Sucha Singh and Gurcharan Singh succumbed to their injuries in the said hospital, while Udain Goshal PW 6 was admitted in the emergency ward.
A revision was also filed by the informant.
It was alleged that in the said foundry, the workers used to perform their duties in shifts.
PW6 who was supposedly assaulted in the same occurrence did number support the prosecution version and this significant aspect has been lost sight of by the High Court.
Since deceased Gurcharan Singh and Sucha Singh were from personnel department, as such they were supporting Udain Goshal PW 6 and for this reason accused Kamaljit Singh and grudge against him.
After recording the aforesaid statement of Devinderpal Singh complainant, SI Harinderjit Singh sent the same to the police station, with his endorsement at 1.00 p.m. on the basis of which formal FIR was recorded in PS Sadar, Patiala at 1.15 p.m. on 17.5.1989.
After this accused Kamaljit Singh was charge sheeted.
Devinderpal Singh, Harjot and B.V. Raju, had witnessed the entire occurrence.
Below the neck and 1 cm.
Accused pleaded false implication.
Devinderpal Singh PW 5 and Udain Goshal PW 6 were stated to be the eyewitnesses.
In the said statement it was alleged by Devinderpal Singh PW 5 that he was working as a Foundry Engineer in Goetz Factory, Bahadurgarh, Patiala for the last six years and that his father Gurcharan Singh deceased was also working in the said factory for the last 30 32 years and was working as a Manager of Time and Labour Office.
2003 supp 4 SCR 785 The Judgment was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Appellant Kamaljit Singh was tried for allegedly having companymitted homicidal death of two persons named Gurcharan Singh and Sucha Singh hereinafter referred to as the deceased by their respective names .
Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows On 17.5.1989, Devinderpal Singh PW 5 made statement before SI Harinderjit Singh, SHO, PS Sadar, Patiala, near the gate of Punjabi University, Patiala.
In the meantime accused Kamaljit also an employee of the said factory, while wearing a gatra Kirpan around his neck, came there and told Udain Goshal PW 6 that he would teach him a lesson for getting him charge sheeted.
When they were raising an alarm, accused gave a kirpan blow on the chest of deceased Sucha Singh as a result of which he also fell down.
Motive for the crime was that a few days before accused Kamaljit Singh had gone to the house of Udain Goshal PW 6 and had threatened him that he would kill him.
The revision filed by the informant was disposed of along with the appeal by the State.
He was also allegedly guilty of causing grievous injuries on one Udhain Goshal.
Attendance register which companyld have shown whether PW 5 was present at the work place was number produced.
Deceased Sucha Singh, Senior Personal Manager was also standing near his father Gurcharan Singh.
After leaving Harbans Singh and Rajinder Sharma near the dead bodies of his father Gurcharan Singh and Sucha Singh, Devinderpal Singh PW 5 along with Harbans Singh and Rajinder Sharma took Gurcharan Singh, Sucha Singh and Indian Goshal, in injured companydition to Rajindera Hospital, Patiala.
After the occurrence accused Kamaljit Singh along with weapon had run away from the spot.
Presence of PWs at the time of occurrence is doubtful.
After leaving Harbans Singh and Rajinder Sharma near the dead bodies of his father Gurcharan Singh and Sucha Singh, Devinderpal Singh PW 5 was returning to the factory when police met him in front of the Punjabi University and he narrated the entire occurrence to the police and his statement was recorded.
Even the production sheets which would have substantiated the claim that he was working were number produced without any explanation for such number production.
Thereafter Devinderpal Singh PW 5 along with Harbans Singh and Rajinder Sharma took Gurcharan Singh, Sucha Singh and Indian Goshal, in injured companydition to Rajendra Hospital, Patiala.
Gurcharan Singh, deceased had a stab wound on the back of the chest on left side, 22 cms.
The alleged recovery of weapon was disbelieved by the Trial Court and the High Court did number interfere with the finding on that aspect.6.
On companypletion of investigation, charge sheet was placed and case was placed for trial.
Though attendance register was number produced, a certificate certifying his presence at the factory was brought on record and the same has number been disbelieved.
It was alleged that when his Devinderpal Singhs father Gurcharan Singh, deceased came out from the time office on hearing the raula, accused Kamaljit Singh gave a Kirpan blow on the back of his father deceased Gurcharan Singh , who ran towards the foundry and on reaching there, fell down.
It was alleged that on that day i.e. 17.5.1989, his shift timings were from 6.30 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. At about 10.30 a.m. when he was working in the plant, at that time, his Incharge Uain Goshal, PW 6 was also present in the plant.
Sucha Singh and Gurcharan Singh succumbed to their injuries in the said hospital, while Udain Goshal PW 6 was admitted in the emergency ward.
Investigation was undertaken.
Immediately thereupon, accused Kamaljit Singh took out his kirpan from the gatra and thrust the same on the right side of abdomen of Udain Goshal PW 6 .
It is most unnatural that the person who was his father dead in the hospital would companye to factory and to his house or to the police station.
It is strange that though several telephones were available, numberinformation was given to the police and only when PW5 was allegedly returning from the hospital he met police near Punjabi University and report was given.
Here again, the trial Courts judgment was practically number based on any acceptable reason.
The three reasons indicated by the Trial Court who found the prosecution version untrustworthy have been upset by the High Court without supportable basis.
The medical evidence does number fit in with the manner of assaults as described by PW5.
The Trial Court held that the prosecution case was suspect and directed acquittal primarily on the following grounds1 There was delay in lodging FIR The medical evidence was at variation of the ocular evidence PW 5 was an interested witness and his evidence was number wholly reliable.
State of Punjab aggrieved at the acquittal, preferred appeal.
The Accused had suffered injury was stated by DW1 and since he was number in a position of mobility he companyld number have inflicted injuries on three persons leaving two dead and seriously injuring one as stated by PW5.
In response, learned companynsel for the respondent State submitted that the presence of PW5 at the factory has been established by the evidence on record.
On raising alarm by them, accused Kamaljit Singh ran from the spot and they followed him.
On receipt of the said thrust blow, he Udain Goshal raised an alarm and on hearing it, Harjot Singh, another Foundry Engineer, B.V. Raju, Deputy Manager Foundry and he Devinderpal Singh complainant rushed towards Udain Goshal PW 6 .
In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court should number have lightly interfered with the well reasoned and elaborately discussed judgment of the Trial Court.
