Page 1

Page 1 of 11

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.  1581 OF 2013

State of Haryana … Appellant

Versus

Bira @ Bhira …Respondent

WITH

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 3779 OF 2014

Fatta Ram … Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana …Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Prafulla C. Pant, J.

Both Criminal Appeal filed by the State of Haryana and

Special Leave Petition filed by accused Fatta Ram, are directed

against the judgment and order dated 03.05.2012 passed by

Page 2

Page 2 of 11

High Court  of  Punjab and Haryana in  Criminal  Appeal  No.

662-DB of 2007, whereby said Court has allowed the appeal of

Bira @ Bhira, and acquitted him of all charges in respect of

offences  punishable  under  Sections  302,  323  read  with

Section  34  of  Indian  Penal  Code  (for  brevity  “IPC”),  but

maintained  the  conviction  and  sentence  recorded  against

remaining two accused, namely, Sant Lal and Fatta Ram.   

2. We  have  heard  learned  counsel  for  the  parties  and

perused the record.  

3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that Vakil Singh (deceased

in the present case) was an accused in the case of murder of

one Atma Ram of Village Nagal. He (Vakil Singh) was acquitted

by the Apex Court about a month before the incident of the

present  case.  On  08.05.2005  at  about  11.00  a.m.,  he  was

coming along with his wife (PW-8 Balbiro) to his village from

Bicchian  where  the  two  had  gone  in  connection  with

condolence  of  one of  their  relatives.  PW-7 Tehla Ram along

with  his  uncle  Mohan  Singh  had  also  gone  there  and  was

ahead  of  them.  At  that  point  of  time,  the  three  accused

Page 3

Page 3 of 11

namely,  Sant  Lal,  Fatta  Ram  and  Bira  @  Bhira  who  were

armed  with  deadly  weapons  came  on  motorcycles  and

intercepted  Vakil  Singh.  All  the  three  accused  persons

assaulted Vakil Singh. Accused Sant Lal gave a blow with a

‘Gandasi’  (heavy  sharp  edged  weapon),  accused  Fatta  Ram

gave a blow with a ‘Lathi’ and Bira @ Bhira allegedly gave a

blow  with  iron  rod  (handle  of  water  pump).   PW-8  Balbiro

resisted but she was also assaulted by the accused persons.

When Mohan Singh and PW-7 Tehla Ram, who were ahead,

turned back,  the  three accused attempted to  flee  but  Fatta

Ram fell down from his motorcycle as the same got skid and

he was caught by villagers. The other two managed to escape.

PW-7  Tehla  Ram  took  both  the  injured  Vakil  Singh  and

Balbiro  to  Mahavir  Dal  Hospital,  Cheeka.  Vakil  Singh

succumbed to the injuries and died in the hospital. The First

Information Report (Ex. PH-1) of the incident was lodged by

PW-7 Tehla Ram on the very day. PW-13 Sub-Inspector Brij

Mohan  of  Police  Station,  Cheeka  started  the  investigation.

PW-2 Dr. Aman Sood along with team of doctors conducted

the post  mortem examination and prepared autopsy  report.

Page 4

Page 4 of 11

The investigation was completed by PW-3 Sub-Inspector Surta

Ram who  submitted  the  charge  sheet  against  all  the  three

accused for their trial in respect of offence punishable under

Section 302 IPC.  

4. After  committal  of  the  case,  Sessions  Judge,  Kaithal,

framed  charge  against  all  the  three  accused  in  respect  of

offences under Section 302, 323 read with Section 34 IPC to

which all the three accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to

be tried. On this, prosecution got examined PW-1 Dr. Ajit Pal

Singh, PW-2 Dr. Aman Sood, PW-3 Sub-Inspector Surta Ram,

PW-4  Constable  Gurvinder  Singh,  PW-5  Head  Constable

Balwinder  Singh,  PW-6  Dr.  Romila  Jhanji,  Medical  Officer,

PW-7  Tehla  Ram  (informant  eye  witness),  PW-8  Balbiro

(injured eye witness), PW-9 Draftsman Lachman Singh, PW-10

Ram Mehar Singh, PW-11 Head Constable Bir Bhan, PW-12

Assistant  Sub-Inspector  Dharam  Pal  and  PW-13

Sub-Inspector  Brij  Mohan  (Investigating  Officer).  The

prosecution evidence was put to the accused under Section

313 of  the  Cr.P.C.  in  reply  to  which they  pleaded that  the

evidence adduced against them is false. In defence, on behalf

Page 5

Page 5 of 11

of  the  accused  DW-1 Ajmer  Singh,  DW-2 Garibu  Ram and

DW-3 Puran Singh were got examined. The trial  court after

hearing the parties found that charge of offences punishable

under Sections 302, 323 read with Section 34 IPC is proved

against all the three accused. Accordingly, all the three were

convicted and each one  of  them was sentenced to  undergo

imprisonment for life and to pay fine of  Rs. 5,000/- (under

Section 302 IPC),  in  default  to  undergo further  six  months

rigorous imprisonment.  Further, the trial court sentenced the

convicts to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six

months under Section 323/34 IPC.

5. Aggrieved by order dated 16.05.2007/18.05.2007 passed

by Sessions Judge, Kaithal, in Sessions Trial No. 23 of 2006,

the  three  convicts  filed  Criminal  Appeal  no.  662-DB-2007

which  is  partly  allowed  by  High  Court.  Conviction  and

sentence  recorded  against  Sant  Lal  and  Fatta  Ram  is

maintained, but that of Bira @ Bhira was set aside, holding

that charge as against him is not proved beyond reasonable

doubt.  Consequently,  Criminal  Appeal  No.  1581 of  2013 is

filed by the State of Haryana challenging acquittal of Bira @

Page 6

Page 6 of 11

Bhira by the High Court, and Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.

3779 of 2014 is filed by convict Fatta Ram which is clubbed by

the Criminal Appeal filed by the State.  

6. Before further discussion, we think it just and proper to

mention the ante mortem injuries found on the dead body of

Vakil  Singh  by  PW-2 Dr.  Aman Sood.  The  same  are  being

reproduced below:-

“1. Lacerated wound 8 x 2 cm with fracture of bone in left  temporal  parietal  region.  Brain matter  was coming out of it.  

2. Incised wound over left temporal region 3 x1 cm. On deep dissection, there is extra dural haematoma of the size of 5 x 3 cm.

3.  Lacerated wound over  the  left  maxillary  region blood clotted around the wound.  

4.  There was lacerated wound over  the  right  ring finger with fracture of proximal phalanx.”  

According  to  PW-2  Dr.  Aman Sood,  the  deceased  had

died  due  to  shock  and  hemorrhage  on  account  of  injuries

suffered by him on the vital parts.  

7. It is also relevant to mention here the injuries found on

the  person  of  Balbiro  by  PW-6  Dr.  Romila  Jhanji  on

Page 7

Page 7 of 11

08.05.2005 at about 4.00 p.m. The same are being reproduced

below from MLR (Ex. P.G.):-

“1. A lacerated wound of 1 cm. x ½ cm. on the left cheek.  Wound  was  bleeding.  She  was  referred  to C.H.  Kaithal  for  X-ray  of  left  cheek  and  expert opinion.

2. There was an abrasion of the size of 1 cm. x 1 cm. on left knee.”  

8. PW-8 Balbiro has narrated the prosecution story stating

that her husband was accused in connection with murder of

Atma Ram, and he was acquitted by the Court. After release of

her husband (Vakil  Singh) from the jail  they had shifted to

village Darauli, and on the day of incident they had gone to

village Bicchian.  She further told that on their way back on

the  day  of  incident  at  about  11.00  a.m.  the  accused

surrounded them and assaulted. She has stated that accused

Sant Lal gave blow with Gandasi and accused Fatta assaulted

with lathi.   She further told after  the incident she and her

husband were taken to hospital by Tehla Ram. Statement of

PW-2 is corroborated not only from the medical evidence on

record discussed above but also from the statement of PW-7

Page 8

Page 8 of 11

Tehla Ram. Both these witnesses have stated that Fatta Ram

while fleeing fell down and was caught by the villagers.  

9. PW-1 Ajit Pal Singh has proved the injuries found on the

person of accused Fatta Ram. The same are being reproduced

below:-

“1. A lacerated wound 1.3 cm. x 2.5 cm x bone deep on left parietal region 4 cm from mid line of skull and 18 cm. from frontal hair line. Advised X-ray.

2. Lacerated wound 1 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep on mid line of skull and 19 cm from frontal hair line. Advised X-ray.

3. Lacerated wound 3cm. x 1.5cm x bone deep on right parietal region 2cm from mid line of skull and 19 cm. from frontal hair line. Advised X-ray.  

4. Lacerated wound on right temporal region 6 cm. from mid line of skull, 5 cm. from right ear pinna and 9 cm. from frontal hair line, measuring 4.5 x 1.6 cm. x bone deep. Advised X-ray  

5. Contused swelling on right fore-arm 3 cm. below right elbow joint measuring 3 cm. x 4 cm. Advised X-ray.  

6. Swelling 3 cm. x 2 cm. on right side of back, 6 cm.  from  vertebral  colon,  corresponding  to  L.4. X-ray was advised.”   

In  view  of  the  above  evidence,  the  prosecution  story

further gets corroborated that  after the incident Fatta Ram

Page 9

Page 9 of 11

was apprehended and beaten by villagers.  As such, we find

no  error  in  the  conviction  recorded  against  him  and  the

Special Leave Petition filed by him is liable to be dismissed.  

10. Learned counsel for the special leave petitioner submitted

that  DW-1  Ajmer  Singh  (Sarpanch  of  the  village)  has  not

corroborated the fact that the villagers caught Fatta Ram after

the incident. We have carefully gone through the statement of

DW-1 Ajmer Singh. What he has stated is that when he saw

many persons gathered at the place of incident where the dead

body was lying, telephone call was given to the police. Since

this  witness  has  reached  after  the  incident,  as  such,  his

statement  does  not  throw light  as  to  the  fact  that  whether

Fatta Ram was caught or not by the villagers.  

11. Our  attention  is  also  drawn  on  behalf  of  the  Special

Leave Petitioner to the cross-examination of PW-1 Dr. Ajit Pal

Singh who has stated that injuries No. 1 to 3 could not have

been suffered due to fall  from a motorcycle. On scrutinizing

the statement of PW-1 Dr. Ajit Pal Singh, we find that he has

clarified that injuries no. 4 to 6 could have been suffered by

Page 10

Page 10 of 11

the  accused  (Fatta  Ram)  by  falling  down.  Since  villagers

apprehended the said accused, other injuries could have been

caused while he was caught by the villagers.  

12. On behalf of the State of Haryana (appellant), it is argued

that  the  High  Court  has  erred  in  law  in  disbelieving  the

testimony of injured eye witness (PW-8) and that of Tehla Ram

(PW-7)  as  against  Bira  @  Bhira.  It  is  contended  that  the

evidence  of  the  prosecution  witnesses  is  equally  reliable  as

against Bira & Bhira, as it was reliable against the two other

accused.  

13. We  have  carefully  gone  through  the  impugned  order

passed by the High Court. The High Court has taken note of

the fact that Atma Ram (in whose murder case Vakil Singh

was accused) was father of accused Sant Lal. Role of Sant Lal

in commission of crime to take revenge after the acquittal of

the deceased, cannot be doubted. Involvement of Fatta, as he

was caught by the villagers immediately after the incident, can

also not to be doubted. But the presence of accused Bira @

Bhira who was Son-in-law of Atma Ram, and belonged to a

separate village appears to be doubtful and it cannot be ruled

Page 11

Page 11 of 11

out  if  his  name was  added due  to  enmity.  We do not  find

sufficient reason to disagree with the above view taken by the

High Court. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the

acquittal of Bira @ Bhira recorded by the High Court.  

14. For the reasons as discussed above, we find no force in

the appeal filed by the State of Haryana, and the Special Leave

Petition  filed  by  the  Fatta  Ram.  Accordingly,  the  Criminal

Appeal and the Special Leave Petition are hereby dismissed.  

………………………..…….J. [N.V. Ramana]

………………………..…….J. [Prafulla C. Pant]

New Delhi; April 24, 2017.