State of Punjab v. Gurdev Singh (SC) BS173135
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- D.M. Sharma and D.A. Pasayat, JJ.

Criminal Appeal Nos. 349-350 of 2002. D/d. 17.10.2008.

State of Punjab - Appellant

Versus

Gurdev Singh - Respondent

Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302 and 34 - Murder - Appeal against acquittal - Allegation that accused persons inflicted injuries of soti(stick) and hockey that resulted in death of deceased - Accused convicted under Section 302 for life imprisonment by trial court - However blood was found on scene of occurrence by investigating officer - Also found no sign of homicidal attack - Even number of cooler (driven by deceased) mentioned incorrect - Scene of occurrence shifted - Further evidence established that prosecution tried to convert vehicular accident's case into homicidal death - Hence acquittal upheld.

[Para 8]

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. - Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court directing acquittal of the respondents. It is to be noted that four out of six respondents were found guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'Indian Penal Code') and sentence of imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation. It was awarded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur.

2. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows :

Further, the case of the prosecution is that Bhupinder Singh died in C.M.C Ludhiana, on 17.7.1994. ASI Kulwant Singh went to C.M.C. Ludhiana and prepared inquest report (Ex. PG) and the offence was changed to under Sections 302/148/149 Indian Penal Code The dead body of Bhupinder Singh was postmortemed in Civil Hospital, Sangrur. Statements of P.W.s were recorded. Rough site plan was prepared. Accused Gurdev Singh, Sh. Ram Singh surrendered themselves in the Court of Shri S.M.S. Mahial, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur on 18.8.1994 and they were formally arrested by ASI Kulwant Singh. After completion of the investigation and other formalities, the report under section 173 Criminal Procedure Code was prepared by S.I. Ranjit Singh on 21.8.1994 and was submitted in the Court on 1.9.1994.

Since the trial court had accepted the prosecution version and had convicted the accused persons, appeals were filed by them before the High Court. Primary stand before the High Court was that the evidence on record does not show that the deceased lost his life on account of any homicidal attack, on the contrary the evidence on record clearly establish that he died as a result of vehicular accident. The High Court found the defence version to be acceptable and directed acquittal.

3. In support of the appeal learned counsel for the appellant-State submitted that the High Court has attached unnecessary importance to certain notings made in the medical record at the time of admission of the deceased. It is stated that the medical opinion did not rule out homicidal attack.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that the deceased lost his life after about 55 days of the alleged occurrence on account of Septicemia. It is pointed out that the High Court has referred to the evidence on record and found that the prosecution has tried to project a death on account of vehicular accident to be homicidal death. It is to be noted that the High Court took note of several factors which have considerable significance. Firstly it was noted that there was delayed lodging of the First information report. PW 5 who is an advocate even did not choose to make a statement either to the police or to the medical officer about the alleged homicidal attacks. He actually appeared on the scene very late and tried to change the factual position.

5. Raj Kunwar Singh PW 8 stated that about 15 to 20 injuries were inflicted by each of the accused persons on the person of the deceased. The High Court found it to be totally out of context and unusual conduct of PWs 5&8 was also highlighted.

6. It was pointed out that the accused persons and the deceased PWs. 5 & 6 were in inimical terms and some of the litigation have been travelled upto this Court.

7. The background facts highlighted by the defence to indicate false implication on the background facts was accepted by the High Court. It is to be noted that one of the factors was the following entry :

8. The Investigating Officer (PW 12) clearly stated that he did not find any blood on the scene of occurrence and also found no sign of the homicidal attack as projected. Even the scooter number was wrongly mentioned. The High Court further noticed that the scene of occurrence was shifted. With reference to the evidence on record the High Court concluded that this was a case where injuries were received in a motor accident and it was given the colour of homicidal death. The High Court has analysed the evidence and, as noted above, came to the conclusion that the prosecution has tried to make a vehicular accident's case into a case of homicidal death. The aspects highlighted by the High Court are germane and relevant. That being so we find no scope for interference in these appeals, which are accordingly dismissed.

.