Back
Supreme Court Of India
State of Punjab
Versus
Pohla Singh
Decided on : September 22, 2003
Acquittal - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, Section 34 - The judgment discusses the delay in lodging the FIR, the credibility of eyewitnesses, and the legal principle of appellate court's interference with an order of acquittal. The court emphasized the importance of re-evaluating evidence and the presumption of innocence of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the questioning of the correctness of a judgment directing the acquittal of the respondents who were charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The incident involved the homicidal death of the deceased, and the prosecution version was presented during the trial.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court directed the acquittal of the accused persons based on the delay in lodging the FIR and the improbability of the accused committing the murder during daytime. The trial court's judgment was restored by the appellate court, emphasizing the inadequacy of the High Court's reasoning and the reliability of the eyewitnesses' testimony.
Issues: The issues included the delay in lodging the FIR, the credibility of eyewitnesses, and the correctness of the High Court's reasoning for directing the acquittal of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court emphasized the importance of re-evaluating evidence, the presumption of innocence of the accused, and the need for compelling reasons to interfere with an order of acquittal.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the respondents were directed to surrender to custody to serve the remainder of the sentence.
Judgment
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
( 1 ) QUESTIONING correctness of judgment directing acquittal of the respondents as passed by the Punjab and Haryana High court, the State of Punjab has filed this appeal. Respondents were charged for commission of offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ipc ). Originally, there were four accused persons. The learned sessions judge, bathinda vide his judgment dated 19. 9. 1994 held that the present two respondents Phola Singh and Balkur Singh were guilty of offences punishable under section 302 read with section 34 IPC and were sentenced for imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each with default stipulation. Other two accused i. e. Raja Singh and Goga Singh were given the benefit of doubt. While the convicted accused questioned the legality of their conviction, a revision was filed to seek conviction of the acquitted accused and enhancement of the sentence passed against the convicted accused.
( 2 ) PROSECUTION version as unfolded during trial is as follows: 2. 1. On 11. 6. 1991 Mandip Singh (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) suffered homicidal death. The incident took place at about 5. 30 a. m. on the aforesaid date. During the night between 10th and 11th of june, 1991 irrigation of certain lands under the cultivation of complainant Gurmail singh (PW2) and others was being carried. During that night, deceased Mandip Singh who is the nephew of the complainant gurmail Singh, was sleeping near the tubewell in the adjacent land belonging to sukhdev Singh. Deceased Mandip Singh was to get up in the morning in order to undertake the agricultural work in the land which was being cultivated by Gurmail singh (PW2) and others. Gurmail Singh (PW2), therefore, went towards the place where deceased was sleeping. Pal Singh (PW3) was then irrigating his land near the place of occurrence. When Gurmail Singh (PW2) came near the place where deceased was sleeping, he noticed that the two accused-respondents and acquitted accused Goga Singh armed with a ghop near deceased. Accused-Pohla Singh then shouted to teach lesson to deceased for having developed illicit relations with Amar kaur who is sister of accused-Phola Singh. Thereupon deceased was dealt with by these accused with their respective weapons. Deceased sustained 13 injuries. On seeing that deceased was being, thus attacked; Gurmail Singh (PW2) and Pal Singh (PW3) raised alarm. Thereupon these assailants fled away with their respective weapons. Deceased succumbed to his injuries at the spot itself. Thereupon, Gurmail singh (PW2) initially proceeded to the village in order to inform his brother Baldev singh. Thereafter, he proceeded towards police station. On way, he happened to meet the police patrolling party at Jalal bus stand. His report was recorded at about 10. 00 a. m. The said report was duly registered at the police station, Dialpura at 10. 45 a. m. The special report regarding the registration of the said offence was sent to magistrate, Phul who received it at 2. 40 p. m. on the same date. The police arrived at the scene of occurrence and prepared the inquest report on the dead body. The dead body was duly sent on autopsy. The doctor found in all 13 injuries. The cause of death was stated to be shock and haemorrhage on the vital organs such as brain.
( 3 ) ACCUSED persons pleaded innocence and false implication. Their specific case as revealed in the examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (in short the code) was that they were falsely implicated at the instance of one Balkar Singh who is a close relative of Gurmail Singh (PW2 ). They claimed that accused Goga Singh was formerly a partner in the cultivation with Balkar Singh and there was a dispute between them on the issue of sharing the money. Deceased was associated with terrorists and robbers and he was in all probability murdered by rival gang and they were falsely involved on sus
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
