Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
13th September 1955.
BOSE, VENKATARAMA AYYAR AND SINHA JJ.
Mohinder Singh, Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 1955.
Advocates appeared
Mr. V. N. Sethi Advocate, for Appellant; Mr. Perus A. Mehta and P. G. Gokhale Advocates, for Respondent.
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - CONVICTION - EVIDENCE - EYE-WITNESSES - IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED - DOUBTFUL - BENEFIT OF DOUBT - ACCUSED ACQUITTED.
Fact of the Case:
Mohinder Singh and his sister's son, Baj Singh, were convicted of murdering Kapur Singh, the eldest son of Phula Singh, with whom Mohinder Singh lived along with his wife and children. The prosecution's case was that Mohinder Singh had developed a relationship with Kapur Singh's wife, Har Kaur, and that Kapur Singh had removed his wife to her father's place a few days before the murder. On the night of the murder, Phula Singh claimed to have been awakened by Kapur Singh's screams and saw Mohinder Singh and Baj Singh attacking him with kirpans. P.Ws. 4 and 5, who arrived at the scene after hearing Phula Singh's cries, also claimed to have seen the accused running away from the scene, with Mohinder Singh carrying a kirpan. However, the High Court acquitted Baj Singh, giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Finding of the Court:
The Supreme Court found that the evidence against Mohinder Singh was not free from doubt. The only eyewitness, Phula Singh, had poor eyesight and could not have clearly seen the assailants in the dark night. The evidence of P.Ws. 4 and 5, who claimed to have seen the accused running away from the scene, was also doubtful as they were roused from sleep and could not have clearly observed the accused in the dark. The court also noted that the High Court had acquitted Baj Singh, who was equally implicated in the crime, which raised a reasonable doubt as to Mohinder Singh's guilt.
Issues: 1. Whether the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mohinder Singh was guilty of murder. 2. Whether the High Court was justified in giving Baj Singh the benefit of the doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence against Mohinder Singh was not free from doubt. The only eyewitness, Phula Singh, had poor eyesight and could not have clearly seen the assailants in the dark night. The evidence of P.Ws. 4 and 5, who claimed to have seen the accused running away from the scene, was also doubtful as they were roused from sleep and could not have clearly observed the accused in the dark. The court also noted that the High Court had acquitted Baj Singh, who was equally implicated in the crime, which raised a reasonable doubt as to Mohinder Singh's guilt.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence of Mohinder Singh, and directed that he be released forthwith.
Judgement
SINHA, J. : This is an appeal by special leave from the Judgment of the High Court of Judicature for the State of Puajab at Simla convicting the appellant Mohinder Singh, aged 25 years, under S. 302. I. P. C. and sentencing him to death. The appellant along with his sister s son, Baj Singh, had been placed on trial for the murder of Kapur Singh. Both had been convicted of the offence and sentenced, the appellant as stated above, and Baj Singh to transportation for life. On appeal Baj Singh was acquitted by the High Court on giving him the benifit of the doubt.
2. The facts of this case may shortly be stated as follows : At about 2-30 a.m. on 29-5-l954, the first information report was lodged by Sunder Singh, lambardar of village Chirewan at police station Muktsar in the district of Ferozepore, to the effect that Phula Singh (P. W. 1) was a displaced person from the district of Lahore. He had been settled in the village Chirewan on an allotment of 16 standard acres of land. He had three sons and a daughter who was married to the appellant Mohinder Singh. Mohinder Singh was also a displaced person from West Punjab and had been living with his father-in-law Phula Singh for the last three years along with his wife and children. Of the three sons of Phula Singh, Kapur Singh is said to have been the eldest about 45 years of age. He as well as the appellant Mohinder Singh used jointly to cultivate the land allotted to Phula Singh. Mohinder Singh is said to have developed a liaison with Kapur Singh s wife named Har Kaur. As Kapur Singh had a few months before, the occurrence come to know of the illicit connection, about ten days before the occurrence he removed his wife to her father s place. Baj Singh, who is the appellant s sister s son, had come to stay with the family only about a few weeks before the occurrence.
The occurrence is said to have taken place on the night between the 28th and 29th of May, 1954, in the courtyard of Phula Singh s house. Three cots more or less contiguous to one another were found lying at the time the police visited the spot in the early morning of the 29th May soon after recording the first information report. It was said in the report that the three beds were occupied by the appellant and Baj Singh side by side and by Phula Singh aforesaid. At about midnight, Phula Singh is said to have been aroused from his sleep by the screaming of Kapur Singh that he was being killed. Phula Singh claimed to have identified the two accused as the assailants of Kapur Singh who died then and there as a result of multiple injuries on his person with sharp cutting weapons like a kirpan. When the police turned up for investigation a bloodstained kirpan, said to have belonged to Baj Singh, was found near about the dead body of Kapur Singh. Mohinder Singh is said to have fled away with his kirpan. Both the assailants are said to have shouted to Phula Singh when he was about to intervene that he should keep out of their way, otherwise he would make himself liable to be similarly dealt with by them. A pair of shoes and a number of clothes said to be the property of accused Baj Singh were also found near one of the cots. On the alarm raised by Phula Singh, a number of persons including Teja Singh (P. W. 4) and Arjan Singh (P. W. 5) and Thakar Singh (not examined) turned up. They also claimed to have identified the two accused while running away from the scene of the occurrence.
3. Such was the prosecution case that was investigated by the police, and after the necessary commitment proceedings the two accused were placed on their trial. Their defence appears to have been that on 28-5-1954, accused Mohinder Singh had left his father-in-law s village where the murder had taken place for village Beriwala, 70 miles away. The same day his sister s son, the second accused, also left with Mohinder Singh s family for village Beriwala. Three witnesses were examined by the accused in support of their defence which was in the natu
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
