JUDGEMENT
MEHTAB S.GILL, J. -
(1.) This Court while granting bail to accused Harvinder Singh, vide its
Criminal Appeal No.803-DB of 2004 -2-
order dated 2.12.2005 had observed as under :-
"It is not disputed before us that the applicants and their co-accused
were tried for the murders of Baljinder Singh and Sawinder Kaur
and for giving injuries to Gurmej Singh. We had summoned the
record and find that although in the present case, two persons
namely, Baljinder Singh and Sawinder Kaur had been murdered,
only single charge has been framed, which may vitiate the trial and
require directions for de-novo trial being conducted in accordance
with law, as has been held by a Division Bench of this Court in
State of Haryana v. Brahamjit and others, Murder Reference No.5
of 2004.
In this view of the matter, the office is directed to list this
case for hearing on 13.1.2006 subject to and after obtaining
necessary orders from Hon'ble the Chief Justice."
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants has drawn our attention to the
judgment rendered in Murder Reference No.5 of 2004 State of Haryana v.
Brahamjit and others. The Hon'ble Bench has observed :-
"Looked at from another angle, if the provisions of Section
218 and 31 Cr.P.C. had been complied with, the appellants would
have been convicted under three separate heads for the murders of
Lakhan, Mohinder and Suresh and three sentences of imprisonment
would have been imposed on them, in addition whereto the trial
Court would also have had to impose the sentences of fine on each
count.
The situation in the present case is not different. As already
conceded by the learned counsel for the parties, separate charges
would have to be framed in relation to offences under Sections
323,170 and 302 I.P.C. In view of this, the conviction and
sentences imposed upon the appellants are set aside and the case
remanded to the Sessions Judge, Faridabad to be re-tried after
proper charges have been framed as is required under Section 218
Cr.P.C. It is further directed that the Sessions Judge would deal
with the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within six
months."
(3.) In the present appeal it has come out that a common charge was
framed by the trial Court for two distinct offences of murder, which is reproduced
as under :-
"I, Kewal Krishan, Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur hereby
charge you Harvinder Singh, Gurvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and
Harjant Singh accused as follows :-
That on 11.12.2001 at about 5.30 p.m. in the area of Village
Bijliwal in the furtherance of the common intention of you all you,
Harjant Singh committed murder by intentionally causing the death
of Baljidner Singh and Sawinder Kaur and thereby committed an
offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. whereas you,
Harvinder Singh, Gurvinder Singh and Jaspal Singh committed an
offence punishable under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and within my
cognizance.
Secondly : On the same date, time and place in the
furtherance of the common intention of you all, you, Harjant Singh
caused injuries to Gurmej Singh with such intention and under the
circumstances that if by that act you had caused the death of Gurmej
Singh, you would have been guilty of murder and thereby
committed an offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C., whereas
you, Harvinder Singh, Jaspal Singh and Gurvinder Singh committed
an offence punishable under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and within my
cognizance.
And, I hereby direct that you be tried on the said charge by
this Court.";
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.