- (1.) THESE two appeals arise out of a common judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh disposing of two Criminal appeals namely, Criminal Appeal No. 290 DB of 1995 and Criminal Appeal No. 336 DB of 1996. Criminal Appeal No. 936 of 1999 in this Court is preferred by Pohlu, who was the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 290DB of 1995, while Criminal Appeal No. 181 of 2002 is by Balwan Singh who was the appellant before the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 336DB of 1996. They have been found guilty of the offence under Section 302/34 IPC for which they have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. They have also been found guilty of the offences under Sections 452 IPC and 323 IPC read with Section 34 IPC for which they have been sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and six months rigorous imprisonment respectively, apart from payment of Rs. 500/- and RS. 2.00/- as fine.
(2.) AS many as five accused persons were put for trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jind in Sessions Trial Case No. 31 of 23-5-1995 charged variously of offences under Sections 302, 452, 323 read with Section 34 IPC. The Trial Court acquitted two of them namely, Raj Kumar and Prem Singh of all the charges levelled against them. The appellants before us were convicted by the Sessions Court which conviction has been affirmed by the High Court, as earlier noticed. The remaining accused namely, Ishwar Singh, who was also convicted, preferred a special leave petition before this Court which was dismissed, while the appellants before us only were granted special leave to appeal. An occurrence is alleged to have taken place on January 8, 1995 at about 2.30 p.m in village Bakhta Khera falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station Julana. In that incident, according to the prosecution, the appellants and three others assaulted Hukam Chand, who succumbed to his injuries while being taken to the hospital and also caused injuries to Smt. Sukhdei, PW 2 who was the daughter-in-law of the brother of the deceased, and who is the informant in the case. She lodged a report at 5 00 p. m. while admitted in the hospital at Julana on the basis of which a formal First Information Report (FIR) was registered at 5.45 p. m. on the same day (Exhibit PB). In the FIR lodged by PW 2 it was stated that panchayat elections were held in the village on 19-12-1994 in which Hukam Chand and one Prakash Harijan had contested. Hukam Chand was declared successful, and since the accused were the supporters of Prakash Harijan they felt aggrieved and bore a grudge against Hukam Chand. According to the informant, at about 2.30 p. m. when she was in her house she noticed that Ishwar, Balwan and Pohlu armed with lathies came towards her house hurling abuses. When she attempted to come out of the house Ishwar gave a lathi blow on her head while Balwan assaulted her with lathi on her right hand and Pohlu inflicted a lathi blow on her left arm. She raised an alarm and ran outside. She noticed deceased Hukam Chand, his Son Rajinder (PW 1), Chander and Sita Ram (not examined) who were co-villagers, coming from the other side. When she reached near the village chaupal Ishwar inflicted a lathi blow on the head of Hukam Chand. Though Hukam Chand was supporting a turban the injury caused on his head resulted in his falling down on the ground, whereafter appellants Balwan and Pohlu caused injuries with their respective lathies. They also caused injuries to her. Hukam Chand had become unconscious and was removed to the hospital but succumbed to his injuries on the way to the hospital. The informant was admitted for treatment. It was, therefore, alleged that Ishwar, Balwan and Pohlu had murdered Hukam Chand assaulting him with lathies on account of party rivalry, and in the process had also caused injuries to the informant. The persons named as eye witnesses in the FIR are Rajender (PW 1), Chander and Sita Ram.
(3.) IT appears that the report was made to the investigating officer PW 11 when he came to the hospital on receipt of a ruqa from the medical officer. IT also appears that 15 minutes later PW 11 recorded a supplementary statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr. P. C. in which the informant stated that when she had given her initial report she was perplexed and had forgotten to mention the name of Prem Singh who had also accompanied the named accused and caused injuries to her and her son Dharamvir after entering her house. The Trial Court and the High Court have relied on the testimony of the two eye-witnesses examined by the prosecution namely, Rajinder PW 1, the son of the deceased and Sukhdei PW 2, who was the daughter-in-law of the brother of the deceased. We may notice at the threshold that two other witnesses mentioned as eye witnesses in the FIR namely Chander and Sita Ram were not examined by the prosecution. Similarly, Dharamvir, who, according to the informant, had been assaulted by Prem Singh was also not examined by the prosecution.;