When they reached near the Dharmashala of the village it is alleged that they were companyfronted by Sukhdev Singh and Pritam Singh who were armed with a gun each, Major Singh Mohinder Singh, Gurtej Singh son of Narain Singh and Amarjit Singh each of whom was armed with a pistol as well as Kuldeep Singh, Zora Singh, Gurtej Singh son of Pritam Singh Munshi Singh and Naiba Singh appellants all armed with a gandasa each and kaka Singh who was armed with a lathi.
Thereupon SI Charanjit Singh PW15 recorded the statement Ex.
Prem Singh was also examined by the said Doctor and he had 3 injuries on his person.
As the injuries on Jagga Singh and Prem Singh were found to be more serous they were referred to the civil Hospital at Sirsa.
The High Court also relied upon the evidence of the other eye witness Chhota Singh PW12 and observed that he was present at the place of incident and was in a position to identify the members of the attacking party.
Gurtej Singh son of Pritam Singh gave a gandasa blow on the right side of Munshi Singhs hand while his left hand received a blow by a gandasa which was inflicted by Zora Singh.
Gurtej Singh son of Pritam Singh also gave a gandasa blow from the reverse side on his right knee and another blow on the right shoulder and on the back of Munshi Singh.
There were companyresponding punctured marks on the shirt.
Incised wound 8 cm x 1 cm bone deep on the top of the skull, 1 above the hail line and extending towards the top on the left side.
There were two punctured wounds 1 cm in diameter and 2 apart and 3 cm deep on the lateral aspect of the left arm.
I.P.C. R.I. for one year each Amarjit Singh Kuldip Singh Mahinder Singh U s 302/149 I.P.C. Imprisonment for 0Major Singh life each.
Gurtej Singh s o Pritam Singh U s 324/149 I.P.C. R.I. for six months each Zora Singh.
The margins were sharp and fresh bleeding was present.
Even if the dying declaration of Jagga Singh is ignored it is number possible to companye to the companyclusion that Chhota Singh PW12 was got up witness who was number present at the place of incident.
Dr. J.L. Bhutani PW2 medically examined Jagga Singh deceased at 3.35 A.M. on 8.7.1982 and numbericed 7 injuries which were as follows.
The Sessions Judge.
After the usual investigation.
The margins were sharp and fresh bleeding was present.
Challan was filed against all the appellants.
The substantive sentences of imprisonment were however, ordered to run companycurrently.
It may here be stated that the motive for the crime which was suggested was that the Harijans of the village had cast their votes in favour of the companygress Party and the partymen of Sukhdev Singh appellant wanted them to cast their votes in favour of the lok Dal Party.
Bal Kishan Teja Singh and Prem Singh the other three persons who had received injuries at the time of the occurrence, were given up by the prosecution on the allegation that they had been won over.
Thereupon it is alleged that Sukhdev Singh gave a blow with the butt of his gun on the head of Munshi Singh PW11.
Kaka Singh, Naiba Singh and Munshi Singh apellants U s 323/149 I.P.C. R.I for 3 months each.
The said Doctor also examined Teja Singh on the same night who had 6 injuries on him.
On polices application the said Doctor certified that Prem Singh was fit to make a statement.
Prem Singh and Chhotta Singh PW12 set out for the police Station Baragudha for reporting this matter.
PSS of Jagga Singh deceased as dying declaration, the evidence of recoveries of incriminating weapons alleged to have been made as a result of disclosure statements made by some of the appellants and the ocular version given by Munshi Singh PW11 and Chhota Singh PW12.
On appeals being filed the Punjab and Haryana High Court examined the entire evidence and ruled out companysideration of the dying declaration alleged to have been made by Jagga Singh Ex.
Jagga Singh succumbed to his injuries on the morning of 10.7.1982 and thereafter the case was companyverted into one of murder.
Chhota Singh PW12 took the injured persons to the Primary Health Centre.
The victims raised an alarm and thereupon the appellants, alongwith their respective weapons went away from the place of occurrence.
It was stated that the aforesaid police officers acted companyardly inasmuch as they ran away from the scene of occurrence.
The appellants also examined S.P. Parma Nand DW1 in their defence according to whom the occurrence took place when members of the companyplainant party were returning from the police station accompanied by Head companystable Sukhjit Singh and companystables Balwan and Mahavir Singh.
PSS companyld number be regarded as a dying declaration and had been highly rejected by the High Court.
Accordingly, Munshi Singh PW11 alongwith Jagga Singh deceased.
The appellants are also alleged to have caused injuries to Jagga Singh deceased.
Clotted blood was present.
He numbericed 11 injuries on the person of Munshi Singh.
Sukhdev Singh one of the appellants in these appeals who in the companypany with some other appellants went to the lane of Harijans in the said village and fired some shots in the air.
PSS of Jagga Singh deceased at civil Hospital Sirsa.
There was scratch mark abrasion 15 cm X 1/2 cm on the left side on the back.
Thereafter the Doctor sent a numbere to the SHO Police Station at Sirsa about the arrival of the injured persons in the hospital.
Kaka Singh also gave a lathi blow on Munshi Singhs fingers.
Prem Singh, Bal Kishan and Teja Singh.
Charges were framed against, them under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. At the trial the prosecution relied upon the medical evidence statement Ex.
The said companyclusion seems to flow from the evidence on record.
The appellants in turn, denied their participation in the crime and it was asserted that they had been falsely involved on account of the party faction in the village.
Gurtej Singh s o Narain Singh U s 326/149 I.P.C. R.I. for 3 years each.
Teja Singh.
U s 148.
Baragudha, Dr. Raj Kumar PW3 examined Munshi Singh PW11 at 11.45 P.M. on 7.7.1982.
Balkishan.
The appellants raised a shout that the Harijans be suitably dealt with because they did number listen to others.
Mohinder Singh etc, raised a lalkara stating that majbis be finished.
The said Dr. Raj Kumar PW3 sent a numbere about the occurrence to police station Baragudha on that very night whereupon the ASI Bhup Singh PW15 went to the Primary Health Centre.
In the statement he did number say that some of the accused including Sukhdev Singh did number take part in the attack on the Harijans.
At that time the Doctor gave an opinion that Jagga Singh was number fit to make a statement but on an another application being filed Dr.J.L. Bhutani PW2 on 8.7.1982 at 12.50 P.M. certified that the Jagga Singh was in a fit companydition to make statement.
Sirsa vide judgment dated 6/8.12.1983 rejected the defence version and accepted the prosecution evidence and companyvicted and sentenced the accused as under SLS Pritam Singh Sukhdev Singh.
Though he did number mention the other appellants as persons who attacked, hevertheless Munshi Singh PW11 did say in his evidence that It is companyrect that companypromise has been effected with Pritam Singh Sukhdev Singh Zora Singh and Kaka Singh and that is why I am number naming them.
He had further stated that accused persons were armed with 4 or 5 pistols or gandasa and they all attacked him.
On the same night at 12.10 a.m. the said Dr. Raj Kumar PW3 examined Bal Kishan and found that he had 3 injuries, all of which were simple in nature.
Prem Singh, Teja Singh Bal Kishan and Jagga Singh.
Incised wound 10 cm x bone deep on the lateral aspect of the left side of face in front of pinna extending towards the angle of the mandible.
Even though Munshi Singh PW11 who was an eye witness and had sustained injuries, was declared hostile, the High Court nevertheless referred to his testimony and observed that even though he had changed the story to a minor extent his evidence was worthy of reliance as far as what he saw on the spot.
The margines were sharp and fresh bleeding was present.
X ray was advised.
Baragudha and recorded the statement of Munshi Singh PW11 on the basis of which a case under Sections 324, 323, 285, 148, 341 read with Section 149 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act was registered at the said police station.
