SUNDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three appellants, Sunder Singh and his sons Lal Singh and Gurmukh Singh along with one Rachhpal Singh were tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal with having committed the offence of murdering Malook Singh, Anup Singh and Darbara Singh on January 13, 1960, at about 11 a.m. in the Abadi of village Habri. The prosecution case was that these three murders were committed by the four accused persons in furtherance of their common intention; at the time when the offence was committed, Sunder Singh and Gurmukh Singh were armed with 'Lathis' and Lal Singh and Rachhpal Singh were armed with guns. According to the charge framed against the accused persons, Lal Singh fired upon Malook Singh and Darbara Singh and thereby killed them while Rachhpal Singh fired upon Anup Singh and killed him. This firing took place in pursuance of the common intention of all the accused persons. That is how Lal Singh and Rachhpal Singh were charged under S. 302 read with S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Judge took the view that the evidence adduced against Rachhpal Singh left room for doubt and so, giving Rachhpal Singh the benefit of doubt, he acquitted him. The remaining three accused persons were, however, convicted by him under S. 302 read with S. 34 because he held that the prosecution case had been proved against them beyond a reasonable doubt. The three convicts were ordered by him to suffer the sentence of death. This order was submitted for confirmation to the Punjab High Court and it was also challenged by the three convicts by their separate appeal. The two matters were heard together by the Punjab High Court and in the result, the conviction of the three appellants was confirmed; in regard to the sentence, however, the High Court took the view that the ends of justice would be met if the sentence of death imposed on Sunder Singh and Lal Singh was confirmed but that imposed on Gurmukh Singh was reduced to one of life imprisonment. In the result, the appeals preferred by the three accused persons substantially failed and the order of sentence was confirmed in regard to two of them. It is against the order of conviction and sentence thus passed by the High Court that Sunder Singh, Lal Singh and Gurmukh Singh have come to this Court by special leave.

(2.) Before dealing with the points raised before us by Mr. Sethi on behalf of the appellants, it would be convenient to set out broadly the material facts leading to the prosecution. Darbara Singh and the deceased Malook Singh were the sons of one Phula. It appears that prior to the partition of India, these brothers lived in a village Butran which is now a part of West Pakistan. The appellants also resided in the same village. Sunder Singh, a brother of Phula Singh mortgaged ill killas of agricultural land with possession for Rs. 2,500/- with the appellant under Singh and his brothers, in about 1943. In lieu of this mortgage, the appellant Sunder Singh and his co-mortgagees had been allotted 40 killas of land in the village Habri in the District of Karnal. The mortgagor Sunder Singh later died without leaving an issue or a widow. Phula Singh, his brother, claimed to be the heir of the said mortgagor and as such, he asked for redemption of the land on payment of Rs. 2,500/-. The appellant Sunder Singh did not recognise Phula Singh as the heir of the mortgagor and so, Phula Singh had to make an application in that behalf on November 29, 1959. By this application made to the Assistant Collector, Kaithal, Phula Singh claimed to redeem the mortgage. This claim was strongly resisted by the appellant Sunder Singh and his co-mortgagees. They disputed the title of Phula Singh and in the alternative, they alleged that they could not be deprived of the possession of the land except on payment of Rs. 2,500/- The proceedings continued for some time but it appears that Phula Singh was not able to place satisfactory evidence about his title before the Assistant Collector. In the result, his application was dismissed for default. Thereafter, the deceased Malook Singh applied for a passport to Pakistan; the prosecution case is that he wanted to go to Pakistan to obtain copies of the original mortgage deed and a pedigree-table from the revenue records kept in Pakistan which would have supported the claim of Phula Singh to the heirship of the mortgagor Sunder Singh. An enquiry was made into the antecedents of the deceased Malook Singh by the authorities concerned and on January 11, 1960, his application for passport was re-Commended by the S. D. O., Kaithal, to the Punjab Government. On January 18,1960, however, the incident giving rise to the present prosecution occurred and Malook Singh along with his brother Darbara Singh and his relation, Anup Singh were murdered. The prosecution case is that these murders were committed by the appellants in furtherance of the common intention because they wanted to thwart Malook Singh's efforts to bring satisfactory evidence about the heirship of his father, Phula Singh to the mortgagor Sunder Singh. That, in substance, is the motive alleged by the prosecution for the commission of the three murders.

(3.) The actual incidents leading to the triple murder lie within a narrow compass. The 13th January,1960, was 'Lohri' day. A couple of days earlier, Malook Singh had arranged for an 'Akhandpath' (Non-stop recitation of the holy Granth Sahib). The Path came to a close on the forenoon of January 11, 1960, and the closing function was attended by several persons, including Shahbeg Singh who is a relation of Malook Singh, between 10 and 11 A. M. on January 13, 1960, Malook Singh, accompanied by his wife Amar Kaur, her brother Anup Singh and Shahbeg Singh went to the local Gurdwara to pay their homage on the auspicious day. Darbara Singh, Balkar Singh and Mohinder Singh ha preceded them. All of them halted in the Gurdwara for a few minutes and then came out. Malook Singh was carrying a spear because he intended to go to his fields after visiting the Gurdwara. As the party reached the 'baithak' of Tara Singh which was a few paces away from the Gurdwara Malook Singh and his companions saw the three appellants coming towards them accompanied by Rachhpal Singh. They also noticed that all of them were armed. The appellant Sunder Singh immediately raised a shout at Malook Singh and said that he would despatch him to Pakistan where he intended to go in order to collect proof for the mortgage and heirship of his father to the mortgagor. So saying, he aimed a lathi blow at Malook Singh, but Anup Singh intervened and entreated Sunder Singh not to assault Malook Singh. As a result, Anup Singh was hit on the head by the lathi of Sunder Singh. The three companions of the appellant Sunder Singh then rushed forward. Gurmukh Singh gave a lathi blow on one of the hands of Anup Singh. Malook Singh then stepped forward to save Anup Singh's life and gave a spear blow to Sunder Singh. This blow caused injuries on his chest. Thereupon, Sunder Singh shouted to his companions not to allow Malook Singh and his friends to escape. At that stage, Lal Singh and Rachhpal Singh used their double-barrelled guns and fired; Lal Singh hit Malook Singh and Rachhpal Singh injured one of the knees of Anup Singh. Rachhpal Singh then shot at Anup Singh again. and Anup Singh fell down. All the companions of Malook Singh, except for his wife Amar Kaur, were frightened and ran for their lives. Lal Singh then gave a chase to Darbara Singh, overtook him at a short distance and shot him dead. Mohinder Singh and Shahbeg Singh, however, managed to find the shelter and thus protected themselves. After shooting Darbara Singh dead, Lal Singh returned to the spot and shot at Malook Singh and Anup Singh again when he found that they were still alive. Having thus committed three murders, the assailants ran away with their respective weapons. That in brief, is the prosecution case.