- (1.) BY this common judgment, I intend to dispose of Criminal Appeal No. S. 388 -SB of 2010 titled as Buta Singh and others versus State of Punjab preferred by the accused for their acquittal and Criminal Revision No. 910 of 2010 titled as Karam Singh versus State of Punjab and another preferred by the complainant for enhancement of the sentence awarded by the trial Court to the accused. Since both these appeal and revision have arisen out of the same incident, judgment and order, therefore these are being disposed of with the common judgment. However, the facts are being taken from Criminal Appeal No. S -388 -SB of 2010.
(2.) BUTA Singh, Surjit Singh and Jagtar Singh accusedappellants have directed the present appeal against the judgment and order dated 22.01.2010 passed by Shri G.S.Dhillon, the then learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Adhoc) Fast Track Court, Ropar vide which the accused were convicted under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ - each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each.
(3.) BRIEFLY stated the case of the prosecution is that Harvinder Singh alias Bittu (since deceased) son of complainant Karam Singh was in love with one Sarabjit Kaur sister of accused -appellants for the last two years (from the date of occurrence) which was not in the knowledge of the complainant and his family members. Sarabjit Kaur also used to write love letters to said Harvinder Singh alias Bittu which were recovered later on after the death of said Harvinder Singh alias Bittu. Parents of Sarabjit Kaur fixed her marriage with some other boy. Then Harvinder Singh alias Bittu (deceased) called Sarabjit Kaur to talk to her on which Buta Singh, Surjit Singh and Jagtar Singh became furious enough to give the complaint against him to the police. With the help of Local police, the matter was solved in the panchayat itself where Harvinder Singh alias Bittu was made to apologize for his act, although he told everyone that he wanted to marry Sarabjit Kaur sister of the accused. The matter was accordingly solved by the panchayat on 27.4.2006. In the said panchayat proceedings, accused Buta Singh, Surjit Singh and Jagtar Singh along with their father undertook not to take any action against Harvinder Singh alias Bittu but despite that they started pressuring the complaint and also started giving open threats to the son of the complainant to kill him. Since Harvinder Singh alias Bittu was already under immense mental tension due to the fixing of the marriage of Sarabjit Kaur, he was tortured mentally by the accused who started giving him open threats to kill and to teach him a lesson for meeting their sister Sarabjit Kaur. Due to the said continuous harassment meted out at the hands of accused Buta Singh, Surjit Singh and Jagtar Singh Harvinder Singh alias Bittu consumed sulphas tablets on 16.5.2006 whereupon he was taken to Civil Hospital, Kharar from where he was referred to the General hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh and ultimately he died of poison on 17.5.2006. On 18.5.2006 police of police station Kharar recorded statement of complainant and his son Satvinder Singh in the presence of Gurdev Kaur, Raj Kumar and others and in their presence complainant Karam Singh also handed over the hand written suicide note of his deceased son Harvinder Singh alias Bittu who made liable accused Buta Singh, Surjit Singh and Jagtar Singh due to continuos harassment. Ultimately, complainant filed Criminal Misc. No.1155 -M of 2006 in this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and on the direction of this Court FIR under Section 306 and 120 -B of the IPC was registered against accused Buta Singh, Surjit Singh and Jagtar Singh. Statements of the prosecution witnesses were recorded. After completion of necessary investigation challan against the accused was presented in the Court. Copies of the documents were supplied to the accused free of costs. The Illqua Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Session as the offence alleged against the accused was exclusively triable by the said Court. The accused were charge -sheeted for offences punishable under sections 306 and 120 -B of the IPC to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.;