UJAGAR SINGH,J - (1.) ON 10.11.1983 Bhagwant Singh and Rajinder Singh, revision-petitioners, armed with Gandasa and Sua respectively, came in front of the house of Jhanda Singh complainant at about 6 p.m. The complainant was challenged by them to come out of his house. The petitioners raised Lalkaras and Jhanda Singh came in the street. Bhagwant Singh petitioner gave a Gandasa blow from its blunt side and Jhanda Singh fell down. In the meantime, Shrimati Dalip Kaur, wife of Jhanda Singh came to his rescue. She gave a cover to him by laying herself on him. Bhagwant Singh caused another Gandasa blow from its sharp-side, striking at the left thumb of the complainant and the same was amputated. Rajinder Singh petitioner gave injuries with Sua on the person of Smt. Dalip Kaur. Bhagwant Singh also caused injuries to Smt. Dalip Kaur. Chhota Singh also came there and tried to rescue Jhanda Singh and Smt. Dalip Kaur. The petitioners run away with their respective weapons. The injured were carried by Bhajan Singh in a truck to Civil Hospital, Malerkotla. The motive for the occurrence was that there was some dispute between Smt. Dalip Kaur and Smt. Basant Kaur alias Basanto, mother of the petitioners. The Gram panchayat intervened and tried to get effected a compromise between the parties, but the complainant-party was not satisfied with the negotiations. Ruqqa sent by the Doctor attracted the attention of the Police and on coming to the hospital, statement Ex. PA of Jhanda Singh was recorded on 12.11.1983 at about 3.45 p.m. and case First Information Report No. 228 of that date was registered under Sections 326/324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (the Code in short) at Police Station Malerkotla. After investigation, report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was submitted to the Illaqa Magistrate.
(2.) DURING trial, the prosecution examined PW1 Jhanda Singh, PW2 Smt. Dalip Kaur, PW3 Chhota Singh and PW4 Dr. K.C. Modi. On 29.1.1985 one PW was given up and the remaining witnesses were not present. Keeping the facts of the case in view, the trial Court closed the evidence of the prosecution, as on earlier dates it was made clear that no adjournment would be granted to the prosecution. Thereafter the statements of the petitioners were recorded and they examined DW1 Harnak Singh and DW2 Ujagar Singh in their defence. Their statements were that in front of the house of Harnak Singh, three was some dispute between Smt. Basanto mother of the petitioners and Smt. Dalip Kaur and there were some injuries caused to Smt. Basanto by Jhanda Singh. Jhanda Singh then declared that he would involve them in some cases. Bhagwant Singh was in service and Rajinder Singh was a student. This defence has not been believed by both the courts below. Relying on the statements of prosecution witnesses No. 1, 2 and 3 (who are eye-witnesses), the trial Court convicted the petitioners under the aforesaid sections of the Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each under Section 326 of the Code and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each. Both the petitioners were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months under Section 324 of the Code and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months under Section 323 of the Code. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The petitioners preferred an appeal and the Sessions Court modified the sentences, reducing one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 326 to 9 months and a fine of Rs. 500/- qua Bhagwant Singh and in default of payment of fine, he was further directed to suffer RI for 6 months. The sentence of Bhagwant Singh petitioner under Section 324 was maintained as RI for 6 months; under Section 323/34 of the Code it was also maintained. Rajinder Singh's sentence under Section 326/34 of the Code was reduced to RI for 8 months, but fine and imprisonment in default thereof was maintained. Rajinder Singh's sentence under Section 324/34 and under Section 323 of the Code was maintained. Out of the fine, if realised, a sum of Rs. 300/- was directed to be paid as compensation to Jhanda Singh and Rs. 200/- to Smt. Dalip Kaur. The petitioners have challenged their conviction and sentences by way of this criminal revision. Jhanda Singh complainant has also filed Criminal Revision No. 1482/1985 for enhancement of sentence and also for awarding more compensation to the injured. Both these Criminal Revisions are being disposed of by this order. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the trial Court framed the charges against the accused on 7th of September, 1984 and therein the following there lines in the beginning thereof indicate a different place of occurrence than alleged against the accused "that on 10th of November, 1983 at about 6.00 p.m. in the area of City Malterkotala you Bhagwant Singh and Rajinder Singh in furtherance of the common intention of you all.." According to him, this charge was not in accordance with the mandatory requirements of Section 212 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred as to 'Code') which requires that the charge shall contain such particulars as to the time and the place of the alleged offence as are reasonably sufficient to give the accused notice of the matter with which he is charged. Admittedly, the occurrence did not take place in the area of city Malterkotala and, therefore, according to him, the whole trial is vitiated. He next argues that left thumb of PW1 Jhanda Singh was chopped off and it fell on the ground at the place of occurrence. There is no corroboration by recovery of the thumb. On this score, he challenges the truthfulness of the prosecution version. He further challenges the prosecution case as most doubtful in view of the delay in lodging the FIR. He has referred to the statement of PW1 Jhanda Singh who admitted that after the occurrence he along with Smt. Dalip Kaur, his wife, were taken in a truck by Bahajan Singh and after reaching Malerkotla they went to the police and, thereafter, along with police people they were taken to the Civil Hospital. Rather according to the witness one constable was sent with them. He further stated in cross-examination that the police went not him in the hospital on the third day and recorded his statement Exhibit 1-A. PW2 Smt. Dalip Kaur is silent about their going to the police station and rather states that they went to the hospital. She talks about probability of compromise through the Panches but stated that after there was no possibility of compromise they reported the matter to the police. He has also referred to the statement of PW3 Chhota Singh who stated that Bhagwant Singh gave a gandasa blow from blunt side on the head of Jhanda Singh who fell down and Smt. Dalip Kaur fell on him. Rajinder Singh then gave Sua blows to her and Bhagwant Singh cut off the left thumb of Jhanda Singh. He has pointed out further discrepancies in the statements of eye-witnesses and has laid stress for absence of the Investigating Officer from the witness box. The statement of PW4 Dr. K.C. Modi in his cross-examination indicating that the possibility cannot be ruled out with regard to injury No. 2 (chopping off left thumb) on the person of Jhanda Singh while working with toka machine. With these arguments, he seeks acceptance of the revision and acquittal of the petitioners.
(3.) THE counsel for the State has urged that the prosecution version is fully supported by the statements of PW1, PW2, and PW3 who are eye-witnesses. According to him, absence of the investigating officer from the witness box is of no consequence in this case because no incriminating recovery has taken place in this case and in the circumstances of the case the delay, if any, has been properly explained by the prosecution witnesses.;