Back
2008 Supreme(SC) 1080
2008(5) Supreme 168
Supreme Court of india
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
State of Punjab — Appellant
versus
Kulwant Singh @ Kanta — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 493 of 2001
Decided on : 16-07-08
Important Points
1.Though, the non-explanation of the minor injuries can not be a factor to make the prosecution version vulnerable in all cases, but if the injuries are of serious nature the prosecution has to explain that aspect.
2.An appellate Court has full power to review, appreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion,, both on questions of fact and of law.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Prosecution of respondent accused for causing death of three persons and injuries to one another – Conviction by Trial Court awarding death sentence – Appeal – Allowed by High Court-Appeal against acquittal – Pivotal witness was PW-6 who claimed to be an eye-witness – Hence it was not a case where prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – However High Court found that this witness was examined after about a month of incident – No explanation was offered as to why after PW-6 was released from hospital he was not examined for about three weeks-Non examination of investigating officer who could have thrown light on this aspect – No reason was indicated for such non-examination-Even though alleged incident took place around 12 midnight, information was lodged at about 8.30 a.m. – High Court found that there was abnormal delay in lodging the FIR. – PW-6 was taken to the hospital and the doctor attending to him sent information to SHO of the concerned Police Station at 7.15 a.m. – Interestingly, respondent was taken to the hospital at 8.30 a.m – No explanation by prosecution as to why there was delay in sending respondent-accused to the hospital- Here again, doctor attending to him sent information to the Police Station – It was accepted before High Court that before lodging of FIR by informant, intimations given by police had reached police station – Non consideration of effect of these informations by trial Court – Whether they constituted FIR or not was another question – The third factor which weighed with High Court to direct acquittal was non-explanation of injuries on accused – Acquittal as directed by High Court held not liable to be interfered with – Appeal dismissed. (Para 5, 14)
Facts of the Case :
1.Respondent accused was prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of three persons and injuries to one another. Trial Court convicted accused for said offence and awarded death sentence. Appeal thereagainst was allowed by High Court.
2.Present appeal has been filed against said order of acquittal passed by High Court.
Findings of the Court :
Pivotal witness was PW-6 who claimed to be an eye-witness. Hence it was not a case where prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence. However High Court found that this witness was examined after about a month of incident. No explanation was offered as to why after PW-6 was released from hospital he was not examined for about three weeks. Even investigating officer who could have thrown light on this aspect was not examined .No reason was indicated for such non-examination. Even though alleged incident took place around 12 midnight, information was lodged at about 8.30 a.m. High Court found that there was abnormal delay in lodging the FIR.. PW-6 was taken to the hospital and the doctor attending to him sent information to SHO of the concerned Police Station at 7.15 a.m.. Interestingly, respondent was taken to the hospital at 8.30 a.m. No explanation was offered by prosecution as to why there was delay in sending respondent-accused to the hospital. Here again, doctor attending to him sent information to the Police Station. It was accepted before High Court that before lodging of FIR by informant, intimations given by police had reached police station. There was non consideration of effect of these informations by trial Court. Whether they constituted FIR or not was another question. The third factor which weighed with High Court to direct acquittal was non-explanation of injuries on accused. Hence Acquittal as directed by High Court held not liable to be interfered with. Appeal was dismissed.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Judgment
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —
1.Challenge by the State of Punjab in this appeal is to the acquittal of the respondent from the charge of commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’). The learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot, had convicted the respondent for the said offence and awarded death sentence. In view of the award of the death sentence, reference was made to the High Court under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the ‘Code’).
2.Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows :
Law was set on motion on the basis of the statement made by Parminder Singh (PW4) who stated that he is running a marriage palace known as Chahal Marriage Palace on Malout Road, at Muktsar. Ashok Kumar Lalji Tiwari and Sham Sunder sons of Sager Ram, residents of Gangoli Khurd, Distt. Gaunda [U.P.] and Kulwant Singh alias Kanta son of Mohinder Singh were employed by him as servants in that marriage palace. Gurpal Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh, was employed as Chowkidar in the said marriage palace. There was a function in the marriage palace on the evening of 26.8.1996. Manjit Singh Mistri, resident of Malout alongwith other labourers was constructing sheds in that marriage palace for the last many days. After the conclusion of the function he went to his house and told his servants to look after the property of the marriage palace. On 27.8.1996 at about 7.00 A.M. Manjit Singh Mistri came to his house and told him that smell was coming- out of the rooms of the marriage palace. Hearing this he alongwith his brother Parminder Singh and Mistri Manjit Singh went to the marriage palace and saw that smoke was coming out of the marriage palace. He alongwith Raminder Singh and Manjit Singh Mistri saw from the back side door of the marriage palace that the dead bodies of Ashok Tiwari and Sham Sunder (hereinafter referred to as deceased by name) were burning there. They also saw that pieces of glass were scattered in the lobby of the marriage palace and Lalji Tiwari (hereinafter referred to as deceased by name) was lying dead in the adjoining room and there were mark of injuries on his head and the blood was coming out of the injuries. When they came out, they saw that Gurpal Singh Chowkidar was lying unconscious in the grassy ground of the marriage palace and his head was stained with blood. A vehicle was arranged and Gurpal Singh was sent to the Civil Hospital, Muktsar, with Manjit Singh. He along with his brother Raminder Singh went inside and when Kulwant Singh moved a little, thinking that he was alive, they picked him up and got him admitted in the Civil Hospital. He left his brother Raminder Singh with the dead bodies. He suspected that the offence was committed by respondent-Kulwant Singh alias Kanta due to some grievance. There was no injury on the body of Kulwant Singh and three persons had been murdered and the fourth was lying in serious condition, as such it appeared that it was an act of Kulwant Singh. After the registration of the case S.I. Beant Singh, who was posted as S.H.O. in Police Station City Muktsar, at that time, alongwith ASI Ravel Singh, ASI Gurmel Singh and other officials and Parminder Singh went to the place of occurrence. Raminder Singh (PW5) was found present near the dead bodies. Inquest reports of Lalji Tiwari, Ashok Kumar and Sham Sunder were prepared. There were hairs in the right hand of the dead body and piece of cloth in the left hand of Lalji Tiwari. The dead bodies along with the requests were sent for post mortem examination through ASI Gurmel Singh. S.I. Beant Singh inspected the place of occurrence. One bed sheet stained with blood, blood stained earth were picked up from the bed room where the dead body of Lalji Tiwari was lying. These were made into parcels and sealed with the seal bearing mark ‘BS’ and the parcels were taken into possession. Pieces of glass were picked up from the lobby and they were made into parcel and we
