DEVA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS Deva Singh, Gurmej Singh and Amar Singh have been held guilty of intentionally causing death of Ajit Singh vide order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar dated March 29, 1995. Whereas, Gurmej Singh was held guilty under Section 302 I.P.C. substantive and ordered to undergo rigorus imprisonment for life as also to pay to fine of Rs. 2000/ - or in default of payment of fine, to further undergo R -1. for six months, Amar Singh and Deva Singh have been held guilty under Section 302 with the aid of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced likewise. Amar Singh has also been held guilty under Section 323 I P C and sentenced to undergo R -1 for six months whereas Deva Singh has been held guilty under Section 307 and ordered to undergo R -1 for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -, or in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months. Whereas, Deva Singh has filed Crl. Appeal No.189 -DB of1995, Gurmej Singh and Amar Singh have filed Crl. Appeal No. 311 -DB of 1995.

(2.) THE facts leading to death of Ajit Singh were narrated by Sahib Singh, PW -7, son of deceased. His statement was recorded by Ravel Singh, A.S.I. PW -9 at Bus stand, Bikhiwind at 10.15 P.M.on May 7, 1992. As per narration of Sahib Singh, appellants caused injuries of Ajit Singh on May 7, 1992 at 7 p.m. The F.I.R. was recorded on the same day at 10.30/11 p.m. the special report reached the concerned Magistrate at May 8, 1992 at 10.30 p.m. While narrating the events leading to death of Ajit Singh, the first informant, Sahib Singh sated that on the day of occurrence at 7 p.m., his father Ajit Singh and he were standing in front of the door of their house when Gurmej Singh son of Balker Singh and Amar Singh son of Balkar Singh, residents of village Kale, armed with Tambas (logs of eucalyptus) and Deva Singh, armed with a stick came there. Deva Singh raised a lalkara saving. "Today Sahib Singh and Ajit Singh be taught a lesson for not allowing them to pass Gharukas and carts from in front of their house in the street." In the meantime, Amar Singh gave a Tamba blow on the head of his father, as a result of which his father Ajit singh fell down on the ground. It requires to be mentioned here that in the translation done by the office, of the F.I.R.,part attributed to Deva Singh is not mentioned but it is conceded between the parties that in the original F.I.R. Deva Singh has been attributed one injury to Sahib Singh. His brother Angrej Singh he raised an alarm of 'don't kill don't kill'. Thereafter the assalianats fled away from the spot with their weapon after causing more latent injuries to him and his father AjIt Singh. His brother Angrej Singh and he, after having arranged for a truck, were taking Ajit Singh to the hospital at Amritsar and when they reached bus stand Bikhiwind, his father died. He was going to lodge the report with the police when A.S.I. Ravel Singh met him. The cause of grudge was that, that day at about 10/11 a.m. when Gunned Singh was passing his Gharuka in the street from in front their house, dirty water of the drain splashed upon his father, who was standing in the street. As a result of this, an altercation took place between him and his father but the matter was settled between them by Bira Singh son of Vinder Singh. Due to this grudge, Gurmej Singh, Amar Singh and Deva Singh appellants herein in connivance with one another, had caused injuries to him and his father.

(3.) INASMUCH as the points canvassed by learned counsel for the appellants centre around only qua nature of offence insoar as Gurmej Singh and Amar Singh are concerned, and non -presence of Deva Singh at the scene of occurrence, it is not necessary to mention the evidence in all its details. Suffice it, however, to mention that the prosecution, with a view to bring home the offence against the appellants, examined Dr. Sarabjit Singh Sandhu as PW -1, who stated that on May 8, 1992 at 10.30 a.m. he conducted post - moretem on the dead body of Ajit Singh and found following two injuries on his dead body : "1. A lacerated wound 6 x 3.2 cms on the top of the head, 8 cms above the left ear, 5 cms behind the interior hair -line. Clotted blood was present The wound was transversely placed. 2. Reddish bruise 3 x 2 cms on the posterior side of the right fore -arm 5 cms above the wrist joint. The wound was obliquely placed." On dissection of injury No.1, there was found to be fracture of both the parietal bones. There was extra -dural haematoma. The fracture of both the parietal bones was depressed in nature. The cause of death in the opinion of doctor, was due to subdural haematoma as a result of injury No.1 which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.