellant and acquitted the rest
of the accused from all the charges.
8. We heard Mr. Vikas Mahajan, learned counsel for the
F appellant and Ms. Bansuri Swaraj, learned counsel for the
respondent/State. Learned counsel for the appellant mainly
contended that there were too many contradictions in the
version of P.W.3, the so-called eye-witness, that when the High
Court chose to disbelieve his version, insofar as it related to
G the other three accused on the same reasoning, it ought to have
acquitted the appellant as well. The learned counsel contended
that the arrest of the appellant based on the version of P.W.14,
was not true, that since the appellant was involved in some other
criminal case earlier, he was falsely implicated in the case on
H hand. Learned counsel contended that there was no evidence
PALWINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 1125
[FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J.]
to show that there was any matching of blood group in order to
hold that the appellant was involved in the murder of the
deceased.
9. As against the above submissions, Ms. Bansuri Swaraj,
learned counsel for the State contended that though P.W.4 was
treated hostile, his version insofar as his going along with P.W.3
to the place of occurrence and the factum of the deceased
being attacked by certain persons as stated by PW-3 was fully
corroborated and consequently the conclusion reached by the
trial Court based on the eye-witness account of P.W.3,
supported by the version of P.W.4 to that extent read along with
the medical evidence for convicting appellant and the
confirmation of the same by the High Court in the impugned
judgment, does not call for interference . ......
10. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant as well
as the respondenUState and having bestowed our serious
consideration to the case pleaded and on perusal of the
material papers including the judgment of the High Court, as
well as the trial Court, we are also convinced that the conviction
and sentence imposed on the appellant cannot be assailed.
11. The thrust of the submission of the learned counsel for
the appellant was that the whole case of the prosecution was
built upon P.W.3 and his version was wholly unreliable. The
learned counsel in support of his submission, placed reliance
upon the decisions reported in Govindaraju alias Govinda v.
State by Sriramapuram Police Station and another - (2012)
4 sec 722 paragraph 25 and La//u Manjhi and another v.
State of Jharkhand - (2003) 2 SCC 401. By relying upon the
above-said decisions, learned counsel contended that P.W.3
could not have witness the occurrence as deposed by him.
12. We perused the evidence of P.W.3. The version of
P.W.3 was that on the date of occurrence, namely, 20.08.1996,
he went to Batala to see his sister who was married in
....... ------------~~~ /
~
• ,
;2ol~(r).)t~ f1· llC'Z 6 ~ lle>l:r
1126 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [201°3] 5 S.C.R. .1
~1
!
A Sagarpura adjoining Batala, that around a,:oo p.m. he started j
from his sister's hou~e and on the .way he met P.W.4 Who ·
· reed to provide a llft to P .W .3. It 1s his further version th t
~~en both of them reached a brick kiln at Mir Kachana arou~
S.45 or 9.00 p.m. they saw the deceased as well as the
accused in a melee among whom the appellant was one of
8 them. He, however, stated that he was not able to identify the
rest of the accused. He also stated that appellant and the three
other persons were attacking the deceased by giving dagger
blows and that he saw the appell~nt giving such specific
c dagger blows on the palm of the right hand of the deceaseq,
as well as, wrist on the chest. He also stated that further dagger
blows were also inflicted upon the deceased. According to
P.W.3, he could notice the above incident with the aid of the
/ head lamp of the scooter.
D 13. In the cross-examination, he stated that the other
accused muffled their faces and he was able to mention their
names with the help of the police personnel. He also stated that .
it was 10 p.m. and, therefore, he left that place and on the next
d~y morning he first informed his family members and along
E with P.W.4 he met police officials by around 8 or 8.40 a.m. at
the place of occurrence where the body was still lying where
he a.Isa gave his statement. According to him, none of the
relatives of the deceased met him He also fairly stated that
he did not make any attempt to re~cue the deceased.
versi~~·; ·~ ·4 who was treated as hostile supported the
by 4
0 5
.w.3 upto the factum of assault on the deceased
lift wh~ch phersons near brick kiln of Mir Kachana, including th~
near Tongaes~~~nded to P.W.3 on Dera Baba Nanak Roa e
G going to village vV He also mentioned that both of them we~e
could not identi adala Banger. He, however, stated that he
deceased H fy any of the accused who were assauttin9 t
appellant.· e also expressed his inability to identifY the
PALWINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 1127
[FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J.]
15. p.W.1, Dr. Kulwant Singh identified the postmortem A
certificate issued by him as Exhibit PA and deposed that he
noticed the following injuries on the body of the deceased:
"1. An incised wound C shaped 4 cm x X cm on the
Palmer side of right wrist joint, muscle deep.
2. An incised wound 1 Y2 x X cm on the palmer side '
of right hand in the middle, muscle deep.
3. An incised penetrating (both sides) wound spindle
shaped 3 cm x 1 cm on the front of right shoulder c
joint, muscle deep.
4. An incised penetrating (both sides) wound spindle
shaped 2 Yz cm x 1 cm on right lateral side and
lower part of the chest on the interior axillaries line
17 cm from the axilla. D
On dissection underlying liyar was ruptured and
whole abdominal cavity was full of blood.
5. An incised penetrating wound (both side) spindle ·r::···-
shaped 2 Yz cm x 1 cm on the front and upper part
of left side of chest, 6 cm from midline 2 cm below
clavical.
On dissection: underlying left lung was ruptured and
thorax cavity is full of blood F
6. An incised penetrating wound (both side) spindle
shaped 2 Yz cm x Yz cm on the front and left side of
chest 2 cm medial to the left nipple.
On dissection: underlying chest wall and pericardieum G
was pierced. Heart was ruptured and pericardieum
was full of blood.
7. Incised penetrating wound ~ cm x 1 Yz cm (both
8
1128 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013) 5 S.C.R.
side) spindle shaped on the left side of abdomen
19 cm from the umbilicus and parallel) do it.
On dissection: The abdominal cavity was ruptured. Colon
on left side was ruptured. Abdominal cavity was full
of blood.
8. 6 incised penetrating wounds (spindle shaped,
sharp from both sides) 2cmx1 cm, 3cm x 1% cm,
2 % cm x 1 cm, 2cm x % cm, 2 cm x % cm, 2cm x
% cm on the back and left side of chest. All were
C muscle deep."
16. The Investigating Officer, P.W.12, deposed that based
on the interrogation, the appellant made a confessional
statement and the admissible portion of which was to the effect
that he had concealed one dagger used in the crime near a
D Shisham tree near brick kiln of Mir Kachana, apart from the
concealment of one ring, one shirt and pant and Rs.1200/- in
the iron box lying in his house, which were recovered under
Exhibit PQ attested by Harjinder Singh. P.W.14 Om Prakash
deposed that all the four accused met him and confessed about
E the killing of the deceased and that he produced them before
the police. P.W.5, the wife of the deceased Jasbir Singh stated
that her husband used to wear two gold rings with the
impression 'JSK', one Titan wrist watch and one purse and that
above articles were missing from the dead body of her
F husband.
17. The above evidence led by the prosecution, disclosed
that the deceased died of ante-mortem injuries and that it was
a homicidal death, which was fully supported by the version of
G P.W.1 Dr. Kulwant Singh. The injuries were all grievous in
nature and the deceased met with gruesome death. When we
come to the evidence of P.W.3 it is true that with regard to the
identity of the rest of the accused other than the appellant, he
stated that he could name them only at the instance of the police
H personnel. As far as his presence at the place of occurrence
PALWINDER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 1129
[FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J.]
was concerned, his version read along with the evidence of A
P.W.4 discloses that the presence of both of them was beyond
any pale of controversy. Even as regards the assault on the
deceased, the version of P.W.3 was fully corroborated by
P.W.4. Therefore, when the presence of P.W.3 at the place of
happening of the occurrence was thus fully established with the
support of P.W.4, as rightly concluded by the trial Court, as well
as, the High Court, the only other question was whether the rest
of the statement made by P.W.3 merited any acceptance. In
that respect, we find that the High Court made a close scrutiny
of the version of P.W.3 and has found that he was a totally c
independent witness and he had no axe to grind against the
appellant. In fact, his statement that he could not identify the
other accused, as rightly held by the Division Bench of the High
Court, was a very fair statement. When he also belonged to the
same village, there was no reason for him to implicate the 0 appellant alone. He could have simply stated that he knew the
other accused also and that he had noted their presence at the
place of occurrence. Therefore, the conclusion of the High Court
that such a fair statement made by the witness, namely, P.W.3
cannot be used to totally erase his version, was perfectly
justified. Further, because he did not make any attempt to go E
to rescue of the deceased cannot be put against the witness,
inasmuch as when four persons were assaulting the deceased
with dangerous weapons that too in the night hour in the present
day set up, one cannot expect an unarmed person to get
himself entangled and suffer unnecessary harm to himself.
Moreover, the occurrence took place late in the light at around
9 pm and, therefore, prudence might have dawned upon him
not to fall a cheap prey at the hands of such criminals who were
already assaulting a person with a dagger and other weapons.
Equally his conduct in having come back to the place of G
occurrence in the early morning at around 7.30 am along with
P.W.4 only shows his earnestness in disclosing what he
witnessed on the previous night to the police.
18. Therefore, we find force in the submission of the H
A learned counsel for the State that the presence of P.W.3 along
with P.W.4 at the time when the occurrence took place and the
identity of the appellant by P.W.3 and describing his involvement
in the commission of the offence as narrated by him, was
rightly believed by the trial Court, as well as, by the High Court
B and we are also convinced that such a reliance placed upon
the eye-witness account of P.W.3 for convicting the appellant
with the aid of other witnesses is perfectly justified. The
recoveries made at the instance of the appellants also fully
supported the case of the prosecution.
c 19. Having reached the above conclusion, we find that the
reliance placed upon the decision reported in Govindaraju
alias Govinda (supra), as well as, Lallu Manjhi (supra) will be
of no avail to the appellant. We say so, since we are convinced
that the version of P.W.3 was wholly reliable and there was no
D reason to doubt his version in order to apply the principles set
out in the above referred decisions.
20. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this appeal. The
appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
K.K.T. Appeal dismissed.