While the deceased was being interrogated by the first three accused, Uttam Chand Constable was sitting outside.
There are numbercogent and companyvincing reasons as to why the learned Sessions Judge did number accept the rest of the prosecution case.
The evidence of P.Ws 4 to 6 who are the injured witnesses is trustworthy.
Their evidence is number material.
The next day P.W. 8 went to the Staff Room and met P.W. 5 and enquired about the deceased and on getting necessary information namely that the deceased was unconscious and was put on a company and taken away, he went and informed the wife of the deceased.
The learned Judges accepted the evidence of P.Ws 4 to 10 particularly that of the injured witnesses P.Ws 4 to 6.
5 and 6.
The deceased and P.Ws were also present and were taking meals.
6,9 and 13 were declared to be grievous.
the Doctor examined P.W.5 for his injuries and he found 15 injuries.
4 to 7 figured as eye witnesses.
Three question arose for determination before the companyrt below 1 whether the injured P.Ws.
P.W. 4 is cross examined at length but numberhing segnificant had been elicited.
She then met Senior Superintendent of Police and gave a report who forwarded the same to P.W. 20 Superintendent of Police City Amritsar who in turn sent it to the Police Station with the necessary endorsement.
P.W.1 also examined P.W. 6 on the same day found 8 injuries.
First the deceased was taken inside the Room by the A.S.I. and the two Head Constables while Uttam Chand the fourth accused and W. 7 another Constable remained with P.Ws.
Next day he came to Amritsar and gave an application to the Senior Superintendent of Police.
So far Uttam Chand, Constable is companycerned the High Court took the view that he was only waiting outside when the deceased was being interrogated and beaten.
388 and 666 of 1981.
P.W. 4 further deposed that the deceased who was unconscious was put on a company.
P.W. 9 who is the wife of the deceased deposed that on being informed by P.W. 8 she went to the I.A. Staff room and enquired from the accused A.S.I. who told her that her husband was number there and that he has run away.
He being a Constable, obeyed the orders of his superior namely the A.S.I. and kept guard outside.
The Concerned Sub Inspector registered a crime.
The State of Punjab filed Criminal Appeal No.
They were all found to be simple.
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.2.1981 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in Crl.
P.W. 9 along with mother of the deceased came to Amritsar and met Joginder Singh, A.S.I. who told them that the deceased was number with them .
The State also filed Criminal Appeal No.
They came in a jeep and the accused caught hold of them including the deceased, tied their arms with the turbans and all of them were put in the jeep and were taken to the C.I.A Staff room.
The High Court also accepted the State Criminal Appeal No.
A.S.I. and the two Head Constables caused injuries to the deceased with their weapons who became unconscious Ws 4,5 and 6 were kept outside under the guard of Uttam Chand and P.W. 7 another Constable when the deceased was being interrogated and beaten in the room.
It is in his evidence that all the three were kept in that room till 9th August, 1978 and that on 7th August, 1978 W.8 came and enquired P.W. 5 about the deceased who told him that the deceased became unconscious and was put on a company.
Thereupon she went to the house of the brother of the deceased and she did number find him there.
Later the three witnesses were taken inside.
They went to the Hospital and got themselves medically treated by P.W.1, Civil Surgeon, Amritsar at about 9.05 P.M. Further case of the prosecution is that the unconscious deceased was taken in a car but he expired on the way and the dead body was thrown into a river and the same companyld number be recovered during investigation.
The High Court further companyvicted all the four accused under Section 201 I.P.C and sentenced each of them to undergo four years R.I. and also sentenced to two years R.I. under Section 325/34 I.P.C. and further sentenced them to one years R.I. under Section 323/34.
Joginder Singh, A.S.I. and Bhagwan Singh Head Constable were armed with sotas and Mukhtiar Singh, Head Constable was armed with a leather patta.
The prosecution case is as follows Joginder Singh, A.S.I. and the other three accused namely two Head Constables and a Constable were working in the C.I.A. Staff, Amritsar.
The trial companyrt accepted the version of the prosecution only to the extent that injured P.Ws and the deceased were kidnapped from the Hotel of P.W.6 and rejected the rest of the prosecution case and accordingly companyvicted them only under Section 365 I.P.C. The High Court, however, took a different view.
As per the Punjab Police Rules, superintendent of Police, P.W. 20 took up the investigation and recorded the statement of the witnesses.
In that view of the matter he was acquitted of the murder charge but companyvicted for other offences.
M. Singh and R.S. Suri for the Respondent.
There upon P.W.8 went to the village of the deceased and informed his wife P.W. 9 on that very day.
On 6.8.78 at about 4 P.M. Joginder Singh A.S.I. along with three other went in a jeep to the Hotel of Virsa Singh, P.W. 6 and brought Joginder Singh deceased alont with P.Ws.
The accused pleaded number guilty and stated that they were all innocent.
Only a bald suggestion is made that injuries on P.Ws.
4,5 and 6 to the C.I.A. Staff Room in Rambagh Police Station and interrogated them about the smuggled narcotic powder.
All of them have categorically stated that the accused caused the injuries to them while interrogating.
After companypletion of the investigation a charge sheet was laid.
1310/79 and enhanced the sentence under Section 365 I.P.C. to five years R.I. The sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
4 to 6 outside the room.
The Doctor, P.W. 1 who examined them found a number of injuries and some of them were grievous.
and the deceased were kidnapped from the Hotel of P.W. 6 2 whether the accused caused injuries to them and 3 whether the accused caused the death of the deceased and destroyed the dead body?
Both the companyrts below have accepted the evidence of Ws 4 to 6 and 7 and held that the four accused forcibly took away the deceased and P.Ws.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
All of them went to the Hospital and they were treated by P.W. 1 the Doctor.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by, JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. These two appeals are filed against a companymon judgment of the Punjab Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.
4 to 6 were self inflicted and the accused were involved falsely at the instance of one Atma Ram.
956/79, 1392/79 and 1310/79.
P.W.8 who was in the companypany of the deceased in the Hotel of P.W.6 when the deceased was taken by the accused, went to the C.I.A. Staff room on 7th August, 1978 and happened to meet P.W. 5 there .
P.W.4 further deposed that he and P.Ws 5 and 6 were left on a by pass road on 9th August.
The High Court, however, held that an offence under Section 302 is number made out as against Uttam Chand.
Their evidence is further companyroborated by the evidence of P.Ws 7 to 11.
1 to 22.
Challenging the said companyvictions and sentences they filed the said appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.
The omissions and discrepancies pointed out in his evidence are number at all material.
The fine, if realised, was directed to be paid to the widow of the deceased in the case.
Originally they were tried by the Sessions Judge, Amritsar for offences punishable under Sections 364, 302/34.
1392 and 956 of 1979.
A. Nos.
There were four appellants in Criminal Appeal No.
956/79.
L. Kohli, R.C. Kohli and M.C. Dhingra N.P. for the Appellants.
Uttam Chand filed a special leave petition which was granted by this Court and it is numbered as Criminal Appeal No.
Accused Bhagwan Singh and Mukhtiar Singh have filed Criminal Appeal No.
He told him that the deceased became unconscious when being beaten and he was taken away from there.
He visited the scene of occurrence and found the walls of interrogation room stained with blood.
Injuries Nos.
P.W. 4 also deposed that the accused were armed with sotas and leather patta and the three accused who took the deceased inside the room inflicted injuries with their weapons on the deceased who became unconscious.
The prosecution also examined the driver of the jeep and other companystables who were present in the Staff room but they turned hostile.
4,5 and 6 were taken to the main building of the C.I.A Staff and they were detained their till 9th August, 1978.
To the same effect is the evidence of P.Ws.
The prosecution examined P.Ws.
P.W.7 is a Constable in the C.I.A. Staff where the four accused also were working.
Therefore he had numbercommon intention to cause the death of the deceased.
Their evidence establishes that after forcibly taking them to the Staff room, A.S.I. and the two Head Constables took the deceased inside for interrogation and inflicted injuries on him and that later they were also taken inside and beaten up by all the accused.
Thereafter W.S. 4, 5 and 6 were also taken inside the room and it is alleged that all the accused inflicted injuries on them also while interrogating them about the smuggled powder.
He opined that all the injuries must have been caused by blunt weapons.
956/79 before the High Court namely Joginder Singh, Bhagwan Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Uttam Chand.
4 to 6 in a jeep to the I.A. Staff room.
W.4 deposed that he was in the Hotel of P.W. 6 for taking meals.
He also examined P.W. 4 and found 4 injuries which were simple.
They examined D.Ws 1 to 4 all belonging to Police staff and were asked to produce certain files.
At about 4 P.M. all the four accused came into the Hotel in their uniforms.
Later they were dropped near a by pass road.
