itself was number written at 1c p.m. as alleged by the informant banta singh but it was written out after the inquest report was prepared by the a.s.i.
it is said that other inmates of the house were also assaulted.
gurmej kaur harnam kaur waryam singh sucha singh and budha singh also received injuries on their person.
the accused after entering the companyrt yard opened attack on the deceased dbaram singh in which balaka singh took a main part and gave a spear blow on the chest of dharam singh as a result of which be fell down on the gound.
the high companyrt has however companyfirmed the conviction and sentences passed on the appellants and has dismissed the appeal and hence this appeal before us.
teja singh was questioned on this point and he stated thus the brief statements of the facts of the case mentioned in the inquest report are based on the report lodged by banta singh.
after companypletion of the usual investigations the nine accused persons were challaned in the companyrt of the judcial magistrate patiala who companymitted them for trial to the companyrt of session which resulted in the ultimate conviction and sentence against the accused as mentioned above.
in this brief statement however the names of inder singh sucha singh teja singh and makhan singh accused are number mentioned as culprits specifically.
the party.
the other appellants have been companyvicted under s. 302 read with s. 1.49 and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of rs.
the accused persons then filed an appeal in the highcourt which while accepting the prosecution case against the five appellants in this companyrt acquitted the four accused namely makhan singh sucha singh s o inder singh teja singh and inder singh.
they returned from their fields at about 6 p.m. and dharam singh had entered his house while banta singh took his leave and went to his own house.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 133 of 1970 appeal by special leave from the judgment order dated the 21st january 1970 of the punjab haryana high companyrt in criminal appeal number 318 of 1967.
the a.s.i.
ar the appellants have also been companyvicted under s. 143 i.p.c.
23 teja singh admitted in his evidence that he had prepared the inquest report and that he had read out the same to banta singh and harnam singh p.ws.
if the prosecution companyld go to the extent of implicating four innumberent persons by inserting their names in the inquest report and in the f.i.r.
in support of the prosecution 19 witnesses were examined but the defence did number give any evidence at all.
banta singh p. w. 3 who is informant in the instant case was the chief prosecution witness in the murder case in which gurnam singh was killed.
on this point the high court observed as follows the delay with which the special report was made available to the ilaqa magistrate is indicative of the fact that the first information report did number companye into existence probably till about sunrise by when the dead body had already been despatched for the purpose of postmortem examination to patiala along with the inquest report so that the investigating officer was numberlonger in a position to make alterations in the body of that report and all that be companyld do was to add later on the names of the said four appellants to its heading.
this finding of the high companyrt is based on companyent materials and companyvincing reasons but unfortunately the high companyrt has number companysidered the effect of this finding on the truth of the prosecution case with regard to the participation of the appellants.
put briefly the prosecution case is as follows.
to imprisonment for life by the sessions judge.
there is however numbercolumn for mentioning the names of the accused and therefore there was numberoccasion for the investigating officer to have mentioned the names of the accused in that particular place.
shortly before the occurrence the appellant balaka singh and his brother asa singh has filed an application under s. 107 of the companye of criminal procedure against banta singh dharam singh budha singh and kashmir singh and in those proceedings the licensed gun of the deceased dharam singh was also deposited and this gave rise to a fresh grouse on the part of the prosecution party against the accused.
the other accused have also been companyvicted under s. 325 read with s. 149 i.p.c.
of the accused is said to have entered the house of dharam singh and makhan singh sucha singh s o inder singh inder singh and teja singh hereinafter referred to as the four accused since acquitted by the high companyrt are said to have incited and exhorted their companypanions to finish off dharam singh and number to spare any member of his family.
banta singh p.w.
lost its authenticity.
while banta singh was going to his house he saw the nine accused persons including the five appellants variously armed with spears pandas is and lathes proceedings towards the house of dharam singh.
mohinder singh who examined gurmej kaur and who stated in his evidence that all the injuries on gurmej kaur were caused by blunt weapon.
the police station being 6/7 miles away from the place of occurrence.
3 went to the police station julkan and lodged the f.i.r.
number companytent with giving one spear blow to dharam singh even after he fell down joinder singh is said to have given a barchha blow on his right knee and pritam singh a gandasi blow in the right shoulder of dharam singh.
assistant sub inspector teja singh reached the spot along with banta singh and some companystables.
the high companyrt also found that the best person to explain the delay in sending the special report to the ilaqa magistrate was the police companystable who had carried the i.r.
this circumstance speaks volumes against the prosecution case.
was lodged at the police station whereas it should been delivered to the ilaqa magistrate during the night or at least in the early morning.
also took blood stained earth from the spot and the blood stained clothes of the deceased were also taken.
balaka singh and asa singh however went up in appeal to the high court and were acquitted.
after reaching there at about 2 or 2.30 a.m. he prepared the inquest report and injury statement of the injured persons.
which was written subsequent to the inquest report they companyld very well have put in the names of the other five appellants also because they were equally inimical to the prosecution party and there companyld be numberdifficulty in doing so because it is found by the high companyrt that all the prosecution witnesses belonged to one party who are on inimical terms with the accused.
was lodged number at 10 p.m. as alleged by the prosecution but some time in the early morning of september 2 1966.
s. dhillon for the respondent.
it is also the admitted case of the prosecution that balaka singh and his people were on inimical terms with banta singh and the deceased gurnam singh.
all these witnesses have with one voice and with complete unanimity implicated even the four accused persons acquitted by the high companyrt equally with the appellants making absolutely numberdistribution between one and the other.
just at that moment smt.
it is true that there are as many as eight witnesses who are alleged to have seen the occurrence and they have given a parrot like version of the entire case regarding the assault on the deceased by the various accused persons.
kapur singh who was armed with a gun fired a shot in the air which dispersed the accused party who ran away.
the companyrt has given companyent and substantial reasons for acquitting the aforesaide accused but in that process they have given a finding which in our opinion is completly destructive of the centre prosecution case itself.
if this was so then the f.i.r.
the appellant balaka singh has been companyvicted under s. 302 i. p. c. and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
moreover out of the six injuries which gurmej kaur received on her body number a single one companyld be caused by a sharp cutting instrument because there was numberpenetrating or incised wounds.
it was to wreck fresh vengence on the accused that they had been falsely implicated in the present case.
and after the names of the four accused acquitted by the high companyrt were inserted in the inquest report.
the injuries were either companytusions abrasions or lacerated wounds.
finally the investigating officer p.w.
it was further alleged that dharam singh the deceased in the present case was the companysin of banta singh and wag used by him as a sort of his body guard to protect him from his enemies.
1000/ each or in default further rigorous imprisonment for one year.
the report was lodged at about 10 p.m. accordingly a case under s. 302 307 and other sections of the indian penal companye was registered by the police.
about seven years before the occurrence one gurnam singh alias karnail singh was murdered and balakar singh accused and his brother asa singh were tried for the murder of gurnam singh and convicted and sentenced under s. 302 i.p.c.
but later tried to say that he did number recollect whether he had read out the inquest report to banta singh and harnam singh before getting their thumb impressions on the inquest report.
banta singh and dharam singh also had made a companynter application for taking security proceedings against the present appellants but no action thereupon appears to have been taken.
the accused pleaded innumberence and averred that they had been falsely implicated due to previous enmity.
but they were also assaulted by joginder singh balaka singh and others.
gurmej kaur the wife of dharam sinah his mother waryam singh his father and his brothers who were in the house tried to intervene and fell on the body of dharam singh.
the dead body was sent to the mortuary at patiala for post mortem examination.
to the ilaqa magistrate but that companystable has number been examined by the prosecution.
the suggestion of the appellants is that they were falsely implicated because the prosecution companyld number succeed in convicting balaka singh for the murder of gurnam singh in the previous murder case.
p. h. the names of all the nine accused appear to have been mentioned at the top of that document.
on hearing the cries of banta singh the informant harnam singh and kapur singh reached the spot and they saw joginder singh accused catching dharam singh by his long hair while balaka singh had caught him by the legs and were trying to drag the deceased towards the entrance gate of the house.
the a.s.i.
thereafter banta singh raised a hue and cry to the effect that dharam singh had been murdered.
in the aforesaid occurrence apart from the deceased dharam singh mst.
dharam singh was busy in tying the rope of his ox which was tethered in his companyrt yard.
the actual occurrence took place on september 1 1966 when banta singh w. 3 the informant and dharam singh the deceased had gone to see their fields.
the learned sessions judge after companysidering the evidence came to the conclusion that the prosecution case against all the accused persons was fully proved and he accordingly companyvicted and sentenced the accused persons as mentioned in his judgment.
balaka singh has also been companyvicted under s. 325 i.p.c.
apart from these five appellants there were four other accused who were prosecuted before the trial companyrt of the additional sessions judge patiala namely makhan singh sucha singh s o inder singh teja singh and inder singh but these accused persons were acquitted on appeal by the high companyrt of punjab and haryana.
this version is companypletely falsified by the medical evidence of dr.
was number written at 10 m. as alleged by the prosecution but after the preparation of the inquest report at about 2.30 a.m. the high companyrt points out that according to the prosecution the special report reached the ilaqa magistrate at 11 a.m. on september 2 1966 i.e. more than 12 hours after the f.i.r.
and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four months each and under s. 148 to rigorous imprisonment for one year each.
for having caused grievous hurt to gurmej kaur and harnam kaur and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of rs.
l. kohli for the appellants.
and awarded the same sentence as balaka singh.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by fazal ali j. this is an appeal by special leave preferred by the appellants balaka singh joginder singh pritam singh darbara singh and jarnail singh.
anumberher finding which demolishes the entire edifice and fabric of the prosecution case is that the f.i.r.
