{"id":86568,"date":"2009-11-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009"},"modified":"2015-07-15T10:09:08","modified_gmt":"2015-07-15T04:39:08","slug":"anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009<\/div>\n
Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                 -1-\n\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT             OF PUNJAB          AND    HARYANA           AT\n                             CHANDIGARH.\n\n                               Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005\n                               Date of Decision: November 5, 2009\n\n\nAnil Kumar                                                    .....Appellant\n\n                               v.\n\nState of Punjab\n                                                       .....Respondent\n\n                               Crl.Appeal No.388-DB of 2005\n\nSanjay Kumar, Dalbir Singh and Ajay Kumar\n                                                       .....Appellants\n                               v.\n\nState of Punjab\n                                                       .....Respondent\n\n                               Crl.Appeal No.422-DB of 2005\n\nAshok Kumar\n                                                       .....Appellant\n\n                               v.\n\nState of Punjab\n                                                       ......Respondent\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL\n       HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA\n\n\nPresent:     Mr.Swarn Singh Rana, Advocate\n             for the appellant in Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005.\n\n             Mr.Vipul Jindal, Advocate\n             for the appellants in Crl.Appeal No.388-DB of 2005.\n\n             Mr.Aseem Rai, Advocate\n             for the appellant in Crl.Appeal Nos. 388-DB and 422-DB of\n             2005.\n\n             Ms.Gurvin H.Singh, Additional A.G., Punjab.\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                  -2-\n\n\n\nRAM CHAND GUPTA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
1.          This judgment will dispose of all the aforementioned three<\/p>\n
appeals as they have arisen out of the same judgment of conviction and<\/p>\n
order of sentence dated 28.3.2005 passed by the then Additional Sessions<\/p>\n
Judge, Rupnagar, vide which accused Sanjay Kumar was convicted for<\/p>\n
offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to be<\/p>\n
referred as `IPC’) whereas the remaining accused were convicted for offence<\/p>\n
punishable under Section 302     read with Section 149 IPC and all the<\/p>\n
accused were also convicted for offences punishable under Section 201 read<\/p>\n
with Section 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to<\/p>\n
pay fine of Rs.5000\/- each, and in default of payment of fine to further<\/p>\n
undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for offence under Section<\/p>\n
302 read with Section 149 IPC and further sentenced to undergo rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.1000\/- each, and in default<\/p>\n
of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month<\/p>\n
for offence under Section 201 IPC. However, the sentences awarded to the<\/p>\n
accused were ordered to run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n
2.          Briefly stated the case of prosecution is that Sarmukh Singh son<\/p>\n
of Bakshish Singh, Ex Sarpanch of Village Bheora, Tehsil and District<\/p>\n
Ropar (PW1) was informed by some ladies of his village on 2.2.1999 at<\/p>\n
about 5.00 p.m. that the dead body of a person was lying near the bridge of<\/p>\n
river when they had gone to answer the call of nature. The Sarpanch<\/p>\n
alongwith Mehan Singh, Jaswinder Singh and some other persons from his<\/p>\n
village reached the said place and found that dead body of a young man,<\/p>\n
aged about 27 to 28 years, was lying there and that his face and beard were
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                 -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
stained with blood. As the dead body was not from that area, none of them<\/p>\n
could identify the same. He informed the police Station Sadar on telephone.<\/p>\n
The Assistant Sub Inspector Baldev Singh (PW5) reached the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence after receiving the message and recorded the statement of<\/p>\n
Sarmukh Singh, Sarpanch, which is Exhibit PA, on which he made his<\/p>\n
endorsement Exhibit PA\/1 and sent the same to the police Station for<\/p>\n
registration of the case, on the basis of which first information report<\/p>\n
Exhibit PA\/2 was recorded for offence under Section 304 A IPC. He also<\/p>\n
prepared inquest report on the dead body Exhibit PW5\/A. He also lifted<\/p>\n
blood stained earth from the place of occurrence and after sealing the same<\/p>\n
into a parcel, had taken into possession vide memo. Exhibit PW5\/B. He<\/p>\n
also took the photographs of the dead body. The photograph is Exhibit P1<\/p>\n
and negative is Exhibit P2. Post mortem examination on the dead body was<\/p>\n
also got done. As the dead body was unidentified, last rites were got<\/p>\n
performed from Municipal Council, Rupnagar. The Assistant Sub Inspector<\/p>\n
had also taken into possession blood stained clothes of the deceased, i.e.,<\/p>\n
pent, shirt, underwear, pair of socks and one shoe.\n<\/p>\n
3.          On 4.2.1999 Paramjit Singh (PW3) accompanied by Harbans<\/p>\n
Singh (PW2), Sarpanch of Village Dugri, reached the police Station Sadar,<\/p>\n
Ropar and lodged report Exhibit PB with Didar Singh, Inspector, Station<\/p>\n
House Officer, Police Station Ropar (PW18), on the basis of which offences<\/p>\n
punishable under Sections 302\/ 201\/364\/ 148 read with Section 149 IPC<\/p>\n
were added. According to Paramjit Singh (PW3) about 1-1\/2 months prior<\/p>\n
to this occurrence Jaspal Singh alias Pala, resident of Village Dugri<\/p>\n
(deceased) purchased Van bearing registration No.DID 1974 from Jagtar<\/p>\n
Singh of the same village and the said van was got attached with taxi stand
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                   -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
of Sahnewal. Paramjit started working with Jaspal Singh as a conductor on<\/p>\n
the said van. On 1.2.1999 at about 10.00 a.m., Dalbir Singh and Sanjay<\/p>\n
Kumar (both accused) came to the taxi stand and asked for booking of the<\/p>\n
van for going to Naina Devi and settled the fare at Rs.1100\/- and Rs.100\/-<\/p>\n
were paid as advance by Sanjay Kumar accused. Thereafter Sanjay Kumar,<\/p>\n
Dalbir Singh alongwith Anil Kumar, Ashok Kumar and Ajay Kumar (all<\/p>\n
accused) came for going to Naina Devi. All of them were known to them.<\/p>\n
Paramjit Singh occupied the seat in the dicky of the van.<\/p>\n
4.            At about 10.00 p.m. they reached near bridge before Police<\/p>\n
Line, Ropar. Anil Kumar accused asked Jaspal Singh to stop the van as he<\/p>\n
wanted to urinate.    On his request, van was stopped by Jaspal Singh.<\/p>\n
However, as soon as the van was stopped accused caught hold of Jaspal<\/p>\n
Singh. Accused Sanjay gave rod blow on the head of Jaspal Singh and<\/p>\n
Dalbir Singh accused gave fist blow, which hit on the nose of the Jaspal<\/p>\n
Singh. Jaspal Singh was dragged by the accused upto bushes. Dalbir Singh<\/p>\n
gave churra blow on the neck of Jaspal Singh due to which he died. Dalbir<\/p>\n
Singh accused snatched his golden ring and Sanjay accused snatched his<\/p>\n
watch and Ashok had taken away his purse. Paramjit was also dragged from<\/p>\n
the van to the bushes. After committing murder of Jaspal Singh, Paramjit<\/p>\n
was again dragged to the van. They were talking that they would also<\/p>\n
murder him and would take away the van with them. Accused Sanjay<\/p>\n
started driving the van. However, the van went out of order and hence, all<\/p>\n
the other four accused started pushing the van in order to start it. Paramjit<\/p>\n
Singh took benefit of the same and slipped from the van and hid himself in<\/p>\n
the bushes. He did not come on the road so that they may not find him and<\/p>\n
murder him.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                   -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
5.          On the next day, he reached Gurudwara Anandpur Sahib and<\/p>\n
remained there on that day and night. On 3.2.1999 at about 4.00 p.m., he<\/p>\n
reached near village Dugri and narrated the whole occurrence to Harbans<\/p>\n
Singh, Ex.Sarpanch of Dugri, who accompanied him to the house of Jaspal<\/p>\n
Singh and then narrated the whole occurrence to his family members. On<\/p>\n
the next day, i.e., on 4.2.1999, they came to the police Station Sadar Ropar<\/p>\n
and lodged the report. Paramjit Singh had also taken Didar Singh, Inspector<\/p>\n
to the place of occurrence. Clothes and belongings of deceased Jaspal<\/p>\n
Singh were also shown to him and the same were identified by him. He had<\/p>\n
also taken the police party to the place near Anandpur Sahib from where he<\/p>\n
slipped.\n<\/p>\n
6.          On the night intervening       1.2.1999 and 2.2.1999, police<\/p>\n
officials were present at barrier toba when van bearing registration No.DID<\/p>\n
1974 came from Anandpur Sahib, which was being driven by Sanjay<\/p>\n
Kumar-accused and all the other accused were also present in the van.    The<\/p>\n
van was stopped. Sanjay Kumar signed in the register at Sr.No.53 to the<\/p>\n
effect that he was driver of the van. The copy of the entry to this effect is<\/p>\n
Exhibit PW9\/A. As the accused could not show documents of the van,<\/p>\n
hence, the van was impounded under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicle Act.<\/p>\n
7.          The clothes and photographs of the deceased were also<\/p>\n
identified by his brother. The van was taken into possession in this case<\/p>\n
from MHC Nanak Ram of Police Station Kot Kehlool. Copy of challan is<\/p>\n
Exhibit PW15\/A and the van was released in favour of Assistant Sub<\/p>\n
Inspector Hari Singh. The van was stopped by Assistant Sub Inspector<\/p>\n
Suhuru Ram (PW16) on the night intervening 1.2.1999 and 2.2.1999.<\/p>\n
8.          Didar Singh (PW18) arrested the accused in this case on
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                  -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
19.2.1999, when Ajmer Singh produced the accused before him.             He<\/p>\n
interrogated all the accused one by one in police custody.<\/p>\n
9.           Accused Ajay Kumar suffered disclosure statement Exhibit<\/p>\n
PW8\/A.     Accused Dalbir Singh suffered disclosure statement Exhibit<\/p>\n
PW8\/B. Accused Ashok Kumar suffered disclosure statement Exhibit<\/p>\n
PW8\/C and Sanjay Kumar suffered disclosure statement Exhibit PW8\/D.<\/p>\n
As per respective disclosure statements, accused Dalbir Singh got recovered<\/p>\n
golden ring, belonging to the deceased, and a daggar.        Accused Sanjy<\/p>\n
Kumar got recovered one wrist watch belonging to the deceased and an iron<\/p>\n
rod. Accused Ajay Kumar got recovered blanket and turban belonging to<\/p>\n
the deceased. Accused Ashok Kumar got recovered the purse containing<\/p>\n
driving licence and photographs of the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
10.          After completion of the investigation, report under Section 173<\/p>\n
of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred as `Cr.P.C.)<\/p>\n
was filed against all the accused.\n<\/p>\n
11.          After commitment of the case to the Court of Sessions by the<\/p>\n
then Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar, accused were charged for offences<\/p>\n
punishable under Sections 364\/302\/201 read with Section 149 IPC.<\/p>\n
12.          In order to substantiate the allegation against the accused the<\/p>\n
prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
13.          PW1 is Sarmukh Singh, Sarpanch, who first informed the<\/p>\n
police regarding presence of dead body of an unidentified person in the area<\/p>\n
of Village Bheora.    PW2 is Harbans Singh, Sarpanch Village Dugri, who<\/p>\n
accompanied the complainant to the police on 4.2.1999 to lodge the report<\/p>\n
about the occurrence, as detailed above.           PW3 is Paramjit Singh-<\/p>\n
complainant and eye witness of the occurrence. PW4 is Head Constable
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                 -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
Nanak Ram, who had proved photocopy of          register No.19 as Exhibit<\/p>\n
PW4\/A regarding entry of the van at the naka (barrier). PW5 is Baldev<\/p>\n
Singh, Sub Inspector, who had recorded the statement of Sarmukh Singh<\/p>\n
and got the first information report registered. PW6 is Head Constable<\/p>\n
Sukhdev Singh, who is a formal witness and who had tendered in evidence<\/p>\n
affidavit of his statement Exhibit PW6\/A. PW7 is Karam Chand, who had<\/p>\n
proved register Exhibit PW7\/B, which was taken into possession vide<\/p>\n
recovery memo Exhibit PW7\/A.        PW8 is Balwinder Singh brother of<\/p>\n
deceased, in whose presence disclosure statements were suffered by the<\/p>\n
accused and the recovery was effected by the Investigating Officer. He<\/p>\n
also identified the clothes of his brother. PW9 is Constable Avtar Singh in<\/p>\n
whose presence the van was intercepted at the barrier in which all the five<\/p>\n
accused were travelling. PW10 is Sukhdev Singh, another brother of Jaspal<\/p>\n
Singh, who had identified     jacket Exhibit P14, shirt Exhibit P15, pant<\/p>\n
Exhibit P16, Banyan Exhibit P17 and one single shoe Exhibit P18<\/p>\n
belonging to his deceased brother. PW11 is Jaimal Singh Halka Patwari,<\/p>\n
who prepared the scaled map of place of occurrence.        PW12 is Head<\/p>\n
Constable Bakshish Singh in whose presence Maruti van was taken into<\/p>\n
custody. PW13 is Constable Devinder Singh, who is also a formal witness<\/p>\n
and who had tendered in evidence affidavit of his statement Exhibit<\/p>\n
PW13\/A. PW14 is Ravinder Pal, Inspector, who had prepared challan in<\/p>\n
this case after completion of the investigation.    PW15 is Jagan Nath,<\/p>\n
Criminal Ahlmad, Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bilaspur, who<\/p>\n
had proved copy of challan of van No.DID 1974 as PW15\/A. He also<\/p>\n
deposed that the said van was released in favour of Assistant Sub Inspector<\/p>\n
Hari Singh of Police Station Sadar, Ropar on 23.2.1999, vide release Order
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                   -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
Exhibit PW15\/B. PW16 is Assistant Sub Inspector Suhuru Ram, who had<\/p>\n
challaned the van and proved the challan Exhibit PW15\/A.<\/p>\n
14.         PW17 is Dr.J.P.S.Sangha, who conducted the post mortem<\/p>\n
examination on the unidentified body on 3.2.1999 on police request. He<\/p>\n
found the following injuries on his person:\n<\/p>\n
            “1.    Lacerated wound 5 x 3 cm present on right parieto
\n                   temporal area, under lying bone fracture. Membranes
\n                   injured. Brain matter laceration present in temporal lobe.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            2.     Nasal bone fractured depressed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            3.     7 x 2 cm wound with sharp edges present in upper part of
\n                   neck. Wound deep up to muscle of the neck.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                   Other organs were healthy.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
15.         He further deposed that the cause of death in this case, in his<\/p>\n
opinion, was due to injury no.1, which was sufficient to cause death in<\/p>\n
normal course of nature and the same was ante mortem. He had proved<\/p>\n
copy of post mortem report as Exhibit PW17\/A and PW17\/B is the pictorial<\/p>\n
diagram showing the seat of injuries. PW17 is Raju Sharma of Sharma<\/p>\n
Studio, who had gone to Civil Hospital, Ropar and had taken the<\/p>\n
photograph of the dead body, which is Exhibit PW17\/1 and the negative is<\/p>\n
PW17\/2.\n<\/p>\n
16.         PW18 is Inspector Didar Singh, the then Inspector, Station<\/p>\n
House Officer, Police Station Ropar, who investigated this case and arrested<\/p>\n
the accused and effected the recoveries, as per their disclosure statements,<\/p>\n
as detailed above. PW19 is Om Parkash, Junior Assistant, DTO Office,<\/p>\n
Ludhiana, who had proved driving licence         of Jaspal Singh deceased.<\/p>\n
PW20 is Assistant Sub Inspector Hari Singh, in whose presence the accused<\/p>\n
were produced before Didar Singh, Inspector by Ajmer Singh PW, and in
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                    -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
whose presence they were interrogated by Inspector Didar Singh and<\/p>\n
recoveries were effected.\n<\/p>\n
17.         Statements of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded<\/p>\n
in which they denied the version of the prosecution witnesses and claimed<\/p>\n
to be innocent. Accused Sanjay Kumar had taken the plea that he used to<\/p>\n
drive tempo at Ludhiana and that he had quarrelled with Paramjit Singh<\/p>\n
witness and due to that grudge he has been involved in this case falsely.<\/p>\n
Accused Dalbir Singh had also taken the same plea whereas accused Ashok<\/p>\n
Kumar, Anil Kumar and Ajay Kumar had taken the plea that they were not<\/p>\n
present in the van and that they have been falsely implicated in this case.<\/p>\n
18.         None of the accused led any evidence in their defence.<\/p>\n
19.         Learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the<\/p>\n
accused as aforementioned against which the present appeal has been filed.<\/p>\n
20.         We have heard learned counsel for the accused, learned<\/p>\n
Additional Advocate General, Punjab, and have gone through the whole<\/p>\n
record carefully.\n<\/p>\n
21.         It has been argued by learned counsel for the appellants-<\/p>\n
accused that there is inordinate delay of three days in reporting the matter to<\/p>\n
the police and hence no reliance can be placed upon the testimony of<\/p>\n
prosecution witnesses.      It has further been argued that there is no<\/p>\n
explanation as to why Paramjit Singh, the only alleged eye witness of the<\/p>\n
occurrence was spared by the accused. It has further been contended that<\/p>\n
the plea taken by Paramjit Singh that he slipped by taking the benefit of<\/p>\n
darkness cannot be believed. It has further been contended that Paramjit<\/p>\n
Singh was having grudge against accused Sanjay Kumar and Dalbir Singh<\/p>\n
as they used to drive tempos together at Ludhiana and hence, he falsely
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                    -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
implicated the accused in this case. It has further been contended that, in<\/p>\n
any case, no injury was attributed to accused Anil Kumar, Ajay Kumar and<\/p>\n
Ashok Kumar and hence, it is argued that it cannot be said that they shared<\/p>\n
common intention\/having common object to commit murder of Jaspal along<\/p>\n
with Sanjay Kumar and Dalbir Singh.\n<\/p>\n
22.          On the other hand, it has been argued by learned Additional<\/p>\n
Advocate General, Punjab, that delay in lodging the first information report<\/p>\n
has been duly explained. It is further contended that deposition of Paramjit<\/p>\n
Singh, eye witness, finds corroboration from the deposition of Sarpanch of<\/p>\n
the village as well as from the fact that the van was intercepted by the police<\/p>\n
officials on the same night in which accused were travelling and the accused<\/p>\n
also got recovered belongings of the deceased and the weapons of offence,<\/p>\n
as per their disclosure statements.\n<\/p>\n
23.          So far as delay in lodging the first information report is<\/p>\n
concerned, the same has been duly explained by Paramjit Singh PW. He<\/p>\n
was having threat to his life at the hands of the accused, hence, he was<\/p>\n
hiding himself in the bushes on the night intervening 1.2.1999 and 2.2.1999.<\/p>\n
He spent one night in Gurudwara due to fear of accused. On 3.2.1999, he<\/p>\n
reached village Dugri and met Harbans Singh, Sarpanch of the village to<\/p>\n
seek his help. He narrated all the occurrence to him. He accompanied him<\/p>\n
to the house of the deceased and narrated the entire occurrence to his family.<\/p>\n
On 4.2.1999, he along with Sarpanch visited the police station and lodged<\/p>\n
the report. Hence it has been rightly observed by learned trial Court that the<\/p>\n
witness was under fear of being murdered by the accused as he was eye<\/p>\n
witness of the occurrence. Moreover though accused Sanjay and Dalbir had<\/p>\n
taken the plea that this witness was known to them as they used to work
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                    -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
together at Ludhiana, however, they had not adduced any evidence to bring<\/p>\n
the assertion that he was having any grudge against them to falsely<\/p>\n
implicate them in this case. The fact that they did not cause any harm to<\/p>\n
Paramjit Singh though remained unexplained, however the same does not<\/p>\n
create any doubt in the version of the prosecution witnesses as there is<\/p>\n
nothing as to why he should have deposed falsely against the accused.<\/p>\n
24.         On the point reliance is also placed upon Ravinder Kumar v.<\/p>\n
State of Punjab (SC) 2001 Crl.L.J.4242, relevant paragraphs of which read<\/p>\n
as under:\n<\/p>\n
                  “14. When there is criticism of the ground that FIR in a
\n            case was delayed the Court has to look at the reason why there
\n            was such a delay. There can be a variety of genuine causes for
\n            FIR lodgment to get delayed. Rural people might be ignorant
\n            of the need for informing the police of a crime without any
\n            lapse of time.     This kind of unconversantness is not too
\n            uncommon among urban people also.               They might not
\n            immediately think of going to the police station.          Another
\n            possibility is due to lack of adequate transport facilities for the
\n            informers to reach the police station. The third, which is a
\n            quite common bearing, is that the kith and kin of deceased
\n            might take some appreciable time to regain a certain level of
\n            tranquility of mind or sedativeness of temper for moving to the
\n            police station for the purpose of furnishing the requisite
\n            information.     Yet another cause is, the persons who are
\n            supposed to give such information themselves could be
\n            physically impaired that the police had to reach them on getting
\n            some nebulous information about the incident.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                  15. We are not providing an exhausting catalogue of
\n            instances which could cause delay in lodging the FIR. Our
\n            effort is to try to point out the stale demand made in the
\n            criminal courts to treat the FIR vitiated merely on the ground of
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                       -12-<\/span><\/p>\n
            delay in its lodgment cannot be approved as a legal corollary.
\n            In any case, where there is delay in making the FIR the court is
\n            to look at the causes are not attributable to any effort to
\n            concoct a version no consequence shall be attached to the
\n            mere delay in lodging the FIR. Vide Zahoor v. State of U.P.<\/a>
\n            1991 Supl.(1) SCC 372; Tara Singh v. State of Punjab 1991
\n            Suppl.(1) SCC 536; Jamna v. State of U.P.<\/a> 1994 (1) SCC\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            185. In Tara Singh (supra) made the following observations:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                            `It is well settled that the delay in giving the
\n               FIR by itself cannot be ground to doubt the prosecution
\n               case. Knowing the Indian conditions as they are we cannot
\n               except these villagers to rush to the police station
\n               immediately after the occurrence. Human nature as it is, the
\n               kith and kin who have witnessed the occurrence cannot be
\n               expected to act mechanically with all the promptidue in
\n               giving the report to the police. At times being grief stricken
\n               because of the calamity it may be immediately occur to
\n               them that they should give a report. After all it is but
\n               natural in these circumstances for them to take some time to
\n               go to the police station for giving the report.'”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
25         However, there is force in the argument of learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the accused that accused Anil Kumar, Ajay Kumar and Ashok Kumar did<\/p>\n
not share any common intention\/having common object with Sanjay Kumar<\/p>\n
and Dalbir Singh to commit murder of Jaspal and they were merely<\/p>\n
accompanying Sanjay Kumar and Dalbir Singh. They did not cause any<\/p>\n
injury to the deceased. They were also not having any weapon with them.<\/p>\n
They also did not cause injury to Paramjit Singh PW. As per prosecution<\/p>\n
version even the dead body of Jaspal Singh was not dragged by any one of<\/p>\n
them. Hence, they cannot be held guilty for offences punishable under<\/p>\n
Sections 302\/201 read with Section 149 IPC. Hence, conviction of accused<\/p>\n
Anil Kumar, Ajay Kumar and Ashok Kumar for offences under Sections
\n Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005                                   -13-<\/span><\/p>\n
302\/201 read with Section 149 IPC, as held by the learned trial Court, is set<\/p>\n
aside and by accepting their appeal we acquit them of the charges framed<\/p>\n
against them.\n<\/p>\n
26.         However, so far as accused Sanjay Kumar and Dalbir Singh are<\/p>\n
concerned, learned trial Court has rightly convicted them for offences under<\/p>\n
Sections 302 and 201 IPC, as both of them caused injuries to Jaspal which<\/p>\n
proved fatal and, thereafter, concealed the dead body in the bushes. Hence,<\/p>\n
we do not want to interfere in the judgment of conviction and order of<\/p>\n
sentence passed against them by learned trial Court.<\/p>\n
27.         Hence the appeal qua accused Sanjay Kumar and Dalbir Singh<\/p>\n
is, hereby, dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
(Mehtab S.Gill)                                    (Ram Chand Gupta)\n      Judge                                              Judge\n\n\n\nNovember 5, 2009\nmeenu\n\nNote:       Whether to be referred to Reporter ?        Yes\/No.\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.Appeal No.335-DB of 2005 Date of Decision: November 5, 2009 Anil Kumar …..Appellant v. State of Punjab …..Respondent Crl.Appeal No.388-DB of 2005 Sanjay Kumar, Dalbir Singh and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-86568","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAnil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-11-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-15T04:39:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-15T04:39:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3498,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-15T04:39:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-15T04:39:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-15T04:39:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009"},"wordCount":3498,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009","name":"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-15T04:39:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-vs-state-of-punjab-on-5-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anil Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 5 November, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86568","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=86568"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86568\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86568"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86568"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86568"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}