Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswinder Singh vs State Of Pb on 6 September, 2024
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur, Sudeepti Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
Reserved on: 02.09.2024
Pronounced on: 06.09.2024
1. CRA-D-603-DB-2003
Jaswinder Singh .....Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
2. CRA-D-731-DB-2003
Dhalwinder Singh .....Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
3. CRR-1630-2003
Narinder Kaur .....Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
4. CRR-98-2001 (O & M)
Ujjagar Singh .....Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Argued by: Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate
Mr. Amritpal Singh Mann, Advocate and
Mr. Prikshit Thakur, Advocate
for the appellant(s)
1 of 27
::: Downloaded on - 21-09-2024 08:44:35 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -2-
(in CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and CRA-D-731-DB-2003)
and for the respondents (in CRR-1630-2023).
Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRR-1630-2003).
Mr. Pawan Girdhar, Advocate (legal aid counsel)
for the petitioner (in CRR-98-2001).
Mr. Maninderjit Singh Bedi, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
****
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.
1. The criminal appeals (supra) and the revision petitions
(supra) became remanded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order
dated 25.08.2010. The operative part of the said order is extracted
hereinafter.
" On the facts of the case we are of the opinion that the
High Court in the impugned judgment has not properly
considered the evidence on record. We are not expressing
any opinion either way about the evidence.
Hence, we set aside the impugned judgment of the
High Court and remand the matter to the High Court to
dispose of the appeal afresh expeditiously after
considering the entire evidence and hearing learned
counsel for the parties....."
2. Since the criminal appeal(s) (supra) as well as the revision
petitions (supra), both involve common questions of facts and law.
Therefore, they are amenable to be decided through a common order.
3. CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and CRA-D-731-DB-2003 are
directed by the convicts-appellants, against the verdict of conviction, as
made on 12.06.2003, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
2 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -3-
(Adhoc), Jalandhar, upon, Session Case No. 1 of 2003, wherethrough,
in respect of charges drawn for offences punishable under Sections
302/34 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, he made a finding of
conviction against the accused.
4. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order drawn on
12.06.2003, the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to impose
upon the convicts (supra) both sentence(s) of imprisonment as well as
of fine, but in the hereinafter extracted manner :-
Dharminder Singh @ RI for a period of life and fined Rs.
Bhinder 2000/- and in default of payment of
fine to further undergo RI for one year
under Section 302 IPC for murder of
Shingara Singh.
RI for a period of life and fined Rs.
2000/-, in default of payment of fine to
further undergo RI for one year under
Section 302 IPC for murder of Balkar
Singh.
RI for a period of 5 years under
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Shinder Singh @ Jaswinder RI for a period of life and fined
Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of
fine to further undergo RI for one year
under Section 302 read with Section
34 IPC for murder of Shingara Singh.
RI for a period of life and fined Rs.
2000/-, in default of payment of fine to
further undergo RI for one year under
Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC
for murder of Balkar Singh.
5. The convicts-appellants become aggrieved from the above
drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, become aggrieved from the
consequent thereto sentences of imprisonment, and, of fine as became
imposed upon them, by the learned convicting Court concerned, and
3 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -4-
hence have chosen to institute thereagainst separate criminal appeals,
before this Court.
6. CRR-1630-2003 has been instituted by the widow of the
deceased Balkar Singh (son of the complainant) praying that conviction
awarded upon the accused respondents be maintained and sentence be
enhanced in accordance with the provisions of law. Further, it has been
prayed therein that heavy amount of fine may kindly be awarded and be
paid as compensation to the legal heirs.
7. CRR-98-2001 has been instituted by the complainant
praying for setting aside the order dated 24.08.2000, passed in Sessions
Case No. 3 of 2000, whereby the learned trial Judge concerned refused
to summon respondents No. 2 to 5, in case FIR No. 209 dated
14.10.1999, registered at Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar.
Factual background
8. The genesis of the prosecution case, becomes embodied in
the appeal FIR, to which Ex.PJ is assigned. The informant one Ujagar
Singh (PW-7) has made narrations thereins that he is resident of village
Reharwan and is an agriculturist. He has got four sons and one
daughter. On the date of occurrence i.e. 14.10.99 at about 6.00 P.M. he
alongwith his son Shingara Singh (since deceased) were present at bus
stop of Poonian and were repairing their vehicle. In the meanwhile, a
Tata Mobile 207 of slightly blue colour, came from the side of Mandi
Poonian which was driven by accused Shinder son of Sucha Singh.
Accused Sukhdev Singh alias Deba son of Sucha Singh armed with
4 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -5-
.315 bore rifle and Dhalwinder Singh alias Bhinder son of Resham
Singh armed with gun were sitting in the said vehicle. They stopped the
said vehicle near the complainant and pulled the son of the
complainant. Accused Deba gave a .315 rifle blow with 3-4 shots which
hit Shingara Singh, the son of the complainant, as a result of which he
died at the spot. They went from the spot while stating that they had
taken the revenge of the death of Jeeta. They were followed by one
Gypsy driven by Satnam Singh son of Banta Singh. In the said Gypsy,
their brother Resham Singh, Sucha Singh and Swaran Singh son of
Banta Singh were sitting. They followed the previous vehicle by raising
lalkaras. The colour of the said Gypsy was white and at that time Neeta
Pandit resident of Poonian and Shinda son of Sarwan of Poonian was
also present, who witnessed the occurrence. They were deputed to
guard the dead body. Thereafter, a mini bus was taken by the
complainant for going to his house to give information. In the
meanwhile, when he reached near the house of Comrade Charanjit
Singh, he heard the noise of weeping of the ladies and when the
complainant reached near the house of Charanjit Singh, he found his
other son Balkar Singh lying dead. His wife Gian Kaur told the
complainant that Balkar Singh (deceased) was coming on his scooter
and his wife Narinder Kaur was also sitting near the gate and then a
Tata Mobile of slight blue colour driven by accused Shinder son of
Sucha Singh on which Sukhdev Singh alias Deba and Jaswinder alias
Bhinder were sitting armed with gun. While they were saying that
5 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -6-
Balkar Singh should not be spared, then Balkar Singh in order to save
himself left his scooter and entered the house of Comrade Charanjit
Singh. Accused Deba and Bhinder followed him and accused Deba
gave a gun blow at Balkar Singh which hit on his back and head, as a
result of which he died. The accused raised lalkaras and went in the
same vehicle and one white gypsy driven by Satnam Singh had also
come there in which Sucha Singh Sarpanch, Swaran Singh and Resham
Singh were raising lalkaras and went towards the market. At that time
Balkar Singh's son Ranjodh Singh aged about 4 to 5 years, who used to
come to the house of Comrade Charanjit Singh to get tuition was also
present there.
9. The motive behind the occurrence is that about 6-7 months
prior to the occurrence, the family member of accused namely Ranjit
Singh alias Jeeta and their servant was killed and the allegation of the
same was leveled on the deceased sons of the complainant by the Police
and they had been released on bail. Due to the said reason, both of his
sons were killed. Both the said vehicles belong to the accused, who
were seen by the complainant in the village. Accordingly a request was
made to take legal action.
10. The above statement Ex.PJ was reduced into writing by SI
Ram Dutt on 14.10.99 on which he made endorsement Ex.PJ/1 and sent
the same for registration of the case on which formal FIR Ex.PJ/2 was
recorded by SI Mohan Singh.
Investigation proceedings
6 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -7-
11. After completion of investigations by the investigating
officer concerned, into the FIR (supra), he instituted an affirmative
report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., before the learned Committal Judge
concerned.
12. Initially, accused Shinder Singh, Satnam Singh, Resham
Singh, Sucha Singh and Swaran Singh were kept in column No. 2,
whereas, Sukhdev Singh and Dhalwinder Singh were challaned.
However, at a subsequent stage, accused Shinder Singh was summoned
under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
Committal proceedings
13. Finding the offence punishable under Section 302 of the
IPC, to be exclusively triable by the Court of Session, thus the learned
committal Court, committed the case for trial to the Court of the learned
Session Judge, Jalandhar.
Trial Court Proceedings
14. On finding a prima facie case, charges under Sections
under Sections 302/34 IPC, and Section 25/54/59 Arms Act became
framed, against the accused concerned, to which they pleaded not
guilty, and, claimed trial.
15. In support of the prosecution case, the prosecution
examined thirteen witnesses. After completion of recording of the
depositions of the prosecution witnesses, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Jalandhar, drew proceedings under Section 313
of the Cr.P.C., but thereins, the accused claimed false implication, and,
7 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -8-
pleaded innocence. The accused examined nine witnesses in their
defence.
16. After conclusion of the trial, as, became entered into the
FIR (supra), by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, the
latter proceeded to make the afore verdict of conviction, and, also made
the consequent therewith sentence(s) (supra), upon, the accused-
appellants.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the convicts-appellants.
17. The learned counsel for the aggrieved convicts-appellants
herein, has vigorously argued before this Court, that the impugned
verdict of conviction, and consequent therewith sentences (supra), as
imposed, upon the convicts-appellants, both become ridden with a
gross infirmity of gross mis-appreciation, and non-appreciation of the
evidence, existing on record. Therefore, they have argued that the
appeal be accepted, and, the verdict, as challenged before this Court, be
quashed, and set aside.
Submissions of the learned State Counsel
18. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has argued
that the appreciation of evidence as made by the learned Convicting
Court, is merit-worthy, and, that it does not require any interference
being made by this Court.
Case dependent upon the testimony of eye witness-complainant
PW-7.
19. For proving the charges (supra) drawn against the convicts,
the prosecution made reliance upon the deposition of the ocular witness
8 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -9-
to the occurrence, who stepped into the witness box, as PW-7. The
contents of the examination-in-chief, as rendered by PW-7 are ad
verbatim extracted hereinafter.
I know Chhinder, Bhinder and Bhupinder Singh, accused
present in the court today. The name of one of the accused is Sukhdev
Singh, Chhinder and Deba accused are sons of Ucha Singh. Bhinder
Singh accused is son of Resham Singh. On 14.10.1999 myself and
Shingara Singh were getting our jeep repaired in the bus stand of vill.
Punian. It was about 6 p.m. Chhinder, Deba and Dharminder came
their on vehicle make 207. The same was being driven by Chhinder.
Deba and Dharminder were sitting therein and they were armed with
315 bore gun. Sucha Singh, Resham, Swarna and Harnam also came
there in a gypsy jeep. Chhinder accused after stopping his vehicle near
our jeep dragged Shingara Singh. Deba and Bhinder fired at Shingara
Singh as a result of which he receive injuries on his head, back and
chest. As a result of that my son Shingara Singh died at the spot itself.
The accused at the time of fleeing were saying that they had taken
revenge of Jeeta. The occupiers of gypsy jeep had been raising lalkaras
and they escaped from the spot along with other accused. This
occurrence was witnessed by Nita and Shinda. After leaving these
witnesses at the spot I came to my village.
When I reached near the house of Charanjit ladies were
standing, at that place and all of them were weeping. I found that
Balkar was lying killed at that place. My wife Gian Kaur and my
daughter in law Davinder Kaur were present at that place. My wife
Gian Kaur told me that Deba, Bhinder and Chinder had come there
and that they fired at Balkar Singh and killed him. I was asked where
Shingara Singh was and I told that he was also killed.
About 2/3 month before the present occurrence, the police
had recovered poppy husk from the possession of the accused. The
accused were present inside the house at that time and they fired from
9 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -10-
inside whereas police fired from outside. In that firing two members of
accused party were killed. FIR was registered about that encounter.
Shingara Singh and Balkar Singh ware falsely implicated in that
encounter and were released on bail. The accused party had the
apprehension that we were instrumental in getting the raid conducted
at their house by the police.
The police met me near the house of Charanjit Singh. At
that place I disclosed all the above said facts to him. My statement was
recorded by the police. I had put my signatures on that statement and
the same is Ex.PJ. The police prepared the inquest report in respect of
the dead body of Balkar Singh. During those proceedings my statement
was recorded. That statement is Ex.PK. The police collected the blood
stained earth from the spot. The same was put in a piece of cloth which
was converted into parcel. That parcel was taken into possession vide
memo Ex. PL. Spent cartridges were also found at the spot and were
taken into possession. Those were 2/3 in numbers. Those were
converted into parcel which were sealed and ware taken into
possession vide memo Ex.PM.
Then the police went to bus stand Punian. At that place it
took inquest proceedings in respect of the dead body of Shingara
Singh. My statement was recorded during those proceedings and the
same is Ex.PN. Four spent cartridges and one bullet was recovered
from that place. Parcel thereof was prepared and was taken into
possession vide memo Ex. PO. Blood stained earth was also collected
from that place which was converted into parcel and was taken into
possession vido memo Ex.PP. The dead bodies were sent to Civil
Hospital, Nakodar for post mortem examination. At the time the post
mortem examination was performed, I identified the dead bodies of my
sons..."
20. PW-7 also suffered the ordeal of an exacting cross
examination, and, when during course thereof, he became confronted
10 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -11-
with his previous statement made in writing, thereins, he made the
hereinafter extracted echoings, the relevant paras whereof become
extracted hereinafter.
"It is incorrect that mostly I do not move about and kept
on lying on the cot. It is correct that I can walk only with the help of
clutches. I had stated in my statement before the police that poppy husk
were recovered from the possession of the accused and encounter took
place with the police in which two of the members of their family died
and they had apprehension that my sons were instrumental in getting
the raid conducted on them.(attention of the witness is drawn towards
his statement Ex.PJ and he is confronted therewith wherein it is not
so recorded.) I had stated in my statement before the police that
Bhinder was also armed with 315 bore rifle. (attention of witness is
drawn towards his statement Ex.PJ and he is confronted therewith
wherein the bore of the gun is not written). When my statement was
recorded in this court on the previous occasion I had stated that
Dharminder accused was also armed with 315 bore gun (attention of
witness is drawn towards his statement recorded on 24.8.2000 and he
is confronted therewith wherein the bore of that gun in not given.
Sucha and brothers had come in the gypsy jeep simultaneously before
the shots were fired. I had not state in my statement before the police
that after Dharminder and other left the spot after causing the death of
Shingara Singh, one gypsy jeep came there which was driven by
Satnam Singh and Resham Singh and others were sitting in the same.
(Attention of witness is drawn towards his statement Ex.PJ and he is
confronted therewith wherein it is so recorded). I had stated in that
statement that Chhinder accused had dragged my son. (Attention of
the witness is drawn towards his statement Ex. PJ and he is
confronted with portion B to B1 thereof wherein it is not specifically
mentioned that his son was dragged by Chhinder accused.) He was
dragged only to the distance of 6 to 7 feet. I had stated in my statement
not before the police that Dharminder accused had also fired at my son
11 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -12-
(Attention of witness is drawn towards his statement Ex. PJ and he is
confronted therewith wherein it is not so recorded). I had stated in the
statement that my son received the gun shot injuries on his head, back
and chest (Attention of witness is drawn towards his statement Ex. PJ
and he is confronted therewith wherein it is not so recorded and he is
confronted with portion C to C1 thereof wherein it is recorded that
Deba fired 3/4 gunshot from his 315 bore gun which hit his son.
I had state in my statement before the police that when I
reached near the house of Charanjit, I was told by my wife Gian Kaur
that Deba, Bhinder and chhinder accused had come there and they
fired at Balkar Singh and killed him. (attention of the witness is drawn
towards his statement Ex.PJ and he is confronted with portion D to
D1 thereof wherein it is recorded that he was told by his wife that
only Deba fired gun shot from his gun at Balkar Singh which hit him
on his back and head causing his death at the spot). xxxx xxxx "
21. The above underlined portions of the cross-examination as
made upon the witness (supra), especially the ones relating to his not in
his previous statement disclosing the bore of .315 rifle wielded at the
crime site, by co-accused Bhinder besides his also not in his previous
statement unfolding the bore of .315 rifle wielded by accused
Dharminder, but not only gives fillip to the hereinafter inference(s) :
a) that therebys the defence conceding to the
participation of the accused in the crime event.
b) that also when for the reasons made hereinafter, this
Court assigns evidentiary vigor to the disclosure statement(s)
respectively made by the accused concerned, and, consequential thereto
made recovery memo(s).
12 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -13-
c) that resultantly therebys the said made improvement
rather than holding any exculpatory effect, contrarily carries an
inculpatory effect.
22. Furthermore, even if this witness in his previous statement
has omitted to state that accused Dharminder had fired at his son.
Moreover, even if the witness (supra), had omitted to in his previous
statement specify the exact regions of the body of the deceased
concerned, which became fired, yet when in his examination-in-chief
expressing that the accused fired gun shots injuries on the head, back
and chest of his deceased son. However, the apposite omission (supra)
also does not hold any exculpatory effect. The reason for so concluding
becomes grooved in the factum that the ante mortem injuries existing
over the body of the deceased, become unfolded thereins to exist on the
head, back and chest of the deceased. Moreover, when the said ante
mortem injuries resulted in the demise of the deceased. In addition,
when the said entailment of fatal ante mortem injuries on the body of
the deceased remained unchallenged by the defence during making a
rigorous cross examination upon PW-1.
23. Furthermores, when for reasons hereinafter, this Court has
assigned evidentiary solemnity to the respectively made disclosure
statement(s) by the accused and also to the consequent thereto
recoveries. Paramountly also, when the ballistic expert has opined vis-
a-vis the user of weapon of offence in the crime event. Conspicuously
therebys the said minimal omission (supra) does not hold any
13 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -14-
consequential exculpatory effect. If yet exculpatory effect is assigned to
the omission (supra), therebys the credible eye witness account
rendered by the eye witness (supra) would become untenably discarded.
Thus, for saving the effectiveness of the credible deposition rendered
by an eye witness to the crime event, the omission (supra) becomes
completely irrelevant.
24. Be that as it may, subsequent to the murder of Shingara
Singh occurring at the crime site, the said witness moved towards
another crime site, where the murder of Balkar Singh became
committed. The said murder was witnessed by Narinder Kaur wife of
Balkar Singh, who stepped into the witness box as PW-10. The contents
of the examination-in-chief, as rendered by PW-10 are ad verbatim
extracted hereinafter.
"On 14.10.99 at about 6.15 р.m. I myself alongwith my
mother in law Gian Kaur were present by the side of gate of Charanjit
Singh of our village. My husband Balkar singh was coming on a
scooter from the side of well. After him two vehicles one Tata Mobile of
blue colour and other gypsy of white colour were coming. The former
vehicle was being driven by Chhinder and Deba and Bhinder were
sitting in it. All of them are the accused present in the court today.
Bhinder is also known as Dharminder and Deba is also known as
Sukhdev. At that time both of them were armed with guns of 315 bore.
The gypsy was being driven by Satnam Singh, Sucha Singh, Swaran
Singh and Resham Singh were sitting in the same. The occupiers of
gypsy jeep raised a lalkara that Balkar Singh be not allowed to go and
that they were to take revenge of Ranjit Singh alias Jita. Balkar Singh
took the scooter and entered the house of Charnjit Singh. Deba and
Bhinder jumped out of the vehicle and followed Balkar Singh by
14 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -15-
entering into the house of Charanjit Singh. They fired at Balkar Singh
From their guns. After that they escaped towards Mand by saying that
they have taken revenge of Jeeta. Balkar Singh died at the spot.
Ranjodh Singh was present at the spot who was studying there. My
father in law Jagar Singh came to the spot. I narrated whole of the
incident to him. He told me that shangra Singh at had also been killed
by Deba and his party. The police recorded my statement in this case.
The accused were known to me previously also as they were related to
us."
25. PW-10 also suffered the ordeal of an exacting cross
examination, and, when during course thereof, she became confronted
with her previous statement made in writing, thereins she made the
hereinafter extracted echoings, the relevant parts whereof become
extracted hereinafter.
" Our tubewell is on the side of Mand from the house of
Charanjit Singh. Our house is situated on the other side. I had stated in
my statement before the police that both the said vehicles were coming
after the scooter of my husband. (Attention of the witness is drawn
towards her statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. dated 15.10.99 Ex.
DA and she is confronted therewith wherein it is not so recorded). I
had not stated at that time the other vehicle namely gypsy after my
husband and fired by Deba and Bhinder and after his death those
accused escaped towards Mand. (Attention of the witness is drawn
towards her statement Ex. DA and she is confronted with the same
wherein it is not so recorded). I had stated before the police that
occupiers of gypsy jeep had raised lalkara that Balkar Singh be not
allowed to go alive and that they were to take a revenge of Ranjit Singh
@ Jita. (Attention of the witness is drawn towards her statement Ex.
DA and she is confronted therewith wherein it is not so recorded). I
had stated before the police that my father in law Jagar Singh came to
the spot and I narrated the occurrence to him and he disclosed to me
15 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -16-
causing of death of Shangara Singh by Deba and his party. (Attention
of the witness is drawn towards her statement Ex. DA and she is
confronted therewith wherein it is recorded that the said accused
were armed with 315 bore guns."
26. The above underlined improvement(s) or embellishments
as made by the witness (supra), from her previously made statement in
writing but ex facie are minimal nor they overcome the inculpatory
effect of the hereinafter made inculpatory conclusions against the
accused.
27. Therefore, the argument addressed by the counsel for the
convict-appellants, that in view of the above improvement(s) or
embellishments made by the witnesses (supra), thus a cloud of doubt
seeps into the prosecution case and benefit thereof, is to be assigned to
the accused, thus is bereft of any vigor and is rejected.
SIGNATURED DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF THE ACCUSED
AND PURSUANT THERETO RECOVERIES.
Signatured disclosure statement of accused Dhalwinder Singh @
Dharminder Singh @ Bhinder.
28. During the course of investigations, being made into the
appeal FIR, convict Dhalwinder Singh @ Dharminder Singh made a
signatured disclosure statement, to which Ex.PY is assigned. The
signatured disclosure statement, as made by the accused is ad verbatim
extracted hereinafter.
"In the presence of the following witnesses accused
Dhalwinder Singh @ Dharminder Singh @ Bhinder son of
Resham Singh caste Jat r/o village Reharhvan, P.S.
Shahkot Jalandhar disclosed that " I have kept concealed
16 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -17-
the rifle of 315 bore used in the case in the bushes of a
barren well outside of my Dera in the area of Shahkot
towards the western side of road leading from Shahkot to
Dharmkot and only I know about it and can get the same
recovered by pointing out". His disclosure memo was
drawn."
29. Pursuant to the above signatured disclosure statement,
convict Dhalwinder Singh @ Dharminder Singh @ Bhinder ensured the
effectuation of the recovery of the weapon of offence i.e. 315 bore rife
No. AB-87-0991, which was taken into police possession, through
recovery memo Ex. PY/1.
Signatured disclosure statement of accused Sukhdev Singh (the said
convict became absent during trial and was declared proclaimed
offender and was re-arrested and convicted vide separate
judgment).
30. During the course of investigations, being made into the
appeal FIR, convict Sukhdev Singh (in CRA-D-1162-2023) made a
signatured disclosure statement, to which Ex.PX is assigned. The
signatured disclosure statement, as made by the accused is ad verbatim
extracted hereinafter.
"In the presence of the following witnesses Sukhdev Singh
above while in police custody on my interogation disclosed
that I had concealed the rifle of 315 bore used in the above
case in a heap of paddy chaff lying near the electricity
transformer towards the western side of road pacca
leading to Mand near village Poonian and only I know
about it and can get the same recovered by pointing out.
His disclosure memo was drawn.
17 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -18-
31. Pursuant to the above signatured disclosure statement,
convict Sukhdev Singh ensured the effectuation of the recovery of the
weapon of offence i.e. 315 bore rife No. AB-98-4987, which was taken
into police possession, through recovery memo Ex. PX/2.
INFERENCES DRAWN FROM THE DISCLOSURE
STATEMENT(S) AND RECOVERY MEMO(S).
32. A reading of the respectively made disclosure statements,
does reveal, that not only all the accused confessed their participation,
in the crime event, but also reveal qua theirs' evincing their readiness to
cause recoveries of the relevant incriminatory items, to the
investigating officer concerned, thus from their respective place(s) of
their hiding and keeping by them, and which place(s) were but known
exclusively to them, and whereafters, also they through recovery
memo(s) (supra), also respectively did cause the relevant recoveries, to
the investigating officer concerned. The above drawn disclosure
statements when become signatured by all the co-convicts, and, also
when they led to the making of the apposite recoveries at their
respective instances, to the investigating officer concerned. In
consequence, sanctity is to be meted to the above drawn memo(s).
. 33. Though the assigning of sanctity thereto would become
waned only, when they had ably denied, the existence of their
respective signatures thereons, and or, had efficaciously proven that the
relevant recoveries, were engineered, or, contrived thus through a
clever strategem being deployed by the investigating officer concerned,
but yet a reading of the deposition of PWs concerned, does not reveal,
18 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -19-
that the above possible exculpatory pleas, hence for negating the
evidentiary worth of the above drawn memo(s), rather becoming either
raised or becoming efficaciously proven.
Medical Evidence
34. The doctor who conducted an autopsy respectively on the
bodies of the deceased Balkar Singh and Shangara Singh, stepped into
the witness box as PW-1. During the course of his examination-in-
chief, he proved the post mortem reports, as became authored by him.
He also proved the existence thereons of his valid signatures and of his
co-author Dr. Paramjit Singh. The post mortem reports are respectively
assigned as Exhibit PA and as Exhibt PB. The relevant observations, as
become narrated in Exhibits (supra) are extracted hereinafter.
Exhibit PA
1. Lacerated wound 4 cm X 3.5 cm in size with irregular and
inverted margins present over left parietal region of scalp. 11 cm from
pinna of left ear and 2 cm from idline clotted blood was present in and
around the wound and temporal and parietal bone were fractured into
multiple pieces. Membranes were torn and brain matter was badly
lacerated. Wound of entry.
2. Lacerated wound 11 cm x 8 cm in size with a irregular everted
margins present over right temporo parietal region of scalp 5 cm above
pinna of right ear and 2 cm from midline. Clotted blood was present in
and around the wound underlying bones were fractured into multiple
pieces. Few pieces were missing, brain membranes and brain matter
was badly lacerated and coming out of the wound Large portion of
brain was absent Wound of exit. Injury no I was communicating injury
no 2.
3. Lacerated wound 2 cm x 1 cm oval in shape present on the top of
right shoulder, margines were blackened and inverted clotted blood
present in and around the wound. On dissection of wound tract,
underlying structural skin, sub-cutaenous tissues, muscles, vessales
and nerves were lacerated and lateral end of clavicle and acromion
were fractured third and fourth rib were fractured at lateral side,
pleura middle and lower lobbes of right lung lacerated, left pleural
cavity contained about 800 cc of fluid and clotted blood Dia phragm
19 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -20-
was lacerated liver was lacerated and three pallets were recovered
from the liver. Abdominal cavity was full of fluid and clotted blood.
4. Lacerated wound 2 cm x 4 cm with irregular and everted margin
present over the front of abdomen at level of umbilicus 8 cm from
midline to the right side Clotted blood was present in and around the
wound. Wound of exit.
5. Lacerated wound 1.5 cm x 1 cm with irregular and inverted
margine was present over front of right side abdomen 17 cm from
middle and 7 cm below and right to injury no 4 clotted blood was
present an abrasion 2 cm x 1.75 cm present on medial and upper side
of wound of entry. On dissection of abdominal wall injury no 4 was
communicated with injury no 5 lacerating underlying strctures skin,
subcutaneous tissue and muscle.
6. Lacerated wound 6 cm x 1 cm with regular and inverted margine
present over right side of abdomen just above iliac crest, 13 cm below
and lateral to injury no 5 Clotted blood was present in and around the
wound. An abrasion 8 cm x 1.5 cm was present on the medial side of
wound. On dissection underlying structure skin, subcutaneous tissues,
mussle were lacerated and pallet recovered from iliac crest.
35. Further, the doctor concerned opined that the cause of
death of deceased Balkar Singh was owing to neurogenic and
hemorrhage shock as a result of injuries (supra) to the vital organs. All
the injuries were declared to be ante mortem in nature and also were
declared to be sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course in nature.
Exhibit PB
1. Lacerated wound 4 cm x 3 cm in size with irregular inverted
margins was present over left side of temporal parietal region of scalp
and upper part of left ear which was also lacerated. Clotted blood was
present in and around the wound. Temporal and prietal bones were
fracuted into multiple pieces. Membranes torn and brain matter badly
lacerated. Wound of entry.
2. A lacerated wound 14 cm x 6 cm with irregular everted margine
present over right side of frontal temporal and parietal region of scalp
Starting just right to midline in the middle of forehead and going
postero laterally 2 cm above pinna of right ear, underlying bones were
fractured into multiple pieces and few pieces were missing brain
membranes and brain matter was badly lacerated coming out of wound
a large portion of brain matter was absent Clotted blood present in and
around the wound wound of exit. Injury no.2 was communicating with
injury no. 1.
3. Lacerated wound 1.75 cm in diameter was present over right
nipple and areolla in upper part margine blackened and inverted.
20 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -21-
Clotted blood was present on dissection one pallot was recovered from
mussles in IV th inter costal space underlying tissue were lacerated.
4. Lacerated wound 1.75 x 1.25 cm oval in shape present on the
posterio lateral aspect of left arm 4 cm below its middle. Margines
were blackened and inverted clotted blood was present wound of entry.
5. Lacerated wound 12 cm x 6 cm with irregular and everted
margins was present over the postero medial aspect of left forearm in
its middle, underlying tissues were badly lacerated. Clotted blood was
present in and around wound of exit Injury no 4 was communicating
with injury no 5.
6. Lacerated wound 3cm x 2 5 cm present over left side of chest 2
cm lateral to left nipple. Margins were irregular and invted an
abrasion 3cm x 2.5 cm present on lateral side of wound. On dissection
of chest injury no 6 underlying structures skin, sub cutaeneous tissues,
muscles were lacerated 4 th and 5 th ribs were fractured near the
sternal end. Plenuae and middle zone of left lung were lacerated left
pleaural cavity contained about 1000 cc of fluid and clotted blood. The
tract of wound contained fluid and clotted blood 2 pallet embedded in
the tract.
7. Lacerated wound 5cm x 4 5 cm with irregular and inverted
margins were present over left side of chest just posterior to
midaxillary line 12 cm below axılla underlying structures skin, sub-
cutaenous tissues muscles were lacerated, 7 th and 8 th ribs were
fractured. Pleurae and lung were lacerated, two pallets recovered from
the tract Clotted blood was present. Pleural cavity full of fluid and
clotted blood.
8. Lacerated wound 1.5cm x 1 cm with irregular inverted margine
present over left side of chest in lowere part over mid axillary line.
Clotted blood present on dissection underlying structure skins, sub-
cutaneous tissues, muscles were lacerated, 10 th rib was fractured.
Peritoneum was lacerated Spleen was ruptured and two pallets
recovered from it. Abdominal cavity was full of bluid and clotted blood.
9. Lacerated wound 1.75cm x 1.125 cm oval in shape present on
back of chest just left to midline 17 cm below the lape of neck margins
were inverted, clotted blood was present in and around the wound. On
dissection laceration of skin, sub cutaneous tissues, muscles were
present fasciae of liver and liver was lacerated. one large pallet was
embedded in sub cutaneous tissue of right of chest at level of 8-9 rib
alongwith one small pallet.
36. Further, the doctor concerned opined that the cause of
death of deceased Shingara Singh was owing to neurogenic and
hemorrhage shock as a result of injuries (supra) to the vital organs. All
21 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -22-
the injuries were declared to be ante mortem in nature and also were
declared to be sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course in nature.
37. Both the doctors remained un-cross-examined by the
defence to the extent that the said ante mortem injuries became not
entailed in consequence to the accused firing the fatal bullets at the
bodies of the deceased concerned. Therefore, utmost credit worthiness
is to be assigned to medical evidence.
38. Consequently, since the medical account but corroborates
the eye witness account besides also lends corroboration to the
memo(s) (supra) therebys the charge against the accused is concluded
to be efficaciously proven.
FSL Report
Report No. 262/99/FSL/Exam
Reference No. Letter No. (i) 132101 dated 18.10.99
(ii) C/46451 dated 24.10.99
From SSP Jalandhar
Subject Case FIR No. 204 dated 14.10.99
u/s 302/148/149 IPC, 25/27/54/59 Arms Act,
P.S.Shahkot.
Date of receipt 20.10.99 and 25.10.99
Mode of receipt (C) Balraj Singh No. 3747 and
H.C. Jarnail Singh No. 1252.
Articles received Eight sealed parcels marked A to H and one
unsealed parcel market 'I' in the laboratory.
Seals were found intact and tallied with the
specimen.
Parcel 'A' contained One .315 inch K.F. Live Cartridge marked L/1
in the laboratory.
Parcel 'B' contained Two .315 inch K.F. Live Cartridge cases
marked C/1 and C/2 in the laboratory.
Parcel 'C' contained Two .315 inch K.F. Live Cartridge cases
22 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -23-
marked C/3 and C/4 in the laboratory.
Parcel 'D' contained Four .315 inch K.F. Live Cartridge cases
marked C/5 to C/8 in the laboratory.
Parcel 'E' contained Four deformed pieces of jacket of bullet
Parcel 'F' contained a) small deformed pieces of jacket of bullet.
b) One deformed piece of lead core of bullet.
Parcel 'G' contained One .315 calibre bolt action rifle No.
AB98/4987 marked W/1 in the laboratory.
Parcel 'H' contained One .315 calibre bolt action rifle No.
87AB/0991 marked W/2 in the laboratory.
Parcel 'I' contained Ten .315 inch test cartridges.
Result of Examination
1. Six .315 inch/8 mm cartridge cases marked C/1, C/2, C/4, C/5,
C/7 and C/8 contained in parcels B, C and D have been fired from .315
inch rifle No. AB98/4987.
2. Two .315 inch/8mm cartridge cases marked C/3 and C/6
contained in parcel C and D have been fired from .315 inch rifle No.
87AB/0991.
39. The report of the FSL concerned, relevant paragraph
whereof are extracted hereinabove, does vividly pronounce, that the
recovered firearm, as became sent there for examination by the ballistic
expert, thus in sealed cloth parcels, rather was the relevant firearm
wherefrom the bullet, hence became fired, besides pronounces that the
said firearm was in a working condition. In sequitur, with this Court
assigning credence to the testification, of the ocular witness to the
occurrence, and, when in tandem therewith, the ballistic expert, has also
made an opinion qua the fired cartridge, becoming fired, from .315 inch
rifle No. 87AB/0991, as became recovered through recovery memo
Ex.PY/1, at the instance of the accused. Consequently, the charge
23 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -24-
drawn against the accused is to be concluded to become invincibly
proven.
40. However, on the basis of the hereinafter extracted
purported indefinite opinion made by the FSL concerned, whereins,
expressions occur that owing to lack of sufficient individual
characteristic marks on the relevant items, thus it could not be
conclusively stated that the deformed pieces of jacket and core of
bullets contained in parcels E and F becoming fired from either of the
two .315 inch rifles.
"No definite opinion could be given regarding firing of
disformed pieces of jackets and core of bullets
contained in parcels E and F from either of the two .315
inch rifles under reference, due to lack of sufficient
individual characteristic marks on them."
41. However, the said indefiniteness of opinion also cannot
garner any exculpatory effect. The reason for making the said
conclusion becomes sparked from the factum that the said
indefiniteness of opinion would have the apposite exculpatory effect,
only if, there was clinching evidence adduced by the defence, either
through suggestions being made to the ballistic expert concerned, or
through the leading into the witness box, vis-a-vis the manufacturer of
the guns', and, with thereins affirmative speakings occurring qua the
bullets contained in parcels E and F, thus holding certain specific
characteristic marks. However, when there is evident omission of
adduction of evidence (supra), therebys the mere indefiniteness of
24 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -25-
opinion, but is in-consequential nor therebys the inculpatory effect of
the disclosure statements, recovery memo(s) besides the credible ocular
account rendered qua the crime event, rather cannot become erased.
42. Paramountly also, when the bullets were evidently
extracted from the bodies of the deceased, thus by the doctors
concerned, besides when there is no evidence, that the statement (supra)
made by the doctors concerned appertaining to the bullets being
extracted from the bodies, rather suffering from any prevarication.
43. Moreover, reiteratedly when it becomes pointedly stated by
PW-1, that the said bullets became extracted from the bodies of the
deceased concerned, whereafter they became enclosed in sealed cloth
parcels. Since subsequently PW-1, deposed that the said sealed cloth
parcels became handed over to the investigating officer concerned.
Moreover, when thereafters the apposite sealed cloth parcels became
evidently deposited in the malkhana concerned, whereafters they
became evidently sent in an un- tampered and un-spoiled condition to
the FSL concerned. Therefores, when the bullets as became extracted
from the bodies of the deceased concerned, and which became declared
in the FSL report to become fired from the recovered fire arms, are to
be concluded to be the bullets which obviously entered the bodies of
the deceased concerned, but irrespective of the factum that the said
bullets not holding any specific characteristic marks.
25 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -26-
Final Order of this Court.
44. In consequence, there is no merit in appeals CRA-D-603-
DB-2003 & CRA-D-731-DB-2003 and are accordingly dismissed. The
impugned verdict, and, consequent therewith sentence(s) (supra), as
imposed upon the convicts by the learned Convicting Court, is affirmed
and maintained.
45. If the convicts (supra) are on bail, thereupon, the
sentences(s) as imposed upon the convicts-appellants, be ensured to be
forthwith executed by the learned trial Judge concerned, through his
forthwith drawing committal warrants.
46. Insofar as CRR-1630-2003, filed by the widow of the
deceased Balkar Singh is concerned, since the instant case is not a
rarest of the rare case, thus therebys this Court is constrained to not
impose capital punishment, upon the convicts. However, the imposition
of the fine amount of Rs. 2000/- upon each of the accused is extremely
minimal, and, is required to be enhanced, as the fine amount is required
to be on its realization disbursed to the family members of the
deceased. Therefore, CRR-1630-2003 is allowed only to the extent, that
the above sentence of fine comprised in the sum of Rs. 2000/- each, as
imposed upon each of the convicts on the counts (supra) being ordered
to be enhanced to Rs. 50,000/- each. Further on realization of the said
fine amount, the same shall be disbursed as victim compensation to the
family members of the deceased. However, in default of payment of
fine amount (supra), the convicts-appellants shall undergo further
26 of 27
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:118911-DB
CRA-D-603-DB-2003 and connected cases -27-
rigorous imprisonment for one year. All the sentence(s) (supra) shall
run concurrently.
47. Furthermore, the connected petition bearing number CRR-
98-2001 deserves rejection on the ground that the dis-affirmative order
passed on an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., has merged into the
verdict of conviction, as made by the learned trial Judge concerned.
Resultantly, the CRR-98-2001 becomes rendered infructuous and is
disposed of as such.
48. The case property, if any, be dealt with in accordance with
law after the expiry of period of limitation for the filing of an appeal.
The records be sent down forthwith.
49. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other
connected cases.
(SURESHWAR THAKUR)
JUDGE
(SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
06.09.2024 JUDGE
kavneet singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
27 of 27
