As per case facts, the appeals stem from a 1999 incident where Jarnail Singh and his brother were attacked by Ujaggar Singh and others, leading to Nachhattar Singh's death. The ...
No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
CHANDIGARH
1 CRA-D-336-DB-2004
KESAR SINGH AND OTHERS
... Appellants
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
... Respondent
A N D
2 CRA-S-729-SB-2004
Judgment reserved on: 08.09.2025
Judgment Pronounced on: 16.09.2025
JARNAIL SINGH AND OTHERS
... Appellants
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
... Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL.
****
Present: Mr. G.S. Punia, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Harveen Kaur, Advocate
for the appellant in CRA-D-336-DB-2004.
Mr. S.S. Rangi and Mr. Fateh Sahota, Advocates
for the appellant in CRA-S-729-SB-2004 and
for the complainant in CRA-D-336-DB-2004.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004 stands abated qua appellant
Rattan Singh, since he is reported to have died.
Mr. H.S. Deol, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
****
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -2-
H.S. GREWAL, J.
By virtue of this common order, we shall decide both the
abovementioned appeals since the same have arisen out of the version (FIR
No.20 dated 01.04.1999) and the cross-version (FIR No.15 dated 22.2.2000) of
the parties. For the sake of brevity and convenience, the facts are, however,
extracted from CRA-D-336-DB-2004.
The said appeal is preferred by the appellants (Kesar Singh and
others) against the judgment dated 09.03.2004 passed by the then Sessions
Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib in Sessions Case No.28-T of 24.07.1999/01.06.2001
titled as State Versus Ujaggar Singh and others arising out of FIR No.20 dated
01.04.1999 under Sections 302, 307, 323, 324, 148 and 149 of IPC registered at
Police Station Khamanon, District Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby the appellants
have been convicted and sentenced as under:
Sr.
No.
Name of accused Under
Sections
Sentence.
1. Kesar Singh 148 IPC
302 IPC
326/149 IPC
324 IPC
RI for six months.
Life Imprisonment with fine
Rs.500/-. I/d six months.
Three years plus fine Rs.300/-.,
I/d 6 months.
One year RI plus fine Rs.100/-,
I/d one month.
2. Rattan Singh
(Note: Appeal
stands abated qua
this appellant,
since he has died).
148 IPC
302 IPC
326/149 IPC
RI for six months.
Life Imprisonment with fine
Rs.500/-. I/d RI six months.
RI for three years plus fine
Rs.300/-., I/d 6 months.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -3-
324 IPC
RI one year plus fine Rs.100/-,
I/d RI one month.
3. Harbhajan Singh
148 IPC
302/149 IPC
324 IPC
326 IPC
RI for six months.
Life Imprisonment with fine
Rs.500/-. I/d RI six months.
RI for one year plus fine Rs.100/,
I/d RI one month.
RI for three years plus fine
Rs.300/-., I/d 6 months.
4. Kulwinder Singh
148 IPC
302 IPC
326/149 IPC
324 IPC
RI for six months.
Life Imprisonment with fine
Rs.500/-. I/d RI six months.
RI for three years plus fine
Rs.300/-., I/d 6 months.
RI one year plus fine Rs.100/-,
I/d RI one month.
All sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.04.1999 at 03:20 PM one
wireless message was received by Sub-Inspector Paramjit Singh in Police
Station from PGI, Chandigarh regarding death of Nachhattar Singh, whereupon,
the police party reached PGI, Chandigarh where Jarnail Singh was present and
he made a statement before the police that he was an agriculturist. They were
five brothers. On 31.03.1999, he alongwith his brother Surmukh Singh was
coming to their house after finishing work in the fields. At about 08:00 PM,
when they reached near the street of house of Ujaggar Singh, they found the
said Ujaggar Singh armed with Sotta, his sons Kesar Singh armed with
Gandasi, Rattan Singh @ Bhola armed with Kirpan, Bhajan Singh armed with
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -4-
Tangli, Kulwinder Singh @ Bagga son of Rattan Singh armed with Sua. All of
them raised lalkara and opened attacked upon them while shouting and saying
that they be taught a lesson for purchasing ‘Dher’ of Gurdev Singh, who is the
brother of Ujaggar Singh. The accused persons inflicted severe injuries on their
person and when they raised hue and cry, Nachhattar Singh came to rescue
them. At the instigation of Ujaggar Singh, Kesar Singh gave a gandasi blow on
the head of Nachhattar Singh; Rattan Singh hit Nachhattar Singh with kirpan on
his head and Kulwinder Singh @ Bagga hit the sua on the head and neck of
Nachhattar Singh. As a result of which, Nachhattar Singh fell down on the
ground but still the accused persons (appellants) continued to inflict injuries
upon him. After hearing the noise, other members of their family came and
upon seeing them, the accused-appellants fled away from the spot with their
weapons. The injured were rushed to Civil Hospital, Fatehgarh Sahib, from
where they were referred to PGI Chandigarh. During treatment in PGI,
Chandigarh, injured Nachhattar Singh succumbed to the injuries. The sole bone
of contention was that Gurdev Singh, who is the brother of Ujaggar Singh, had
sold his land to the complainant party.
3. On the basis of the above, an FIR was registered and the
investigation swung into motion. The Investigating Officer visited the spot,
inspected the same and recorded the statements of witnesses. He prepared the
inquest report also. He prepared rough site plan with correct marginal notes. He
recorded the statements of accused also. Accused were arrested and produced
before the Court. After completion of investigation, challan was prepared and
presented in the Court and upon finding prima facie case against the accused
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -5-
persons, charges under Sections 148, 302/149, 326, 326/149, 324, 324/149 of
IPC were framed against the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty
and claimed trial.
4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 18
witnesses. PW1 Dr. Jaspal Singh conducted X-ray examination of Jarnail Singh
and Surmukh Singh and proved the injuries, X-ray reports and skiagrams of
both injures as Ex.P1 to P10.
5. PW2- Doctor Vivek Sharma conducted postmortem on the dead
body of Nachhattar Singh and observed the following injuries:
1. A stitched wound 9 cm long with 5 stitches present over left
parietal area. It is anterior extremity lying 8 cm above tip of
left ear pinna and posterior 9 cm behind this as described.
2. A stitched wound 17 cm in length with 12 stitches present
involving left frontal area, parietal area, just laternal and
above proceeding injury. Its anterior extremity situated 4 cm
above medial one third of left eyebrow and posterior
extremity post to it as described at point 4 cm left to vertex.
3. A stitched wound 6 cm in length with 3 stitches present in a
curved fashion with convexity upwards involving left
parietal area in front of vertex. It is anterior extremity, joins
injury No.2 10 cm posterior to anterior end.
4. Two stitched wounds lying close to each other measuring 5
cm with one stitch and 7 cm with 2 stitches involving central
portion in front of proceeding injury.
5. A stitched wound 5 cm long with 4 stitches lying
horizontally in right frontal area 7 cm above lateral canthus
right eye.
6. A stitched wound 5 cm long with one stitch in front of right
parietal eminence placed obliquely.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -6-
7. A curved abrasion with reddish brown scab 6 cm in length
and 0.75 cm in breadth in posterior one-third, tapering on
the both sides present upon top aspect of right shoulder.
8. Two stitched wounds 4 cm with two stitches and 3 cm with
two stitches present just under chin on right side.
9. A laceration 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm on lower lip closed to right
angle of mouth.
10. An abradded area with reddish brown scalp 0.5 cm x 1 cm
on back of left shoulder 7 cm posterior to acromian process.
11. An abradded contused area 6 cm x 2 cm placed obliquely on
right side of neck, anterior extremity placed just lateral to
thyroid eminence going laterally towards right with raddish
brown scab appreciable.
12. A curved abrasion with convexity towards wrist 6 cm in
length present 5 cm above left wrist joint on dorsal aspect of
fore-arm extending on to anterior aspect by crossing radial
border, where it is widest measuring 0.5 cm. Another
horizontally placed linear abrasion with reddish brown scab
2.5 cm in length just below the above-mentioned curved
abrasion.
13. An incised wound 2 cm x .5 cm on left ring finger on dorsal
aspect over middle phalangeal area.
14. An abrasion with reddish brown scab over left middle
finger, 2 cm x .5 cm on dorsal aspect over mid phalangeal
area.
15. An abrasion with red brown scab 1.5 cm x 1.00 cm, against
right anterior superior iliac spine.
16. Two horizontally placed contused lines reddish blue in
appearance at varying distance apart present in front of chest
below mammary regions with some normal area appreciable
over xhiphisternum area.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -7-
17. Obliquely placed reddish blue contused lines (4 in number)
with some intervening normal area present on the front of
abdomen 8 cm above umbilicus. The upper pair is crossing
midline going towards left with length of limbs 9 cm and 8
cm. While lower pair situated towards right of midline (with
limbs measuring 7cm x 6 cm)
18. An abrasion with reddish brown scab 1.5 cm x .5 cm on
back of chest against nape of neck.
The doctor opined that the cause of death in this case was due to
shock and haemorrhage on account of the injuries which were ante-mortem in
nature. Probable time that passed between injuries and death was between 6 to
18 hours and between death and postmortem was 34 to 36 hours. This witness
has proved the postmortem report Ex.P11. Doctor Ramandeep Singh has proved
the factum of Nachhattar Singh and Sarmukh Singh having admitted in PGI
Chandigarh about which he sent intimation to the police. Nachhattar Singh had
expired on 01.05.1999 at about 5.30 AM.
6. PW-4 Doctor Ramesh Chand Gupta had medico legally examined
Nachhattar Singh on 31.03.1999 prior to his death. This witness has examined
Jarnail Singh also at 09:45 PM on the same day and found the following
injuries on his person: -
1. Incised wound 7" x 1 /2" bone deep obliquely running from
front of head of midline of back side of head on right side,
bleeding was present-Advised x-ray.
2. Incised wound 1" x 1/4" x 1/4" on the left side of head on
the front part, bleeding was present. Advised x-ray.
3. Incised wound 2" x 1 /2" x bone deep on the left side of the
head running anteropostly, bleeding was present. Advised x-
ray skull.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -8-
4. 3" x 3" contusion over the left shoulder, tenderness present,
movements painful, advised x-ray.
5. 2" x 2 " swelling on the left side of face in front of the pinna.
This Doctor had further medico-legally examined Surmukh Singh
on the same day and had found the following injuries: -
1. Incised wound 2-1/2" x 1/2" bone deep on the left side of the
front of head. Bleeding was present. Advised x-ray.
2. Incised wound 2" x 1/2" bone deep on the top of head in
about a middle - Bleeding was present. Advised x-ray.
3. Incised wound 21/2" x 1/2" bone deep on the left side of the
top of the head in posterior part. Bleeding was present.
Advised x-ray.
4. Incised wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm on the dorsem of left
thumb at IP Joint, Bleeding was present. Pulse 60 per
minute.
On the same day at 10:20 PM PW-4 Doctor Ramesh Chand
conducted medico-legal examination of Randhir Singh and observed the
following: -
1. Incised wound on the left side of upper lip measuring 2 cm x
1/2 cm x 1/2 cm, bleeding was present.
2. Incised wound 3 cm x 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm on the left side of the
nose, bleeding was present, Advised x-ray, tenderness was
also present.
Medico-legal examination of Amrik Singh shows the following
injury: -
1. Incised wound 2" x 1/2" x 1/2" on the right side of head-
Bleeding was present, tenderness was present, Advised x-
ray.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -9-
Injuries on the person of Gurmeet Kaur were given as under: -
1. 3" x 3" contusion over the right side of back of head,
tenderness was present. Advised x-ray.
2. Swelling over the left kneecap, tenderness was present.
Movements painful.
Reports about the aforesaid injuries were duly proved by doctor(s).
In his cross examination, the doctor proved the injuries on the person appellants
also.
7. PW-5 Jarnail Singh is the complainant/injured who narrated the
evidence preceding and succeeding the occurrence and disclosed about
complete picture of the incident.
8.
PW6 Randhir Singh and PW7 Amrik Singh were the injured eye
witnesses and they both corroborated the prosecution story including injuries on
their persons.
9. PW8- Amrit Lal Verma proved the scaled site plan.
10. PW9- Kultar Singh was witness to the recovery, in whose
presence, the blood stained earth was lifted from 15 places.
11. PW10- SI Tara Singh had interrogated accused Ujaggar Singh, on
whose behalf the weapon of offence i.e. Khunda was recovered.
12. PW11- Sher Singh has recorded the statements of Kultar Singh.
Then the investigation of the case was transferred to Paramjit Singh.
13. PW12- Inderjit Singh, MHC was a formal witness.
14. PW13 HC Harbhajan Singh was a witness to the recovery of
kirpan at the instance of accused/appellant Rattan Singh, recovery of Sua at the
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -10-
instance of Kulwinder Singh, recovery of Tangli at the instance of Harbhajan
Singh.
15. PW14- ASI Rama Kumar proved certain endorsements and also
witnessed the recovery of Gandasi at the instance of accused/appellant Kesar
Singh.
16. PW15- Inspector Paramjit Singh was the Investigating Officer who
proved certain formalities observed by him and also proved the statement of
complainant which was recorded by him at PGI Chandigarh.
17. PW16- HC Kulwant Singh is formal official witness.
18. PW17- Rajnish, Clerk proved the sale-deed No.1951 dated
22.03.1999 Ex.P84.
19. PW18- Dr. M.K. Tiwari deposed that injured Jarnail Singh and
Surmukh Singh were brought in the Emergency Ward with injuries. He further
proved the Bed Head Tickets of the injured.
20. Thereafter, learned Public Prosecutor closed the evidence on
03.03.2004. Accused/appellant Ujaggar Singh had unfortunately died during the
trial on 02.03.2004, whereupon proceedings against him stood abated.
21. Thereafter, statements of accused/appellants were recorded under
Section 313 of Cr.P.C., wherein the entire evidence and incriminating material,
which were led and brought on record, were put to them, which were denied by
them and they pleaded false implication.
22. Leaned senior counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that
the judgment under challenge is against the law and facts and as such the same
is liable to be set aside on this score alone. He further argued that the learned
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -11-
trial Court has erred in finding that as to who was the aggressor party and
passed the impugned judgment by merely observing that it was a free fight. He
further argued that the trial Court overlooked the fact that there was sufficient
material on record to show that infact the complainant party had attacked the
appellants with an intention to cause severe injuries and the action on the part of
appellants was in exercise of their right of self defence only. It is further argued
that accused/appellant Kulwinder Singh had been stated to be armed with a Sua,
however, no punctured wound or stab wound was found on the body/person of
the deceased or any of the other injured persons. He further argued that a cross-
case was also registered against the complainant party at the instance of
appellants upon which they were also tried by the trial Court and have been
convicted and sentenced also; but still the plea of self defence of the appellants
has not been considered by the trial Court. The trial Court has committed a
manifest and grave error while holding the appellants guilty. The impugned
judgment is based on surmises and conjectures. It suffers from grave illegality,
perversity and impropriety; whereas the judgment of conviction and sentence
passed against the complainant party is well reasoned and justified. The guilt of
the complainant party stood duly proved on record which strengthens the
version of appellants regarding self defence. Hence, the impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 09.03.2004 passed against the appellants
is liable to be set aside and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence of
even date passed against the complainant party is liable to be affirmed/upheld.
He thus prayed accordingly.
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -12-
23. Further, the learned arguing counsel for the appellants in CRA-S-
729-SB-2004 (complainant in connected case) has strongly opposed the
contentions raised by learned senior counsel for the appellants in CRA-D-336-
DB-2004 while submitting that in fact they had been attacked by Kesar Singh
and others with a strong motive of eliminating them. He further argued that the
cross-case lodged by the other side is a false one and had been got registered as
a counter-blast in order to save them from legal repercussions. Moreover, there
is a delay of 11 months in registering the cross-case, which in itself is sufficient
proof of the same being false, concocted and an afterthought. He thus prays that
the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.03.2004 passed
against Jarnail Singh etc. may be upheld and that one passed against appellants
in CRA-D-336-DB-2004 may please be set aside.
23. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the
arguments of learned counsel for the appellants in respective appeals while
arguing that the prosecution has proved its cases beyond reasonable doubt as
the incident was a result of free fight, in which both the parties have inflicted
injuries to each other. He thus prays for upholding both the judgments of the
court below.
24. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and
have gone through the documents and other material available on record with
their able assistance.
25. From the deposition of Investigating Officer as well as perusal of
the site plan, it is evident that the incident had taken place in the street situated
outside the house of appellants- Ujaggar Singh and others and not inside their
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -13-
house. Therefore, it cannot be said that the appellants were in the courtyard of
their house. Even the blood stained earth had been picked up from the street and
not from the courtyard of the house of Ujaggar Singh. From the ocular version
as well as the evidence led on record, it has come on record that 18 injuries had
been suffered by deceased Nachhattar Singh, out of which four injuries were
directly suffered by him on his head. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said
that such injuries were inflicted by Ujaggar Singh and his associates in exercise
of their right of self defence. It has further come on record that Surmukh Singh
had also received three injuries on his head; PW-6 Randhir Singh, injured had
also received one injury on his face i.e. left side of upper lip; Amrik Singh
(PW7) had also received an injury on his head and Gurmeet Kaur had also
received one injury on her head. Therefore, it can safely be presumed that the
injuries were squarely given to the complainant party (Jarnail Singh and others)
with an intention to take their lives as is evident from the weapons as well as
seat of the injuries on the bodies of complainant party. On the other hand,
complainant party has only been charge-sheeted under Section 326 IPC
alongwith other sections. In that case, PW4 Dr. Ramesh Chand Gupta has found
an injury on the head of Ujaggar Singh. On the person of Rattan Singh, one
diffuse reddish blue coloured swelling was found on the shoulder. Over the
swelling, a 3" long abrasion was present on the front part of the shoulder, and
two small abrasions were present on the upper part of the shoulder. A small
abrasion was also present on the knee front aspect 3” to 5” long with two
bruises running parallel on the left side of scapular region on the person of
Rattan Singh. Further, appellant Harbhajan Singh was also found to have
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -14-
suffered an incised wound 3" x 1½" bone deep on the dorsum right hand at the
level of index and middle finger. However, all the members of complainant
party namely Jarnail Singh, Surmukh Singh, Jasbir Singh, Randhir Singh
Hardial Singh, Jasbir Singh son of Bhajan Singh and Amrik Singh have been
convicted for the commission of offences punishable under Section 326 of IPC
alongwith other offences and have been substantially sentenced for two years.
26. One thing is very much clear in the present case that nobody has
denied his presence at the place of occurrence. The motive is although an old
one that the complainant party (Jarnail Singh and others) had purchased land
from the brother of Ujaggar Singh. However, there is admitted enmity between
both the parties. In light of the same, the plea of self defence would not be
available to the appellants (Kesar Singh and others) as the nature of injuries
shows that the same are much beyond the act of self defence since multiple
injuries had been suffered by the deceased on his head. Therefore, the nature of
injuries as well as number of injuries does not indicate the same having been
caused in self defence.
27. We are, however, of the opinion that so far as the appellant
Kulwinder Singh, who was stated to have been armed with sua (ice poker), is
concerned, no punctured wound or stab injuries have been found on the persons
of complainant party, which could be said to have been caused with such a
weapon. Even otherwise, none of the injuries have been attributed to the
appellant Kulwinder Singh. Therefore, his role, presence and intention can be
doubted. Hence, we acquit the appellant Kulwinder Singh of the charges framed
against him. Accused Ujaggar Singh had died during the trial, whereupon the
CRA-D-336-DB-2004+1 case -15-
proceedings were dropped against him. Further, the appellant Rattan Singh had
died during the pendency of the present appeal, hence, the appeal already stands
abated qua him vide order dated 08.09.2025.
28. Therefore, in light of the above, we uphold the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 09.03.2004 passed by the then Sessions
Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib against appellants Kesar Singh and Harbhajan Singh.
The cross-appeal No.CRA-S-729-SB-2004 also stands dismissed and the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed on even date against the
appellants Jarnail Singh and others is also sustained and are accordingly upheld.
29. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib is directed to take
necessary steps to ensure that the appellants in both appeals are taken into
custody and made to undergo the remaining sentence in accordance with law.
30. All other misc. application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of
accordingly.
(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL)
JUDGE
(H.S. GREWAL)
SEPT. 16
th
, 2025. JUDGE
Rajender
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Legal Notes
Add a Note....