SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(SC) 77

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.C. RAY AND K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, JJ.
Jagtar Singh, Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and others, Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 532 of 1986, D/- 27-1-1988

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction under - Set aside - Appeal against acquittal - Assault by the accused with the handle of the tractor on the deceased - Immediate motive was the altercation which the deceased had with the accused when his tractor struck buffaloes of the deceased - Long standing enmity between the parties on records - Sons of deceased witnessed the assult - Statements of the witnesses are clear and true - F.I.R was lodged with utmost promptitude - Recovery of tractor from the spot - Handle of the tractor stained with human blood was recovered in pursuance of the disclosure statement made by the accused - Result - Appeal recorded by lower court is affirmed.

Judgment

RAY, J.:- This appeal by special leave is against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 1984 reversing the conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala and acquitting the appellant Paul Singh (respondent No. 2 in this appeal) of the charge under section 302.

2. On Oct. 8, 1983 at about 4 p.m. the deceased, Karnail Singh who was the next door neighbour of Paul Singh, along with his son Kuldip Singh (PW8) were taking their buffaloes from their house towards the fields. When they reached near the house of one Baldev Singh in the lane where the houses of weaver community are situated, respondent No. 2, Paul Singh came from the opposite side driving a tractor. While the tractor was passing, it hit one of the buffaloes whereon Karnail Singh asked Paul Singh whether he could not see the buffaloes. There was some altercation between the parties. Paul Singh suddenly got down from his tractor taking the handle of the tractor in his hand and gave a blow on the forehead of Karnail Singh, the deceased. The deceased fell on the ground with his face downward. At that time Jagtar Singh (PW 1), another son of the deceased, Karnail Singh along with Gurmit Singh was coming towards the spot and they saw the occurrence. Paul Singh gave 3-4 blows on Karnail Singh lying on the ground and took to his heels as Jagtar Singh (PW 1) and Gurmit Singh were hastening to the spot to intervene. The tractor was left behind. The deceased died at the spot on receipt of the injuries. Jagtar Singh (PW 1) keeping Kuldip Singh (PW8) and Gurmit Singh to guard the dead body, went to the police station by bicycle which is about 12 Kms. from the place of occurrence in Village Sangatpur Sodhian and reached there at about 5.15 p.m. The statement of Jagtar Singh (Exhibit PA) was recorded as FIR by the Sub-Inspector, Harbans Singh (PW 9). The Sub-Inspector and Jagtar Singh came to the spot at about 7 p.m. and made an inquest report. The said report (F. I. R.) was despatched by the Sub-Inspector to Illaqa Magistrate who received the same at about 8.15 p.m. on October 8, 1983. The tractor of the respondent No. 2, Paul Singh was taken into possession by the Sub-Inspector vide Memo Exhibit PL. After preparing the inquest report (Exhibit PE), the Sub-Inspector despatched the dead body of Karnail Singh for autopsy. The respondent No. 2 was arrested on October 9, 1983 and on the basis of his disclosure statement (Exhibit PG) the handle of the tractor (Exhibit PF) stained with blood was recovered by the Sub-Inspector. Respondent No. 2 in his statement under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure pleaded his innocence and stated that due to enmity he has been falsely involved in this case.

3. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after hearing the counsel for the parties and on a consideration and appraisal of the evidences on record, convicted the accused Paul Singh under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to suffer R. I. for life and also pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine to undergo further R. I. for 2 months. It was also ordered that the period of detention already undergone by him during the investigation, inquiry or trial would be allowed to be set off under S. 428 of Cr. P.C.

4. Against this judgment and order the accused, Paul Singh filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 1984 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The said appeal was heard by a Division Bench of the High Court and without properly considering and marshalling the evidences of the eye-witnesses, Jagtar Singh (PW1) and Kuldip Singh (PW8) as well as the FIR (Exhibit PA) and also the Inquest Report (Exhibit PE) and other evidences on record, wrongly held that the occurrence was not witnessed by Jagtar Singh and Kuldip Singh and Paul Singh, respondent No. 2 in this appeal was named in the FIR because of the previous prolonged enmity with him. It was also held








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top