Jasvir Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab
!
"#$%#&'('$)*++,
(-'./'01$"1#.
+++ #"'"'$#.( 2// /""#$% 345 +++#(6$#"(
(-'./'01$"1#.
+++ #"'"'$#.( 2// /""#$% 345 +++#(6$#"(
) 7 8 + /
/ /
!"
####
/ / 9 + $
% "" " " !&'
(
) *$ +, (+(* -
**,. (+(* " -!"/ $0$(+(*1
11!!
*
-!"/ $0$(+(* """ !
+2 $( (+(( 1 " 3 &% 1 !! *$2 - -" " *+(*+,
*4'- (,!&'/ ,5+$ +5 (+($ " %
-
**,. (+(* " 1!
4*.--!" 1 " &'
6 %!-!"/ $0$(+(*
&'/ ,5+$ +5 (+($" !
% 7 /!" 7-! !
8" "" % 1
!/!"
! 3 9:3 9: ! ";11"""1 ""1!! "!"
) *$ +0 (+($ 0 ++
" /!" < " "
6 ! ! *( " 3 9:! $( " "
3 9:
" !
1" 6 ! !" " ! """ 6 !"!<
! ! % 1 ! ! 3 9: "" % " " "" 1"1 6 !"!"1/!"
<
!! """"!"1!
8""! 8""" !"1 !
% << % "
6"&' = $ "Statement of Sukhwinder Kaur @ Guddi wife of Nirmal Singh @ Chamba son of Gurnam Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, Police Station Sadar, Kotkapura, aged about 52 years. Stated that I am residing at above noted address. I am a housewife. My marriage took place about 30/32 years back with said Nirmal Singh @ Chamba. I have got three daughters & one son Harjot Singh. My two daughters are married, while one daughter & son are still unmarried.
My husband Nirmal Singh was having dispute with his brothers Karam Singh, Jaswinder Singh, Jasvir Singh & his father Gurnam Singh regarding partition of landed property, as my deor & father in law collectively restrain us from irrigating our fields from water channel and try to divert the irrigation water to their water channel out of the turn in forcible manner. Today, at about 5.00 P.M.
,
after Karam Singh and Jasvinder Singh, Jasvir Singh have turn after ours. I, my husband Nirmal Singh & my son Harjot Singh were diverting the water for our field, so that we may not have any problem in getting irrigation water, when my deors came from village Dhilwan side. Karam Singh was armed with .32 bore revolver, while Jasvir Singh armed with .12 bore double barrel gun & Jaswinder Singh was riding the said scooter, while my father in law Gurnam Singh arrived at the spot on a cycle. My father in law Gurnam Singh raised lalkara that Nirmal Singh & his family members may be taught a lesson for getting irrigation water before the scheduled time.
On this, my deor Karam Singh fired on us with his revolver, which first fire hit near left ear of my husband Nirmal Singh and second one behind his right shoulder, on which, my husband collapsed in our field. My son Harjot Singh came forward to save his father, when Karam Singh fired three shots on us from his revolver, with a motive to kill us, which hit in chest of my son Harjot Singh. My deor Karam Singh fired all cartridges lying in his revolver and put the used cartridges in his pocket. Thereafter, he obtaining some more cartridges from Jaswinder Singh, loaded his revolver and fired on my son, which hit on neck & left hand of my son, resulting which, he collapsed on ground. I raised alarm, in which, said Karam Singh etc. fled away from the spot on their vehicles.
My husband died at the spot, while my son, who was injured due to having received gun shots, gave a phone call from his Mobile to Atma Singh Dhillon son of Ajmer Singh Dhillon, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan. On this, Atma Singh Dhillon & his son Gurmukh Singh arrived at the spot. We left Gurmukh Singh at the spot to protect the dead body of Nirmal Singh and then I alongwith Atma Singh Dhillon arranged conveyance and brought my son Harjot Singh to Civil Hospital, Kotkapura, who further referred him to Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot. First aid was provided to my son at Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot and then he was further referred.
Reason of grudge is that my deor & father in law use to get the irrigation water to their water channel out of the turn in forcible manner and restrain us from irrigating the fields.
persons, in connivance with each other, have fired on us, which resulted in death of my husband and also injured my son with gun shots. You have recorded my statement, read over & explained its contents, heard, which is correct. Due legal action may be taken in the matter. Sd/8Sukhwinder Kaur @ Guddi. Attested 8 Sd/8 Insp. Jagbir Singh 01/FR, S.H.O., Police Station Sadar, Kotkapura. ,
6 1"
"" 1 %"
"&% > 1" " = (
"! "
!"" --6? ! """ !"13 3 ! 1" " " 6"
" "Conclusion Report:
The application filed by Bir Pal Kaur wife of Jasvir Singh, resident of village Matta, Tehsil Jaitu, District Faridkot & Ranjit Kaur wife of Jaswinder Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, Tehsil & District Faridkot, statements of applicants, so produced photo copy of bills for A.C., statement of Balwinder Singh son of Deep Chand son of Kalu Ram, resident of village Hari Nau, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot, Gursewak Singh son of Chhota Singh son of Nihal Singh, resident of village Matta, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot, Gurdit Singh son of Sukhdev Singh son of Ranjit Singh, resident of village Matta, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot, Jaswinder Singh son of
*
Karnail Singh son of Sham Singh, resident of Kothey Mahal Wale, Village Dhilwan Kalan, Tehsil Kotkapura, Jasvir Singh son of Makhan Singh son of Daan Singh, resident of Kothey Darjian Wale, Village Dhilwan Kalan, Tehsil Kotkapura, joint statement of Balwant Singh, Panch, son of Nachhattar Singh, Dilbag Singh, Panch, son of Joginder Singh, Malwinder Singh, Panch, son of Balkaran Singh & Malkit Kaur, Sarpanch, wife of Binder Singh, residents of village Matta, Tehsil Jaitu, District Faridkot, joint statement of Kulwant Singh, Nambardar, son of Dara Singh, resident of village Dhilwan Kalan, Tehsil Kotkapura, Makhan Singh, Ex.
Panch, son of Ajmer Singh, resident of Guru Tegh Bahadur Nagar, Village Dhilwan Kalan, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot, statement of Sukhwinder Kaur @ Guddi wife of Nirmal Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, complainant of case & affidavit produced by Ranjit Singh @ Goli son of Beant Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot in his statement, perusal of case file belonging to F.I.R. No. 76 dated 1.10.2021 U/s. 302, 307, 34 IРС, 27, Arms Act 8 Police Station Sadar, Kotkapura, Call detail report belonging to Mobile No.98889 65759 of Jaswinder Singh and Mobile No.98150 50658 of Jasvir Singh, for 31.5.2021, CCTV Camera recording of Hamara Petrol Pump, Village hari Nau for 31.5.2021 at 5.00 P.
M & video, prepared with Mobile and spot examination, that Jaswinder Singh, Jasvir Singh & Karam Singh are leasing out their land since past three years and this year also, they have leased out their land in favour of Ranjit Singh @ Goli son of Beant Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan. At the time of said occurrence, which took place on 31.5.2021 at about 5.00 P.M, said Jaswinder Singh son of Gurnam Singh, resident of village Dhilwan Kalan is found in his house & shops, situated near his house from noon hours till about 6.00 P.M and Jasvir Singh son of Gurnam Singh, resident of village Dhilwan Kalan, presently residing at village Matta, his maternal grandparents' village since past about 17818 years, found having gone with Gursewak singh, Electrician, resident of village Matta to Kotkapura, where he purchased a 1.5 Ton A.
Bill No.362 dated 31.5.2021, then he arrived at Hamara H.P. Petrol Pump, Village Hari Nau at about 05:00 P.M and then at about 6.30 P.M, he is found present at village Matta. As regard presence of Jasvir Siongh with .12 bore gun, as got recorded by said Sukhwinder Kaur @ Guddi wife of Nirmal Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, complainant of case in her statement, no fire is found having made by him. Then on 25.6.2021, Harjot Singh, son of the complainant, got recorded in his statement that Jasvir Singh made fires with his .12 bore gun with a motive of elimination. However no used cartridge found at the spot.
It reveals from open as well as secret enquiry so far conducted by me and the evidence brought on case file that both Jasvir Singh son of Gurnam Singh son of Ajmer Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, presently residing at Village Matta and Jaswinder Singh son of Gurnam Singh son of Ajmer Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, are not found having present at the spot at the time of said occurrence, hence they are liable to be declared innocent in the instant case. If it is approved, a direction may be issued to the S.H.O, Police Station Sadar, Kotkapura for declaring said Jasvir Singh son of Gurnam Singh son of Ajmer Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, presently residing at Village Matta and Jaswinder Singh son of Gurnam Singh son of Ajmer Singh, resident of Village Dhilwan Kalan, to be innocent in the instant case.
Encl: Pen Drive.
Sd/8 Superintendent of Police, P.B.I, Faridkot 29/7/2021"
.
!"13 3 "
!/ ("" 1"
6 " !! !" = @ $ "
=! !" &'!!3 ! " "
!%"" !
) ! ! 1 @ $ !"
% "! 1
*$2- - " 3 !!
" 1"1 ""1 !&' "" "! !"=! 6"
3 "" " *$2 - - !!" *$2 - -+, +5 (+(( 6 1"
3 " = $+ " 1 " 3 1" -!"/ $4$.(+(( - - = $$$( +, (+(("" 1" *$2- -! %" "1 " 1 - " <A "
!-
" 3 !prima facie " " B" " "!"" !! %" 3 &%
:
%" 1"1 " " 1<A "
!-
!"
6" 3 !
+2 $( (+(( 1 !!" '1-!"/ $0$ (+(* "> !
+2 $( (+(( -
**,. (+(* " 4*.--!"
1 "
$+
C " " !" 3 """ "
*$2- -" 1""> 1 1
"= ( ""1"
1
" !alibi 1" 3 " "
*$2- - <" > 1 !
" " > !"" !1 " < !! > 13 "" 6"
% 8&%$, $.1 "" !" 3 1 " ""!/!"
"$01" "
7 " 1 ' 1 3 *$ +0 (+($ "!$$ 40
1 % -% %
B"" !1 -! % ""/ *5(*$ +0 (+($! %!0 $0
!""1 3 " "A!"1 ""11 (+1 %1 /!"
" """$01""" 7 "1 "" *$ +0 (+($ 0++
3 % %""5*+
&' <" !! > 1
"3
!" !!"1<!" !?"" < / 0++
" % B"
"%"" """ --6?! " 6! % " 1" ! 3 "" 0*+
!" !!"" "" C " ! ! ""3 0++
<!
" !?"" </ "" ""
++
< ! "" 1
" ! "1= 1"
$$
C " ! " 3 ""!"" " !"1 ! !" !" !!
*$2- - < !<A "
!- #
$ %%
%& 1"
!!" ""1 ! - <A "
! -
! " , !prima facie ! !
" "
$(
)" " ! !! " ! prima face 1" 3 " !
- !"
$*
C " "!" ! " !! 1-
! %" 3 "1 ! " 1 - " <A "
!-
!"
< ! ""1 1 "
3 *$2- - !! 1 !"=! 6! %" 3 !<A "
!-
!" !!!"=! 1 ) < !"" 1" "!&' " < 1
6< =!@ (" " 6 !!"1! =!@ * <" - !" ) =! !!"@ $ " 3 !
1 !! " < !1 != !" - &' " !! 1 3 "! $(
1 1 < !" 1<A "
!-
!"
- " " *$2 - -! - !" > 1 < ! 1"" " alibi " ! ! " *$2- - !1 !"
" 3 !% ! prima facie !!" <" ! 0 ++
*$ +0 (+($&'" 1"1+$ +5 (+($++*( " ! " 1!" ! " &'
< ! "
!" !"3 "! $(
&'"1"! !"""13 "
1 1 < ! !!1 !
$4 '" "
$0
6 " 3 " "
*$2- - !! "
!! 1!" !"1
% 7 @ $"! !"1< @ (!! @ *" - @ $
% 7
,
&' @ (< !"" !
@ *! " @ $@ (""%" !" %@ (< "
6&' " ""!! 1"1 ! 6" 3 ! ! 1!
6!
1!"1 ! ! &' < "" 1 3 ! " " $(
! !!!"! - &' 8
! 1 " " $(
" " 3 < $(
" $5
<A "
!-
!" " "1 " *$2- - ! " 1!" 1- D% "!! ""1 1 - % *$2- - 6AA "! "
> % *$2- -"
"1prima
facie "!" - "1" =! > ! "1!"1 6 " !!=!!
=
"" 6" ! xxxx8xxxx8xxxx "80. In view of the discussion made and the conclusion drawn hereinabove, the answer to the aforesaid question posed is that apart from evidence recorded during trial, any material that has been received by the court after cognizance is taken and before the trial commences, can be utilised only for corroboration and to support the evidence recorded by the court to invoke the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The 'evidence' is thus, limited to the evidence recorded during trial.
xxxx8xxxx8xxxx
99. Thus, we hold that though only a prima facie case is to be established from the evidence led before the court not necessarily tested on the anvil of Cross8Examination, it requires much stronger evidence than mere probability of his complicity. The test that has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction. In the absence of such satisfaction, the court should refrain from exercising power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. In Section 319 Cr.P.C. the purpose of providing if 'it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence' is clear from the words "for which such person could be tried together with the accused." The words used are not 'for which such person could be convicted'. There is, therefore, no scope for
*
the Court acting under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to form any opinion as to the guilt of the accused.
xxxx8xxxx8xxxx
110. We accordingly sum up our conclusions as follows: Question Nos.1 & III Q.1 What is the stage at which power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. can be exercised?
AND Q.III Whether the word "evidence" used in Section 319(1) Cr.P.C. has been used in a comprehensive sense and includes the evidence collected during investigation or the word "evidence" is limited to the evidence recorded during trial? A. In Dharam Pal's case, the Constitution Bench has already held that after committal, cognizance of an offence can be taken against a person not named as an accused but against whom materials are available from the papers filed by the police after completion of investigation. Such cognizance can be taken under Section 193 Cr.P.C. and the Sessions Judge need not wait till 'evidence' under Section 319 Cr.P.C. becomes available for summoning an additional accused.? Section 319 Cr.P.C., significantly, uses two expressions that have to be taken note of i.e. (1) Inquiry (2) Trial.
As a trial commences after framing of charge, an inquiry can only be understood to be a pre8trial inquiry. Inquiries under Sections 200, 201, 202 Cr.P.C.; and under Section 398 Cr.P.C. are species of the inquiry contemplated by Section 319 Cr.P.C. Materials coming before the Court in course of such enquiries can be used for corroboration of the evidence recorded in the court after the trial commences, for the exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., and also to add an accused whose name has been shown in Column 2 of the charge8sheet. In view of the above position the word 'evidence' in Section 319 Cr.P.C.
broadly understood and not literally i.e. as evidence brought during a trial.
Question No. II Q.II Whether the word "evidence" used in Section 319(1) Cr.P.C. could only mean evidence tested by cross8 examination or the court can exercise the power under the said provision even on the basis of the statement made in the examination8in8chief of the witness concerned? A. Considering the fact that under Section 319 Cr.P.C. a person against whom material is disclosed is only summoned to face the trial and in such an event under Section 319(4) Cr.P.C. the proceeding against such person is to commence from the stage of taking of cognizance, the Court need not wait for the evidence against the accused proposed to be summoned to be tested by cross8examination.
Question No. IV Q.IV What is the nature of the satisfaction required to invoke the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to arraign an accused? Whether the power under Section 319 (1) Cr.P.C. can be exercised only if the court is satisfied that the accused summoned will in all likelihood be convicted? A. Though under Section 319(4)(b) Cr.P.C. the accused subsequently impleaded is to be treated as if he had been an accused when the Court initially took cognizance of the offence, the degree of satisfaction that will be required for summoning a person under Section 319 Cr.P.C. would be the same as for ? framing a charge. The difference in the degree of satisfaction for summoning the original accused and a subsequent accused is on account of the fact that the trial may have already commenced against the original accused and it is in the course of such trial that materials are disclosed against the newly summoned
accused. Fresh summoning of an accused will result in delay of the trial 8 therefore the degree of satisfaction for summoning the accused (original and subsequent) has to be different. Question No.V Q.V Does the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. extend to persons not named in the FIR or named in the FIR but not charges8sheeted or who have been discharged?
A. A person not named in the FIR or a person though named in the FIR but has not been charge8sheeted or a person who has been discharged can be summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. provided from the evidence it appears that such person can be tried along with the accused already facing trial. However, in so far as an accused who has been discharged is concerned the requirement of Sections 300 and 398 Cr.P.C. has to be complied with before he can be summoned afresh.
The matters be placed before the appropriate Bench for final disposal in accordance with law explained hereinabove. $,
! 1" "
"" > 1= alibi" 1
"1 ! "" --6? ! " " 8
!> 1"
" " ! --6? 1
" " ! ! - "1, .%! 6"
:
%" " "" <
" " " ) ! - "
- =! 1 " 3 " "!"!"
$( " "
@$
% ! 3 ! &'" ! 1 !! " " ! < %"""
$.
6 " 3 " "
*$2- - "!"" " - !"
!prima face! 6!
"13. Thus, prosecution has proved on record sufficient evidence that accused Jasveer Singh was also present on the spot and allegedly fired from his double barrel gun towards PW1 Sukhwinder Kaur @ Guddi complainant and others, with intention to kill them, but the shots did not hit them, whereas, accused Jaswinder Singh ferried them to the spot having live cartridges which were taken by accused Karam Singh for the purpose of reloading his revolver. The evidence brought on record is more than a prima facie case against Jaswinder Singh and Jasveer Singh and leads to the only conclusion that they were accompanying accused Karam Singh, when accused Karam Singh committed murder of his brother Nirmal Singh and injured
PW2 Harjot Singh, and accused Jasveer Singh also fired from his 12 bore double barrel gun.
14.
Accordingly, application moved by prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is allowed and accused Jaswinder Singh is ordered to be summoned for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, 307 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act and accused Jasveer Singh is ordered to be summoned for commission of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, 307 read with Section 34 IPC, 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act.
15.
Any observation while deciding this application shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and shall not construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case." $2
C "" ! <A "
!- #
!": "alibi " 1" " !!" ' ! " alibi """$,0 %!!" !%" !" 3 > !""" < 3 " ""! /!" " " 7 " "1" 1*$ +0 (+($3
"!$$ 40
11 %
-! 1!! %! $0
'
"" 3 " % B" " !!"1<!" !?"" </ 0++
"%"" "
"" --6? 3 " !0 ++
" !! ' ! ! ""3 """5 ++
<
!" " !- " ! "1, .%! !" 3
! 1
"1" "1!/!"
"" !!"1 7 "1*$ +0 (+($ 0++
3 %""
5*+
6 !1 %"
6
" =!"1 " " ! "!"
(+
6""- """ *$2 - - !! " !! 1!" ""
6!!!"" 3 ! prima facie ! "
!" "1" 1 !1 ! !!!
/!" 6- ! !" " "
1
" " *$2- - ! prima facie 6"" "1!1 !
+2 $( (+(( 1" 3 &%
($
-> "1! ((
6 " 4*.- -!" 1 "&'/
,5+$ +5 (+($ *+(*+,*4'- "
% 8&%
(*
C " ! !1 1 "1 = 1" " >
(4
C " ! 3 "" "!! 1 " !"3
" " $(
!! 1 1 < !
"" 1!
< !3 &'"" "! "
" 1! %""" <" ! " > > " " 1!"
(0
" "- ! $(
"" "1 13
*( """ "1 " 13 "
! 1" "
> " " " >
(5
6- ! 1 " (,
-> "1 1!
(.
<1 "" =!! "1
/ / *++, .;#(1 @% ; E;/ @ " E;/