Full Judgment Text
NONREPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 914 OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO.1582 OF 2020)
HARPAL SINGH …APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB …RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
J K Maheshwari, J.
Leave granted.
2. The instant appeal is preferred by the accused against final
judgment dated 17.10.2019 passed by High Court of Punjab and
Haryana at Chandigarh in CRAD257DB2003 (O&M), whereby
the Division Bench of High Court declined to interfere with the
Signature Not Verified
judgment of the Sessions Court dated 04.02.2003 by which the
Digitally signed by
GULSHAN KUMAR
ARORA
Date: 2022.07.05
14:29:29 IST
Reason:
appellant was convicted for the charge under Section 302/120B
1
of Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’) and directed to undergo
imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.1000/, in default
further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant was
also convicted under Section 342/120B of IPC and was
sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months with an order
to run both the sentences concurrently.
3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 03.04.2000 while a
police party headed by inspector Atma Singh (hereinafter referred
to as 'the Investigating Officer/IO’) of Police Station, Kotwali
Amritsar was on patrol duty at Chowk Katra Jaimal Singh,
received information regarding murder of deceased Banarasi
Dass. The police party went to the house of deceased, where
complainant Leela Wati, wife of deceased made the complaint and
her statement was also recorded by IO. It is stated that she was
residing with the deceased in a house at Katra Jaimal Singh,
Amritsar on first floor. The deceased used to work in the shop
with his son Vinod Kumar, which was in the name and style of
Sunder Shoes. On the intervening midnight of 2/3.04.2000 they
were sleeping in their house, when she woke up suddenly saw
that a Sikh youth wearing a white kurta payjama and patka of
the same colour on his head, aged about 35/36 years along with
2
a clean shaved person, aged about 30/32 years have entered in
the house. Sikh youth was armed with a dagger/chhura, who
first strangulated her husband Banarasi Dass thereafter, gave
dagger blows above the stomach while lying on the bed. The Sikh
youth demanded keys of Godrej almirah from the complainant,
which out of fear she handed over. She was locked in a bathroom
by them. Both the intruders looted gold ornaments, cash and
other articles and went back. The chowkidar rang the call bell
but because she was confined in the bathroom so could not open
the door. In the morning, the chowkidar with the help of other
persons opened the door of house and also of bathroom, then,
she came out. On initial search, she found that the intruders had
taken away six gold bangles, Rs.7000/ in cash and other articles
of gold including cash from the wooden almirah also. The IO after
making some endorsement below the statement of complainant
sent ruqa to the police station, on the basis of which, formal FIR
No.51 dated 03.04.2000, was registered of the offences under
Sections 460, 342, 120B and 34 of IPC at Police Station Kotwali,
Amritsar.
4. The IO carried out the inquest proceedings with regard to
unnatural death of deceased Banarasi Dass. He drew rough
3
sketch to the place of occurrence and bloodstained bed sheet
was kept into sealed parcel. Dead body was sent for post mortem
examination. After such examination, Head Constable Nirmal
Singh produced the clothes of the deceased before the IO, which
was converted into a sealed parcel and taken into possession.
The IO recorded the statements of other witnesses also. On
19.04.2000, the IO went to the shop of the deceased and
collected license to run the shop and purchase bills. On
03.05.2000, accused Gulzar Singh, Bikramjit Singh and Ashwani
Kumar were arrested in this case. During the course of
interrogation, they made disclosure statement to which recoveries
were effected. From accused Ashwani Kumar police recovered
three gold biscuits and a wrist watch, whereas, from accused
Bikramjit Singh police recovered five gold biscuits of 10 tolas, 20
gold biscuits of 5 tolas each, one gold necklace, two gold bangles,
two ear rings, one wrist watch and cash amount of
Rs.2,36,000/. From accused Gulzar Singh police recovered 10
gold biscuits weighing 10 tolas each, 10 gold biscuits weighing 5
tolas each, cash amount of Rs.1,20,000/ along with a pair of ear
rings, two gold bangles, one necklace and a dagger. All the
4
recovered articles were identified by PW12 Vinod Kumar
Gambhir, son of the deceased.
5. On 10.05.2000, accused Harpal Singh who is Appellant
herein and Pavitar Singh were apprehended while they were
coming in a car bearing No.PB02H3113. They were formally
arrested in this case and the car in question was seized. Both the
accused were interrogated and they also suffered disclosure
statements, in pursuance thereof, from Harpal Singh police
recovered 10 gold biscuits of 5 tolas each and 08 gold biscuits of
10 tolas, in addition to cash amount of Rs.2,84,000/, whereas,
from accused Pavitar Singh police recovered 2 gold biscuits
weighing 10 tolas each and a ladies’ wrist watch.
These articles were identified by prosecution witness PW12,
Vinod Kumar Gambhir, son of deceased.
6. On 18.05.2000, IO went to the hotel Sita Niwas and
obtained copy of the entry register of the hotel Ext.PAA. It was
seized, vide a recovery memo Ext.PKK. On 06.06.2000, Head
Constable Kapal Dev produced two photographs along with
negatives, which were taken into possession. Statements of
witnesses were recorded. After completion of investigation and
5
other formalities, the challan against the accused was filed in the
Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (for short 'JMFC'),
Amritsar, who supplied copies of documents relied upon in the
challan to the accused free of costs as provided under Section
207 Cr.P.C and then find the offence under Section 460 was
exclusively triable by the Court of Session, vide her detailed
committal order dated 22.08.2000, committed the case to the
Court of Session. On committal, learned Session Judge,
Amritsar, after finding prima facie case framed the charges for
commission of offences under Sections 460, 302, 342 and 120B
of IPC. The accused persons were abjured the guilt. During the
course of trial 15 prosecution witnesses were examined.
7. Statements of the accused were recorded under Section
313 Cr.P.C., in which all the incriminating circumstances
appearing against such accused were put to them but they
denied the same, contending that they are innocent and have
been falsely implicated in the case. Accused Ashwani Kumar,
Bikramjit Singh and Gulzar Singh had filed written statements,
contending that the allegations against them were false. They
were kept in illegal detention and created false evidence against
them.
6
8. Appellant Harpal Singh had filed separate written defence,
mentioning therein that he was having a mini bus No.PB02H
9661 which was sold on 05.11.1999 for consideration of
Rs.3,80,000/ to Hakumat Singh, resident of Village Harpura,
Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur and delivered the custody of
vehicle to the purchaser. The accused further stated that he
wanted to purchase a truck with the sale proceeds of the mini
bus which amount was lying at his house. During the
investigation of the case, the police unlawfully recovered that
amount and out of which, recovery of a sum of Rs.2,84,000/
was shown from the possession of Harpal Singh with a view to
create evidence against him as a matter of fact, no recovery had
been effected.
9. Learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide judgment dated
04.02.2003, convicted and sentenced all the accused persons
including appellant herein for the charge under Section
302/120B IPC and directed to undergo sentence for
imprisonment of life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ in default
further rigorous imprisonment for six months. All the five
accused persons filed appeal against the judgment of their
7
conviction and sentence before High Court of Punjab and
Haryana.
10. In the impugned order passed by the High Court, the
testimony of PW1 Leela Wati has been relied upon to support the
case of prosecution and the commission of murder with robbery.
In her testimony, she has described the looted articles and also
supported the supplementary statement. The defence taken by
the defendant regarding planting of the gold articles by the son of
the deceased Vinod Kumar being gold smuggler was not found
worthy to rely upon. For the purpose of commission of the
offence, the testimony of PW4 Vinod Singh Chauhan was found
worthy of credence, however, the commission of the offence with
the aid of recoveries and also by identification of the looted
articles. The High Court has also relied upon the extrajudicial
confession made by PW14 Devinder Kumar. Thus, concluded
that the conviction of the appellant for the charges proved beyond
reasonable doubt and the finding of the Trial Court do not suffer
from any infirmity warranting interference. Consequently, the
appeal was dismissed by the impugned order.
8
11. Learned counsel for the appellant has strenuously urged
that the recovery of articles and cash from him has not been
proved as per law. The recovered articles claimed from the
accused were not the same articles as described by the
complainant. The appellant has taken several defence regarding
sale of mini bus No. PB02H9661 for the consideration of
Rs.3,80,000/ to Hakumat Singh and the police has illegally
recovered the said consideration amount for the sake of looted
article with intent to implicate him falsely. The defence to show
false recovery has been supported by the testimony of DW1
Dhanpal Singh and DW2 Surinder Mohan Luthra. The evidence
regarding prior meeting of mind is not on record thereby the
appellant conspired or was a part of conspiracy in committing the
loot and murder of the deceased. The connecting evidence
regarding recovery of the record of the hotel has not been
produced in original. Thus, merely on the basis of the said
evidence and the recovery, which is not summarised in the FIR,
the conviction of the appellant is wholly unsustainable.
12. On the other hand, the State counsel contends that the
amount recovered from the possession of the appellant as a sale
proceed of the mini bus has not been proved in support of his
9
defence. The identification of the gold biscuits and looted articles
were made by PW12 Vinod Kumar Gambhir son of the deceased.
In the defence, it has not been said that the gold articles seized
were of the accused persons. No explanation for huge recovery of
gold items has put forward from the accused, simultaneously
Hakumat Singh, to whom the mini bus was sold, has not been
examined, hence, the defence was not found plausible. On the
other hand, looking to the testimony of PW1 Leela Wati, PW2
Nasib Singh, PW4 Vinod Singh Chauhan and also the extra
judicial statement given by PW14 Davinder Kumar, the High
Court has rightly confirmed the findings of the Trial Court. Thus,
the findings of fact concurrently recorded are based on due
appreciation of evidence and those findings are not perverse.
13. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and on
perusal of the record, it is seen that ample evidence to have
conspiracy between all five accused have been duly proved. The
involvement of the appellant is fully established by the testimony
of PW4 Vinod Singh Chauhan, who was an employee on the
shop ‘Sunder Shoes House’. As per his testimony, it is clear that
coaccused Ashwani Kumar another employee in the shop, met
with appellant/accused Harpal Singh and Pahlwan Bikramjit
10
Singh on the shop at about 45 p.m. on 15.03.2000. At that time
deceased Banarasi Dass was counting the cash currency at the
counter. Ashwani Kumar told Harpal Singh and Bikramjit Singh
that Banarasi Dass was having ample money with him and he
was also involved in the money lending business keeping the gold
as security. Subsequently, on the date of incident i.e.,
02.04.2000, appellant alongwith coaccused visited the shop and
made inquiry about coaccused Ashwani Kumar (another
employee of Sunder Shoes). Thus, by the evidence of this witness,
nexus between appellant Harpal Singh and coaccused persons is
fully established. The defence taken by the appellant regarding
recovery of the cash money of Rs.2,84,000/ from him by virtue
of sale of mini bus has not been proved because the said mini
bus was not sold to him and the buyer of the said mini bus
Hakumat Singh has not been examined. DW1 Dhanpal Singh in
his crossexamination has categorically admitted that the
amount was not lying in his bank account or of his father. Thus,
the defence of the appellant was not found plausible.
Simultaneously no plausible defence to disprove other looted
articles have been brought on record.
11
14. We have perused the testimony of other witnesses that
includes PW1 Leela Wati, PW4 Vinod Singh Chauhan, PW12
Vinod Kumar Gambhir and PW14 Davinder Kumar on the basis
of the same the involvement of the appellant alongwith other co
accused has been fully proved by prosecution beyond reasonable
doubt. The Trial Court and the High Court has rightly
appreciated the evidence and proved the charges while convicting
the appellant. The minor inconsistencies in the statement of
witnesses are not of any consequence looking to the finding
concurrently recorded by two courts. Thus, the findings of fact
recorded against the appellant and the other coaccused, who
have not come forward to file the appeal before the Court, are
neither perverse nor illegal so as to warrant interference by this
Court. Therefore, while affirming the view taken by the High
Court and the Trial Court, we dismiss the appeal.
………..………………...J.
(INDIRA BANERJEE)
.….………………………J.
(J.K. MAHESHWARI)
New Delhi;
July 05, 2022
12