JUDGMENT
Mehtab S. Gill, J.
1. We will be deciding Criminal Appeals No. 863-DB of 2005, 864-DB of 2005, 2062-SB of 2005, 2073-SB of 2005, 2074-SB of 2005, 2075-SB of 2005 and Criminal Revision No. 323 of 2006 by this common judgment, as they arise out of the same judgment/order dated 18.11.2005 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, whereby he convicted Jaspal Singh D.S.P. son of Satpal Singh and Amarjit Singh ASI son of Dara Singh under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for five months. They were also convicted under Section 120B I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months. They were further convicted under Sections 364/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for five months. They were also convicted under Sections 201/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months.
2. Pirthipal Singh HC son of Bela Singh, Satnam Singh SI son of Piara Singh, Surinder Pal Singh SI son of Jagjit Singh and Jasbir Singh SI son of Harbhajan Singh were convicted under Section 120B I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months.
3. These four accused were also convicted under Sections 364/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for five months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The case of the prosecution is unfolded by the statement Ex.PA given by Paramjit Kaur to SI Baldev Singh at Kabir Park on 6.9.1995 at 4 p.m. Paramjit Kaur stated that her husband along with two children was living in Kabir Park, in her own house. Her daughter is aged 10 years and son is aged 9 years. On 6.9.1995 at 9 a.m. after sending her children to school, she went to the University Library, as she worked there. Her husband Jaswant Singh Khalra was at home. At about 1 O’Clock (p.m.) she came back to her house from the University. She then came to know that some unknown persons in police uniform had taken away her husband in a Maruti car, of light white colour bearing No.DNB-5969. Her husband had a heated discussion with them. She looked for her husband, but was not successful in getting to know his whereabouts. Rajiv Singh son of Parkash Singh told her that her husband was taken away at about 9/9.20 a.m. forcibly, by some unknown persons.
4. On the basis of this statement F.I.R. Ex.PA was registered on 7.9.1995 at 9.30 a.m. under Section 365 I.P.C. Complainant Paramjit Kaur not satisfied with the investigation being done by the Punjab Police, filed S.L.P. No. 497 of 1995 in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court passed order dated 5.11.1995 and directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the C.B.I.) to investigate the case and F.I.R. No. 72 Ex.PO was registered by the C.B.I. on 18.12.1995, at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar. Special report was sent to the Illaqa Magistrate by post on 2.1.1996. The F.I.R. Ex. PO registered by the C.B.I. was the verbatim of statement Ex. PA given by Paramjit Kaur to SI Baldev Singh.
5. The C.B.I. to prove its case, brought into the witness-box Kikkar Singh PW-1, Paramjit Kaur PW-2, Sish Pal Singh PW-3, Gurbhej Singh PW-4, Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5, Satnam Singh PW-6, Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7, Satwinder Pal Singh PW-8, Piara Singh PW-9, Baljit Singh PW-10, Jaspal Singh Dhillon PW-11, Surinderpal Singh PW-12, Baljinder Singh PW-13, Kulwant Singh PW-14, Rajiv Singh PW- 15, Kuldip Singh PW-16, Dr. B.A. Vaid PW-17, P.L. Meena PW-18, K.S. Joshi PW-19, Ramesh Kumar Inspector PW-20, Satnam Singh PW-21 and Damajjan Singh PW-22.
6. The defence to rebut the allegations of the C.B.I., also brought into the witness-box Devinder Singh DW-1, Gurjit Singh Kahlon Advocate DW-2, Kuldip Singh DW-3, Behal Singh ASI DW-4, Kulwant Singh DW-5, Ravinder Singh DW-6, HC Jaspal Singh DW-7, Satnam Singh MHC DW-8, Dalip Singh DW-9, Chanan Singh DW-10, Ajit Singh DW-11 and SI Baldev Singh DW-12.
7. Learned Counsel for appellant Jaspal Singh, Shri R.S. Cheema has argued that as per the prosecution witnesses, the deceased was picked up from his house. Though he was seen being picked up by Rajiv Singh PW-15 and Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7, strangely no police official was identified. Appellants were posted in Taran Taran i.e. in the area of Amritsar. They could have been easily identified.
8. Deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra was a Human Rights Activist and was collecting evidence regarding the illegal cremation of bodies in the area of Amritsar and Taran Taran. He was the General Secretary of the Human Rights Wing of the Akali Dal.
9. The names of accused/appellants do not figure in the statement Ex. PA or the F.I.R. Ex.DW12/D. It is only after a gap of about seven months when the C.B.I. took over the investigation of the case that names of the appellants were given by complainant Paramjit Kaur PW-2. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 is an educated lady who was working in the University. She knew that the names of the accused should be given at the earliest to the police. Nothing has come on record to show that she made a complaint to the D.I.G., the S.G.P.C. authorities or the Chief Justice of India.
10. In the Petition filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, three affidavits were attached. Appellants have not been named in the petition, or in the affidavits. The testimony of this witness is not truthful. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 has named the appellants only on hear-say.
11. Similarly, Rajiv Singh PW-15 is an interested witness. He is a Human Rights Activist and was a friend of deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra. He was known to the family. He filed an affidavit in the Hon’ble Supreme Court along with the S.L.P. He has not named any of the appellants in that affidavit. He is a partisan and highly motivated witness. In his statement given before the Court, he has stated that he did not make any complaint to the police or the I.G. or any superior officer. He has been confronted not once or twice, but several times with his statement before the Court and the statement given by him under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on vital aspects. He has made material improvements. His father disowned him. A person of such a character should not be believed. Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 also did not identify the appellants at the initial stage. He was the Secretary of the Punjab Human Rights Organisation. He was also an interested witness. His source of income was the Human Rights Organisation activities and from agricultural, as stated by him in the Court. He is also not a reliable witness. Several cases were pending against him. Such a witness could be easily induced by the complainant Paramjit Kaur PW-2 to give a statement against the appellants. The C.B.I. induced him for giving evidence against the appellants.
12. Shri R.S. Ghai, learned senior counsel for appellants Satnam Singh SI, and Surinder Pal Singh SI adopting the arguments of Shri R.S. Cheema, has added that Paramjit Kaur PW-2 did not sign on the dotted lines. She is an educated lady. The police could not have induced her to sign on blank papers, as stated by her.
13. In the affidavit submitted in the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 9.9.1995, appellants have not been named. Affidavit of Rajiv Singh PW-15 is dated 11.9.1995, he has also not named the appellants. It is on 5.2.1996 that Rajiv Singh PW-15 in his statement before the C.B.I. and Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 gave his statement on 5.2.1996 to the C.B.I. under Section 161 Cr.P.C., that the story started unfolding. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 the star witness of the C.B.I. named the appellants for the first time in Court on 2.3.1998 after a gap of 2 years.
14. Kulwant Singh PW-14 has stated that Jaswant Singh Khalra was taken to the lock up, where he was also lodged (in jail). If Jaswant Singh Khalra had been abducted by the appellants, he would not have been taken to the lock up, but hidden at some location where nobody could see him. As per the prosecution, Jaswant Singh Khalra was killed on 24.10.1995. He would not have been kept for 1-1/2 months if the appellants had the intention to eliminate him.
15. Shri T.S. Sangha, learned Counsel for appellant Amarjit Singh has argued that Kuldeep Singh PW-16 has not named Amarjit Singh, in his lengthy statement regarding the murder taking place in front of him, nor in disposing of the dead-body. No offence under Section 302 or 201 I.P.C. is made out against Amarjit Singh. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 in her statement Ex.DX given to the C.B.I. under Section 161 Cr.P.C., Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 and Rajiv Singh PW-15 in their statements before the C.B.I. have not named appellant Amarjit Singh. They have named Jasbir Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Satpal Singh, Ashok Kumar (since dead) and Prithipal Singh. Kulwant Singh PW-7 has also not named Amarjit Singh, but has named Satnam Singh, Jaspal Singh and Ajit Singh Sandhu, the then S.S.P. Taran Taran (since dead). A false case has been made out against the appellant. He has been roped in.
16. Learned Counsel for the C.B.I. Shri Rajan Gupta has argued, that nothing new has been raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants regarding the role and innocence of the appellants. All these arguments were taken into consideration by the learned trial Court and thereafter a reasoned order was passed.
17. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 and Rajiv Singh PW-15 have stated in their testimony before the Court that they went to Shri D.R. Bhatti, D.I.G. Amritsar and disclosed the names of the appellants. Shri D.R.Bhatti advised them to keep quite as only the Director General of Police, Punjab, could help them. The affidavits filed in the writ petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court were drafted by an Advocate. At that stage, Paramjit Kaur PW-2 was under fear and she did not want to go beyond a reasonable point as the physical safety of her husband Jaswant Singh Khalra was paramount to her.
18. False cases were clamped on the prosecution witnesses. Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 was involved a case under Section 376 I.P.C., Rajiv Singh PW-15 was involved in a case under Section 324 I.P.C. Kulwant Singh PW-14 and Kuldip Singh PW-16 were also involved in false cases, so that they resile from their original statements. Such was the level of intimidation and pressure being put on the prosecution witnesses. The plea of ali bi taken by appellant Jasbir Singh was that he had gone to Hemkund Sahib on the day the kidnapping of the deceased took place. This plea fell flat, after the Handwriting Expert Dr. B.A. Vaid PW-17 stated, that his signatures and the writing in the register at Govindghat (on the way to Hemkund Sahib) were not that of appellant Jasbir Singh. The learned trial Court has dealt with the false pleas of ali bi taken by appellants in a meticulous manner.
19. The motive for the commission of offence has been clearly spelt out by Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5, Satwinderpal Singh PW-8 and Jaspal Singh Dhillon PW-11. These witnesses have categorically stated that Jaswant Singh Khalra was a Human Rights Activist and was looking into the illegal deaths and thereafter, cremation of these innocent persons in the districts of Amritsar and Taran Taran by the police. This was the reason that he was targeted. Jaswant Singh Khalra had spelt out his apprehensions on this aspect to these witnesses.
20. It is after the death of Ajit Singh Sandhu, the then S.S.P., Taran Taran in the year 1995, that Kuldeep Singh PW-16, the eye-witness to the torture and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra, came out openly to tell the story. He was threatened and false cases were also clamped on him.
21. Shri R.S. Bains, learned Counsel for the complainant has adopted the arguments of learned Counsel for the C.B.I., but has added that the Criminal Revision filed by Paramjit Kaur PW-2 may be accepted and the sentence of the appellants be enhanced. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance.
22. The case of complainant Paramjit Kaur PW-2 was that her husband was picked up by the police officials (appellants) and thereafter murdered, as he was an active member of the Human Rights Organisation.
23. He unearthed the extra-judicial killings in the area of District Taran Taran and Amritsar. He had vital information to this effect. Appellants were apprehensive and especially Ajit Singh Sandhu, the then S.S.P., Taran Taran (he died before the trial commenced) that they would be held accountable for these extra judicial killings.
24. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 in her statement before the Court has reiterated what she stated in her statement Ex.PA given to SI Baldev Singh DW-12 and what she stated in his statement Ex.PO, before the C.B.I. In her testimony before the Court, she stated that Rajiv Singh, a Journalist by profession, had come to her residence on 6.9.1995 at 8.30 a.m. as he along with Jaswant Singh Khalra had to go to the Indian Express office. Thereafter Paramjit Kaur PW-2 left for the University, where she was working. About 200 yds. from her house, she saw a police Gypsy and in it were sitting appellant Jaspal Singh and appellant Surinder Pal Singh. 5/6 police personnel were also sitting in the Gypsy. She identified them, they being Ashok Kumar (since deceased), appellant Jaspal Singh and appellant Amarjit Singh. She identified the appellants in Court during trial also. At about 9.20 a.m. she received a telephone call from her office, to come back to her house. When she reached her house, Rajiv Singh PW-15 told her, that her husband had been taken away by the police. Thereafter she made calls to her relatives from a PCO informing them about the kidnapping. She went to Police Station Islamabad along with Rajiv Singh PW-15. The police personnel stated that deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra was not brought by them. Thereafter she went to the Main Post Office, Amritsar and sent telegrams to the Director General of Police, Punjab, Chief Minister of Punjab, Chief Justice of India, Chief Justice of Punjab & Haryana High Court and Jaspal Singh Dhillon at Chandigarh. Thereafter she met D.R. Bhatti IPS who was the D.I.G. She was accompanied by Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 and some other persons. Shri D.R.Bhatti asked her to come on the next day. Next day at about 10/11 a.m. she again went to the office of Shri D.R.Bhatti IPS. She was accompanied by Satwinderpal Singh PW-12 and Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7. On 7.9.1995, the police officials of Police Station Islamabad came to her house and made enquiries about her husband and asked her to sign on some written papers. On 8.9.1995 Shri D.R.Bhatti told her that he was not in a position to help her, but she should meet the D.G.P., Punjab. He is the only person who could help her. Thereafter she knocked the doors of the National Human Rights Commission at New Delhi the officials told her to file a petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. She filed a S.L.P. in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. She stated that her husband was a human rights activist and Secretary of the Human Rights Wing of Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). The deceased had been raising his voice about the cremation of unidentified bodies by the police after killing them in fake encounters.
25. A number of threats were given to her on telephone by the Punjab Police, that she should not pursue the death of her late husband. If she persists, she would also be taught a lesson. False cases were registered against her. Kuldip Singh PW-16 told her that her husband had been killed in his presence.
26. When confronted with her statement Ex. PA, she stated that the statement was not given by her voluntarily, but SI Baldev Singh DW-12 appended her signatures without telling her anything. She did not know that F.I.R. No. 72 dated 7.9.1995 had been recorded under Section 365 I.P.C. at Police Station Islamabad. She further reiterated that Baldev Singh SI came to her residence on 7.9.1995 and obtained her signatures under some writing which she did not read. This witness was put to a lengthy cross-examination, but she stood firmly and reiterated her version. It is clear from the statement of Paramjit Kaur PW-2 that at the initial stage she reposed trust in the local police, but the local police instead of helping her, got her signatures on Ex.PA. Names of the appellants were deliberately omitted. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 was going from pillar to post crying for justice, but the police set-up was trying their best not to go forward in her search for justice.
27. Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5 has stated, that Jaswant Singh Khalra was known to him. He was the General Secretary of the Human Rights Wing of Shiromini Akali Dal. Jaswant Singh came to his house on 31.8.1995 and told him that Ajit Singh Sandhu, the then S.S.P., Taran Taran, had called him and threatened him, that he will meet the same fate as happened in the case of 25,000 unclaimed dead-bodies. Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5 advised him to file a writ petition in the Punjab & Haryana High Court. On 6.9.1995 he was informed that Jaswant Singh Khalra had been abducted by a police party headed by Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P. Taran Taran.
28. Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5 has spelt out the motive for the commission of the offence. The statement of Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5 has to be taken note of, as not only he is a former Judge of the High Court, but was also Chairman of the Punjab Human Rights Commission. He was appointed by the then Chief Minister of Punjab Shri Surjit Singh Barnala to review the cases of detenus in various jails in Punjab in the year 1995.
29. Motive for the commission of the offence has been spelt out not only by one witness, but a number of witnesses i.e. Justice Ajit Singh Bains PW-5, Satnam Singh PW-6, Satwinderpal Singh PW-8, Jaspal Singh Dhillon PW-11 and Surinderpal Singh Advocate PW-12. All these witnesses have stated that Jaswant Singh Khalra was a Human Rights Activist and was looking into the deaths of innocent persons, who had been killed in false encounters and their bodies cremated, in the districts of Amritsar and Taran Taran. Jaswant Singh Khalra had confided in them, about he being eliminated and the danger to his life. Similarly, Satnam Singh PW-6, Satwinder Pal Singh PW-8, have also reiterated that deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra had confided with them that his life was in danger and he would be eliminated any day. Ajit Singh Sandhu S.S.P. Taran Taran, was not happy with him for pursuing the cases of the persons who had been illegally eliminated. The testimony of these witnesses is cogent and convincing. They have proved the motive for the commission of the offence.
30. Kirpal Singh Singh Randhawa PW-7 is an eye-witness to the abduction of Jaswant Singh Khalra. He has stated, that on 6.9.1995 a Journalist of the Indian Express had come to meet Jaswant Singh Khalra. When he started from his house on 6.9.1995 at 9.15 a.m. and reached near a speed-breaker, he saw a Maruti Van of sky colour, bearing No.DNB-5969 being driven by a Hindu gentleman who was in civil dress. He saw appellant Satnam Singh sitting along with a driver in police uniform. On the rear seat he saw Jaswant Singh Khalra sitting in between two persons. Jaswant Singh Khalra shouted that he was being taken by the police forcibly. Appellant Satnam Singh was the S.H.O. of Police Station, Jhabal, at that time. Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 saw the deceased being taken away by the police party. Appellant Satnam Singh was identified by him. Rajiv Singh PW-15 has similarly stated that on 6.9.1995 at about 9.15 a.m. he was sitting in the drawing room of Jaswant Singh Khalra. He was waiting for Mandeep Singh, Staff Reporter of the Indian Express. At about 9.15/9.20 a.m. he saw three persons in uniform and one in civil dress. One of them had a walki talkie set. He identified the person with the walki-talkie as appellant Jaspal Singh D.S.P. The others being appellant Satnam Singh SI and Prithipal Singh HC of Police Station Manochahal. He identified these appellants in Court. He saw D.S.P. Ashok Kumar (since deceased) sitting on the front seat. He noticed 5/6 more police officials, one of them was appellant Jasbir Singh. The others being Avtar Singh, nephew of Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P. Taran Taran. Appellant Jaspal Singh told Jaswant Singh Khalra that Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P. Taran Taran, wanted to meet him. He was pushed inside the Maruti van and the Maruti van sped away. Thereafter he made a telephonic call to Paramjit Kaur PW-2 informing her of her husband having been abducted.
31. Both these witnesses Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 and Rajiv Singh PW-15 are independent witnesses. Both are witnesses to the abduction and who had last seen the deceased, in the custody of some of the appellants. He was being abducted from his house by the police officers.
32. Their testimony is cogent and convincing. Kulwant Singh PW-14 and Kuldip Singh PW-16 are the star witnesses of the prosecution. Kulwant Singh PW-14 has stated in his testimony before the Court that he was arrested in a case under the N.D.P.S. Act on 4.9.1995 by the police officials of Police Station Jhabal. On 5.9.1995 a young boy by the name of Bali was also in the police station, he (Bali) was released on 5.9.1995. On 6.9.1995 Jaswant Singh Khalra was brought to the police station. Jaswant Singh Khalra disclosed his identity to Kulwant Singh PW-14 and told him that he did not know as to why, he had been brought to the Police Station. He stated that he had been arrested by appellants, Satnam Singh SI and Jaspal Singh D.S.P. He (Kulwant Singh PW-14) was taken to Police Station Jhabal, as his challan had to be presented. He was made to sit in the office of Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P. Taran Taran. Jaspal Singh D.S.P., Satnam Singh S.H.O. made enquiries as to whether he knew anything about the drunkard man (Jaswant Singh Khalra). Nothing has come in the cross-examination of this witness or from the defence in the form of documentary evidence like the Roznamcha etc. that he was not present on 6.9.1995 in Police Station, Jhabal.
33. The version put forward by Kuldip Singh PW-16 has a ring of truth. He has supported the prosecution version. Not a question has been put to this witness in cross-examination or any document has been put on record, as to whether he was not employed as an S.P.O. at Ropar since 23.2.1994. No question has been put to this witness that Ajit Singh Sandhu, the then S.S.P. Ropar had not given him employment. He in fact, gives his S.P.O. number being as, 205 at Ropar. His appointment as a Body Guard of appellant Satnam Singh S.H.O. has also not been challenged in his cross-examination. In February 1995 Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P. Ropar was transferred as S.S.P. Taran Taran, and Satnam Singh was transferred from Ropar to Taran Taran. Kuldip Singh PW-16 was also transferred to Taran Taran and was allotted No. 606-Taran Taran. He was posted as a Body Guard to Satnam Singh SI/SHO, Police Station Jhabal. Kuldip Singh PW-16 also used to do his personal work, besides being his Gunman. About 15 days before Diwali in 1995, appellant Satnam Singh called Kuldip Singh PW-16 and gave him the keys of his room and told him that there is a man inside the room and he should serve him meals etc., but this should be kept a secret. From the statement of this witness and no challenge coming from the prosecution, it is clear that Kuldip Singh PW-16 was a privy to all that happened with Jaswant Singh Khalra, from the time he was brought to Police Station Jhabal till his death. He is the one who spilled the beans. The promise given to him that he would be inducted into the Punjab police permanently, was not kept, by the appellants. Appellant Satnam Singh turns out to be a key figure as per the statement of Kuldip Singh PW-16, in eliminating Jaswant Singh Khalra. He (PW-16) has further stated that he served meals to the deceased. After about 3 days in the evening Ajit Singh Sandhu S.S.P. Taran Taran, Jaspal Singh D.S.P. and his Body Guard Arvinder Singh came in a Maruti car. Both Surinder Pal Singh SI, Jasbir Singh S.H.O., and Pirthipal Singh came in another Maruti car. This witness has not named Amarjit Singh ASI. Jaswant Singh Khalra was threatened by Ajit Singh Sandhu S.S.P. Taran Taran that he should stop his activities. At about 2 p.m. appellant Satnam Singh called Kuldip Singh PW-16 and told him that they had to go somewhere. A car bearing registration No.PB02J- 2005 was parked. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 along with appellant Satnam Singh made deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra to sit in the back seat of the Maruti car. The physical condition of the deceased was not good, as he had been given a severe beating. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 further stated that Jaswant Singh Khalra was brought to the car with his help and the help of appellant Satnam Singh. His wrist joints were swollen. He was not in a position to take his meals. He was unable to answer the call of nature. Appellant Satnam Singh occupied the driver seat and Kuldeep Singh PW-16 along with Jaswant Singh Khalra sat on the back seat. They went to Taran Taran, at Manawala Kothi of Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P., who was himself present there. After meeting Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P., Jaswant Singh Khalra was taken back to Police Station, Jhabal. After some days appellant Jaspal Singh along with his Body Guard Arvinder Singh came to Police Station Jhabal in a car, which was being driven by appellant Surinder Pal Singh. He was accompanied by appellant Jaspal Singh, the then SI/SHO, Police Station Manochahal and appellant Prithipal Singh. They went to the room of Jaswant Singh Khalra where again he was tortured and given a beating. Kulwant Singh PW-14 was directed to bring a glass of water by appellant Satnam Singh. When he went to bring a glass of water, he heard the sound of two shots, fired from a fire arm. He immediately came back and saw appellant Satnam Singh standing at the door in which Jaswant Singh Khalra had been kept. Thereafter he saw Balwinder Singh Gora bringing back the Maruti car in reverse gear, in which these officers had come. The door of the dicky was open. Arvinder Singh and Balwinder Singh Gora threw Jaswant Singh Khalra in the dicky of the car by lifting him, from his arms and legs. Blood was oozing out of his chest. Thereafter Balwinder Singh Gora sat on the driver’s seat. Arvinder Singh occupied the front seat. Appellant Prithipal Singh occupied the rear seat. Appellant Jaspal Singh D.S.P. sat on the driver seat of the white Maruti car which did not have any registration number and appellant Jasbir Singh sat on the front seat. Appellant Surinder Pal Singh also sat in the Maruti car. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 sat down on the back seat of the Maruti car. They went to Village Harike. At about 10 p.m. on that day they crossed the river in Village Harike. After crossing the canal and going towards the road leading to Village Makhu, the vehicle stopped. The dead-body of Jaswant Singh Khalra was thrown into the canal by Balwinder Singh Gora and Arwinder Singh. Thereafter the three vehicles returned to the Rest House at Harike. At the Rest House there were two police Gypsys, one of them was that of Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P., who was also present there. Appellant Jaspal Singh, appellant Surinder Pal Singh and appellant Jasbir Singh went inside the Rest House. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 along with Balwinder Singh, Arvinder Singh and Prithipal Singh sat on chairs in the lawn outside the rest house. Two bottles of whisky were sent to them which they consumed and then had their meals. At 12 in the night, Kuldeep Singh PW-16 along with appellant Satnam Singh returned to Police Station Jhabal in the Maruti car. This witness has categorically stated that he was under fear, till the time Ajit Singh Sandhu, S.S.P. was alive, and he could not even think of disclosing about the murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra, out of fear as he would be eliminated and also that Ajit Singh Sandhu would not absorb him in the Police Department.
34. This probably is the reason that Kuldip Singh PW-16 gave his statement at such a late stage. Kuldeep Singh’s (PW-16) life was in danger and he was under constant threat from Ajit Singh Sandhu, the then S.S.P. Taran Taran. It is after the death of Ajit Singh Sandhu that he sent a registered letter to Shri P.C.Dogra, D.G.P. Punjab, to employ him permanently in the Police Department. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 has further stated that he disclosed the incident to his relatives, but they also advised him not to say anything, as the police would then register false cases against him and his family members. The police will harm him physically and monetarily. They would also harm his family. This witness in his statement has constantly harped on the threat he was being given by the police officials especially by appellant Satnam Singh and Jaspal Singh.
35. The allegation against this witness that Rs. 50,000/- was offered to him by complainant Paramjit Kaur PW-2 for giving statement against the appellants is palpably wrong and hollow. In fact, if we go through the statement of Kuldeep Singh PW-16, we find that he was being put under constant threat to his life and liberty by the appellants. Inducements were being given to him and he had no option but to play a cat and mouse game with the appellants, to save his life and his family members’ lives, until he was sure and confident that no harm would come to him and his family if he spoke the truth. He spoke the truth after the death of Ajit Singh Sandhu S.S.P. Taran Taran died. The investigation of this case in the meantime had been handed over by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the C.B.I. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 is the star witness. He has seen the abduction, torture, murder and disposing of the body of deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra. In his statement he has named appellants Jaspal Singh, Satnam Singh, Surinder Pal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Prithipal Singh. Appellant Amarjit Singh has not been named by him either for the torture, murder or disposing of the body of Jaswant Singh Khalra. Complainant Paramjit Kaur PW-2 in her statement before the C.B.I. (Ex.DX), Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7, Rajiv Singh PW-15 and Kulwant Singh PW-14 in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. made before the C.B.I. have not named appellant Amarjit Singh ASI for any role played by him. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 has named appellants Jasbir Singh and Surinderpal Singh. Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. before the C.B.I. has named Satnam Singh. Rajiv Singh PW-15 in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. before the C.B.I. has named Ashok Kumar (since dead), Surinderpal Singh and Prithipal Singh.
36. We find the statement of Kuldeep Singh PW-16 to be truthful, convincing and inspiring confidence. He initially was under fear, but at a later stage, came out with the truth. Nothing tangible in the form of oral evidence or in the form of any document has come forward from the side of the defence for showing that Kuldeep Singh PW-16 was not posted as an S.P.O. with Satnam Singh SI first at Ropar, and then at Police Station Jhabal. In fact, in his statement given before the Court, he has given his number in Ropar as SPO-205 and when he was transferred along with Satnam Singh appellant to Police Station Jhabal, he was allotted number 606-Taran Taran on 8.3.1995. This witness is an eye-witness to the gruesome abduction, torture, murder and disposal of the body of Jaswant Singh Khalra.
37. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 gets corroboration from Kulwant Singh PW-14, Paramjit Kaur PW-2, Justice Ajit Singh Bains (Retd.) PW-5, Satnam Singh PW-6, Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 and Rajiv Singh PW-15. Taking the statements of these witnesses in totality, we have no hesitation in coming to a conclusion that deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra was picked up from his house at the instance of Ajit Singh Sandhu S.S.P. (since dead) by appellants Jaspal Singh, Satnam Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Prithipal Singh. He was tortured at Police Station Jhabal and shot dead there and finally his body was disposed of by them, near the Harike Bridge, in river Sutlej. The evidence against appellant Amarjit Singh is flimsy. His name does not find mention in the statements given before the Court or in the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. given to the C.B.I. by the key witnesses i.e. Kuldeep Singh PW-16 and Kulwant Singh PW-14. In fact, Kulwant Singh PW-14 corroborates the version of Kuldeep Singh PW-16 that it was appellants Satnam Singh, Jaspal Singh, Ajit Singh Sandhu S.S.P. (since dead) along with other appellants apart from Amarjit Singh who had committed the murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra. A number of defence witnesses have been examined. Their testimony and veracity were gone into, but ultimately it comes out that they were untruthful witnesses who went out of their way to help the appellants. Gurjit Singh Kahlon Advocate DW-2 procured a false affidavit under threat, from Kuldeep Singh PW-16. Learned Counsel for the appellants did not argue or try to build up a case on the basis of the witnesses produced by the defence. There is no need for us to go into the details of the testimony of the defence witnesses, as the defence itself has not relied much upon their testimony.
38. We do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned trial Court apart from the conviction of appellant Amarjit Singh ASI. Appeal of Amarjit Singh ASI is accepted and he is acquitted of the charges framed against him. Conviction and sentence of Amarjit Singh is set aside. If in custody, he shall be set free forthwith. Conviction of the other appellants shall remain intact as awarded by the learned trial Court.
39. Appeals of Jaspal Singh, Satnam Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Prithipal Singh are dismissed. Paramjit Kaur PW-2 has filed Criminal Revision No. 323 of 2006 for enhancement of the sentence awarded to appellants Satnam Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Prithipal Singh. This Revision was admitted on 12.12.2006. Notice of motion to respondents No. 4,5,6 and 9, to be heard on the quantum of sentence for 10.10.2007.
40. The respective counsel for the respondents accept notice of motion. As Criminal Appeal No. 863-DB of 2005 filed by Amarjit Singh has been accepted, Revision qua him has become infructuous.
Vide our judgment dated 8.10.2007, notice of motion was issued to respondents No. 4,5,6 and 9 i.e. Satnam Singh SI son of Piara Singh, Surinderpal Singh SI son of Jagjit Singh, Jasbir Singh SI son of Harbhajan Singh and Prithipal Singh HC son of Bela Singh.
41. Shri R.S. Ghai, learned Counsel for respondents Satnam Singh and Surinderpal Singh has argued that the Revision is not maintainable. Revision of the complainant was admitted without giving notice to the respondents. As per Section 377(2) Cr.P.C. the C.B.I. was never authorised to file an appeal for enhancement of the sentence. The sole prerogative was that of the C.B.I. to file an appeal.
42. This Revision has been filed under Section 401 Cr.P.C. Paras 4 and 5 of Section 401 Cr.P.C. clearly spell out that where an appeal lies and no appeal is filed, no proceedings by way of Revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party. Order dated 12.12.2006 of this Court is a nullity and it was passed without notice to the accused or their counsel. Section 386 of the Cr.P.C. also would not apply in this case as the appeal has got to be filed by the C.B.I. Offence under Section 364 I.P.C. is not made out. At the most as per the evidence on record, an offence under Section 365 I.P.C. could be made out, for which the maximum sentence is seven years.
43. As per the prosecution story, at the most, it could be taken as abduction to conceal deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra. There is no evidence of his murder being committed by the appellants/respondents.
44. Shri K.S. Ahluwalia, learned Counsel for respondents Satnam Singh SI and HC Prithipal Singh has adopted the arguments of Shri R.S.Ghai. He has further added that HC Prithipal Singh is an old man and the other respondents have also undergone a substantive part of their sentences.
45. Learned Counsel for Paramjit Kaur Khalra, the petitioner, has stated that the revision in this case is maintainable. After the revision was admitted by this Court on 12.12.2006 and it was directed that the revision be heard along with the criminal appeals, notice was sent by the Court to the accused. Counsels had sufficient notice to file an appeal against this Court’s order. Learned Counsels for the respondents are wanting the revision to be dismissed merely now on a technical ground. In any case, notice had been given by this Court on 8.10.2007 on the quantum of sentence. This itself is sufficient notice.
46. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties on the quantum of sentence. Revision was admitted by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2006 and this Court directed that this revision be heard along with the criminal appeals. This Court vide order dated 8.10.2007 convicted the appellants/respondents and gave them notice for 10.10.2007 for arguments on the quantum of sentence. On 10.10.2007 as the counsel were not prepared, the case was adjourned for 15.10.2007 on their request.
47. Sufficient notice has been given for arguing the case. Though the C.B.I. has not come into appeal under Section 377(2) Cr.P.C., but we cannot overlook the provisions of Section 386(e) Cr.P.C. Learned Counsel are overlooking this fact that it is not only under Section 377 Cr.P.C. where an appeal can be filed by the State Government against the sentence, but under Section 386(e) of the Cr.P.C., the Court has the suo motto power to enhance the sentence.
48. Learned Counsels have tried to make out a case under Section 365 I.P.C., but on the evidence on record, as already discussed in the main judgment, it is clear that Jaswant Singh Khalra was abducted by the respondents/appellants and thereafter murdered. No charge under Section 302 I.P.C. has been farmed against the respondents/appellants. Apart from his wife Paramjit Kaur PW-2, Kirpal Singh Randhawa PW-7 and Rajiv Singh PW-15 had seen his abduction taking place.
49. After being abducted, Kulwant Singh PW-14 and Kuldip Singh PW-16 were witnesses to the illegal detention and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra. The case clearly falls within the ambits of Section 364 I.P.C. Appellants/respondents have been awarded RI for 7 years under Section 364 I.P.C. Intention of the appellants/respondents was clear. Deceased was abducted so that his life is extinguished. Deceased being a human rights activist, was active in finding out the extra-judicial killings done in the Districts of Taran Taran and Amritsar.
50. Sentence of the appellants of 7 years RI is inadequate. Sentence of the appellants/respondents Satnam Singh, Surinderpal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Prithipal Singh is enhanced from 7 years RI to RI for life.
51. Fine shall remain intact, as awarded by the learned trial Court. Revision is disposed of as such.