SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.K. MUKHERJEE AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.
State of Punjab, Appellant v. Tejinder Singh and another, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 533 of 1985 with 481 of 1985
Decided on 21-8-1995.
WITH
Tejinder Singh, Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab, Respondent.
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 - Investigation - Commit murder - Water in pitcher when he saw coming from side of nearby field armed with bandanas shouting that would not be spared - Immediately thereupon both of them started assaulting with their respective bandanas as result where fell down - On alarms being raised by both accused ran away - Then put in trolley and taken to hospital at Raman - Senior Medical Officer - Civil Hospital Raman found condition serious and therefore referred him to Civil Hospital simultaneously sent written information to Station House Officer Raman Police Station - Accordingly was taken to hospital where he expired in afternoon – Held, In our considered view neither of above findings can be sustained - So far as first finding is concerned unequivocally stated that both inflicted ganders blows on deceased which necessarily meant that similar injuries would be caused thereby - Considered in that perspective finding of trial Court that all injuries found on person of deceased could be handiwork one person must be to be speculative one - Other finding that had no motive to commit crime militates against one of postulates of criminal trial that if eye witnesses account of an incident sustains prosecution case question motive pales into insignificance - In instant case trial Judge has fully relied upon evidence and in our view rightly as against and therefore to disregard their evidence as against on ground that he had on motive does not stand to any reason - It is undoubtedly true that in given case ocular version may be believed against one and not against others arraigned for justifiable reasons as maxim Falsest in no Falsest in omnibus is not applicable in criminal trial but then as in instant case reasons given by trial Court for disbelieving evidence far is concerned are patently wrong he is also liable to be convicted along with for assaulting deceased with ganders resulting in his death - In view of our above findings court have now to ascertain whether for heir such acts are liable to be convicted Section read with - It appears from evidence that deceased was assaulted both with sharp edge and blunt edge of ganders as and nature of injuries also so indicates - If really appellants had intended to commit murder they would not have certainly used blunt edge when task could have been expedited and assured with sharp edge – Appeal allowed
JUDGMENT
M.K. MUKHERJEE, J. :- Tejinder Singh and Darshan Singh (hereinafter referred to as A-1 and A-2 respectively) were tried by the Judge, Special Court, Ferozepore for the murder of Jasbir Singh. The trial ended in the conviction of A-1 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C. for short.) with a sentence of imprisonment for life and the acquittal of A-2 Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence A-1 has filed one of these two appeals (Criminal Appeal No. 481 of 1985 while the other one (Criminal Appeal No. 533 of 1985) has been filed by the State of Punjab against the acquittal of A-2 and for enhancement of sentence imposed upon A-1. Both the appeals have been heard together and this judgment will dispose of them. Shorn of details the prosecution case is as under:
2. A-1 and Jagjit Singh (PW-4), father of the deceased, own and possess adjoining plots of cultivable lands. Four days prior to the incident in question, an altercation took place between the deceased and A-1 over the watt (boundary line) of their respective plots. On July 19,1984, at or about 6.45 A.M.the deceased accompanied by his father had gone to cultivate their plot. Daljit Kaur, wife of the deceased also reached there at or about 8.30 A.M.carrying breakfast for her husband and son. On seeing Daljit Kaur (PW-5) coming PW-4 went to the hand-pump to bring water in a pitcher when he saw A-1 and A-2 coming from the side of the nearby field armed with gandasas, shouting that Jasbir Singh would not be spared. Immediately thereupon both of them started assaulting Jasbir Singh with their respective gandasas as a result where of Jasbir Sigh fell down. On alarms being raised by PW-4 and PW-5 both the accused ran away. Jasbir Singh was then put in a trolley and taken to hospital at Raman. Dr. Mittal (PW-1), the Senior Medical Officer. Civil Hospital, Raman found the condition of Jasbir Singh serious and, therefore, referred him to Civil Hospital, Bhatinda and simultaneously sent a written information to Station House Officer of Raman Police Station. Accordingly Jasbir Singh was taken to the Bhatinda hospital, where he expired in the afternoon.
3. In the meantime ASI Harbhajan Singh (PW-6) had reached the hospital at Raman on receipt of the written information from the doctor. As Jasbir Singh was not in a position to make a statement he recorded the statement of Jagjit Singh (Ex. P .9) and sent it to police station for registration of the case. While in the hospital he also recorded the statement of Daljit Kaur and then left for the spot. He prepared a rough site plan, collected some blood stained earth from the spot and after preparing a sealed parcel made arrangement to forward the same for chemical examination, From there he went to Civil Hospital, Bhatinda only to learn that Jasbir Singh had already expired. He then prepared inquest report upon his dead body and sent it for post-mortem examination. Thereafter the Investigation of the case was taken by Inspector Rattan Singh (PW-8). During the course of Investigation he arrested A-1 and A-2 on July 22,1948 and seized from their possession two blood stained gandasas. He made two separate parcels in respect of the gandasas, sealed them and forwarded to the Chemical Examiner for examination and report. On completion of in Investigation, he submitted charge-sheet against both the accused and in due course the case was committed to the Special Court for trial.
4. Both the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge levelled against them and contended that they had been falsely implicated. A-1, however, admitted that their field and that of Jasbir Singh adjoined by denied that there was any altercation over its boundary.
5. Jagjit Singh (PW-4) and Daljit Kaur (PW-5) who were the two eye-witnesses produced by the prosecution to prove its case, narrated the prosecution to prove its case, narrated the prosecution case as detailed earlier. On a careful perusal of their evidence we find that inspite of searching cross-e
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.