Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Crl.), 1265 of 2009, Judgment Date: Mar 23, 2015

                                                              Non-reportable

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                       CRIMINAL APPELLAE JURISDICTION

                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1265 OF 2009


Deepa @ Deep Chand & Anr.                                     ... Appellants

                                   Versus

State of Haryana                                               ...Respondent

                               J U D G M E N T

Uday Umesh Lalit, J.

      This appeal challenges the judgment and final order  dated  09.05.2008
passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana  at  Chandigarh  in  Criminal
Appeal No.559-DB of 2000 affirming the judgment of  conviction  recorded  by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, in Sessions  Case  No.54  of
1999.
2.    According to  the  prosecution,  one  Amar  Singh  had  two  brothers,
namely, Data Ram and Sheo Chand.  Amar Singh  had  four  sons,  viz.,  Mauji
Ram, Roop Chand @ Roopa, Ram Singh and Deepa Chand @ Deepa.   Deep  Chand  @
Deepa and Sukhbir Singh, son of Mauji Ram, are the present  appellants,  who
were tried and stand convicted for the offence of murder  of  Roop  Chand  @
Roopa.  Said Roop Chand @ Roopa was unmarried and aged  about  80  years  on
the date of incident and was residing with Randhir Singh,  grandson  of  the
above-named Sheo Chand.  It is alleged that Roop  Chand  owned  agricultural
land which was being cultivated by said Randhir Singh, which  fact  was  not
to the liking of his brother Deep Chand @ Deepa and the immediate family.
3.    It is alleged that on 04.12.1998 at about 7.00 a.m.,  Roop  Chand  had
gone to irrigate his land and was followed by  Randhir  Singh  and  his  son
Surender Singh at 8.00 a.m. with his meal.  While  they  were  approximately
an acre and a half length away from the kotha in their field, they saw  Roop
Chand @ Roopa being attacked by Deep Chand @ Deepa with an axe,  by  Sukhbir
Singh with a jaili and Basti Ram, son of  Sukhbir  with  a  gandasa.   These
three assailants noted the presence  of    Randhir   Singh   and   his   son
Surender Singh and escaped with their weapons.  Randhir Singh  and  Surender
Singh immediately put the injured Roop Chand on their  tractor  and  shifted
him to Aggarwal Hospital, Gannaur, for medical treatment.  According to  the
Medico-legal Report (Ext. PN), Roop Chand was brought  to  the  hospital  at
about 9.20 a.m. and was examined by Dr. G.P. Aggarwal.   Dr.  Aggarwal  sent
intimation or ruqa (PN/1) to the Police Station  at  10.00  a.m.,  whereupon
the Police reached the hospital.  Roop Chand was not in a position  to  make
any statement and succumbed to his injuries in  the  hospital.   The  Police
recorded the statement of Randhir Singh at about  11.50  a.m.,  pursuant  to
which FIR No.444 was registered with Police Station, Gannaur.

4.           Accused  Deep  Chand  and  Sukhbir  Singh  were   arrested   on
07.12.1998 and pursuant to their disclosure statements, an axe and  a  jaili
were  recovered.   Basti  Ram  was  arrested  on  08.12.1998.   During   the
investigation, it was found that Basti Ram was  juvenile  and  as  such  his
case was separated and he was later tried by  the  Juvenile  Justice  Court.
As regards Deep Chand @ Deepa and Sukhbir Singh,  challan  was  filed  after
completion of the investigation and the  case  was  later  committed  to  be
tried by the Sessions Court, Sonepat.  In order to substantiate  the  charge
of murder, the prosecution examined fourteen  witnesses  and  tendered  some
documents.  Randhir  Singh  and  Surender  Singh,   eye-witnesses   to   the
occurrence, were examined as PW-5 and  PW-6  respectively,  while  Dr.  G.P.
Aggarwal was examined as PW-12.  Dr.  Arun  Garg,  who  conducted  the  post
mortem on the dead body of Roop Chand at  about  3.00  p.m.  on  04.12.1998,
found the following ante mortem injuries on the person of the deceased:

"1.  A stab wound with clean cut margins 2.5 x 1 cms on  the  left  side  of
face, 3 cm lateral to the left angle of mouth with bleeding.   Fragments  of
bone were visible.

2.  A stab wound with clean cut margins 4 x 1 cms on the left side  of  face
with bleeding and exposed bone fragments.

3.  Incised wound 7 x 1.5 cms on the left side of  face  crossing  the  left
ear.  The left ear was cut deeply with bones exposed, bleeding was present.

4.  There was a swelling 5 x  3  cms  over  the  right  side  of  face  with
crepitus felt.

5.  There was swelling and deformity  of  nose  2  x  1  cms  with  crepitus
present.

6.  A lacerated wound 2.5 x 1 cms on the scalp in the left  parietal  region
near the midline  with  bone  exposed  and  fragments  felt.   Bleeding  was
present.

7. The left eye was black with subconjectival hemorrhage on the left eye.

8.  An incised wound 6 x 2 cms on the posterior lateral side of the  forearm
with bleeding.  Bones and muscles were exposed.  There was fracture of  both
bones of forearms with haematoma.

9.  Incised wound 4 x 2 cms on the left forearm, 3  cms  above  injury  No.8
with bleeding and bones exposed.

10. A bruise reddish in colour 8 x 2 cms in the form of a lathi mark on  the
lateral side of the upper part of upper thigh with infiltration of blood.

On dissection of scalp and  face  there  were  multiple  fractures  of  left
maxilla, zygomatic multiple fractures of mandible and right maxilla.   There
was infiltration of blood all over.  There was fracture of nasal  bone  with
infiltration of blood around.

On dissection of scalp there was haematoma over the scalp with  fracture  of
the parietal bone.   On removing the vault, there was subdural  as  well  as
extra dural haematoma in this region.   On  removing  the  brain  there  was
blood in the anterior and middle crenal foesae.   The  membrance  and  brain
were lacerated in the left parietal area.

Cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage and injuries were  found  to
be anti mortem in nature and were sufficient  to  cause  death  in  ordinary
course of nature.  Probable time that elapsed  between  injuries  and  death
was within one to two hours."

5.    The defence version of the accused was that Randhir  Singh  wanted  to
grab the property of the deceased, that he was compelling  the  deceased  to
transfer the same in the name of prosecution witnesses for the last  two  to
three months and that said Randhir Singh had filed a suit  for  transfer  of
the land of the deceased in his name.

6.          The Trial Court after considering the evidence on record,  found
the eye-witness account through the testimonies of PW-5  Randhir  Singh  and
PW-6 Surender Singh to be cogent and reliable.  It was  further  found  that
the FIR in question was registered soon after  the  incident.   The  injured
Roop Chand was brought to Aggarwal Hospital by Randhir Singh soon after  the
incident and it was  Dr.  Aggarwal  (PW-12)  who  had,  in  fact,  sent  the
intimation or ruqa to the Police.  Accepting the case  of  the  prosecution,
the Trial Court on 20.10.2010 convicted  Deep  Chand  @  Deepa  and  Sukhbir
Singh for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section  34  of
the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer life  imprisonment.   The
decision of the Trial Court was affirmed by the  High  Court  by  dismissing
the appeal preferred by the Accused-Appellants.  This Court, after  granting
special leave to appeal against the judgment of the High  Court,  was  later
pleased to release both the appellants on bail vide order dated 11.04.2011.

7.           Mr.  Rishi  Malhotra,  learned  Advocate  appearing   for   the
appellants, submitted that the appellants had  been  falsely  implicated  to
grab the property of the deceased.   It  was  submitted  that  PW-5  Randhir
Singh and PW-6 Surender Singh had done nothing to apprehend  the  assaulting
accused and that their presence was  doubtful.   It  was  further  submitted
that the trial of Basti Ram which stood segregated and was conducted by  the
Juvenile Justice Court, had resulted in clean acquittal of Basti Ram,  which
would also reflect on the falsity in the  case  of  the  prosecution.   Mrs.
Vivekta Singh, learned Advocate appearing for the State, supported the  view
which weighed with both the courts below and submitted that the  eye-witness
account was completely truthful and reliable.

8.          We have gone through the record and considered  the  submissions
of the counsel.  It must be noted that the judgment of the  Trial  Court  in
the instant case was passed on 20.10.2000,  while  the  judgment  acquitting
juvenile Basti Ram was passed on 23.04.2004.  The  acquittal  was  based  on
the assertion by Randhir Singh, who was examined as PW-1 in that trial  that
Basti Ram was not involved and that  the  deceased  was  assaulted  by  Deep
Chand @ Deepa and Sukhbir Singh.  Thus, the judgment in the  case  of  Basti
Ram would be of no avail to the appellants herein.  The eye-witness  account
in the present case is truthful and has been accepted  by  both  the  courts
below.  In the circumstances, we do not find anything on record  to  take  a
view different from the one  which  weighed  with  the  courts  below.   We,
therefore, affirm the judgment and  order  of  conviction  and  sentence  as
recorded against the present appellants and dismiss the instant appeal.

9.          The appellants, who were  released  on  bail  pursuant  to  this
Court's order dated 11.04.2011, shall serve  out  the  sentence  awarded  to
them.  Their bail bonds stand cancelled  and  they  be  taken  into  custody
forthwith.

                                            ..............................J.
                                                     (Dipak Misra)


                                            ..............................J.
                                                      (Uday Umesh Lalit)

New Delhi,
March 23, 2015.



ITEM NO.1F               COURT NO.12               SECTION IIB

               S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                     Criminal Appeal  No(s).  1265/2009

DEEPA @ DEEP CHAND & ANR.                          Appellant(s)

                                VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA                                   Respondent(s)


Date : 23/03/2015      This appeal was called on for pronouncement of
            judgment today.

For Appellant(s)       Mr. Rishi Malhotra, Adv.
                       Mr. B. Veeraswamy Raju, Adv.

For Respondent(s)      Mrs. Vivekta Singh, Adv.
                       Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Adv.

      Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh  Lalit  pronounced  the  non-reportable
judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice  Dipak  Misra  and  His
Lordship.
      The appeal is dismissed.   The appellants, who were released  on  bail
pursuant to this  Court's  order  dated  11.04.2011,  shall  serve  out  the
sentence awarded to them.  Their bail bonds  stand  cancelled  and  they  be
taken  into  custody  forthwith  in  terms  of  the  signed   non-reportable
judgment.

      (R.NATARAJAN)                                 (SNEH LATA SHARMA)
       Court Master                                    Court Master
            (Signed non-reportable judgment is placed on the file)