Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2008 Supreme(SC) 1655

2008(8) Supreme 776
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, C.K. Thakker and Lokeshwar Singh Panta, JJ.
State of Punjab — Appellant
versus
Sukhchain Singh & Anr. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 254 of 2002
with
Criminal Appeal No. 587 of 2002
Decided on : 07-11-2008

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant :Ms. Indu Malhotra, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sunita Ojha, Kuldip Singh, Ajay pal and Vikas Mehta, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Ms. Prem Malhotra, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Both questions of fact and of law are open to determination by the High Court in an appeal against an order of acquittal.

Headnote:(a)Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 378 – Both questions of fact and of law are open to determination by the High Court in an appeal against an order of acquittal – High Court had full power to review the evidence – It is equally well settled that the presumption of innocence of the accused was further reinforced by his acquittal – Findings of the trial court could be reversed only for very substantial and compelling reasons. (Paras 11 and 21)
       (1934) 61 IA 398; AIR 1945 PC 151; AIR 1954 SC 36; (1952) SCR 193; (1953) SCR 418; AIR 1955 SC 807; (1955) 2 SCR 1285; (1961) 3 SCR 120; (1963) 2 SCR 405; (1973)2 SCC 793; (1979) 1 SCC 355; (1996) 9 SCC 225; (2002) 3 SCC 57; (2002) 4 SCC 85; (2002) 4 SCC 85; (2002)6 SCC 470; (2003) 12 SCC 606; (2006) 10 SCC 313 – Relied upon.
       (b)Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 378 – General principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against acquittal culled out. (Para 37)
       (2007)4 SCC 415 – Relied upon.
       (c)Criminal Trial – Proof – The concept of probability and the degree of it have a subjective element in evaluation thereof – While preserving the protection given by criminal process to the accused, uninformed legitimization of trivialities must be avoided. (Para 40)
       (1988)4 SCC 302; 2008 (9) JT 591 – Relied upon.
       Facts of the case :
       1.On 6th September, 1987 at about 6.30 PM Jit Singh and Jaswant Singh (both deceased) alongwith Nishan Singh (P.W.7), Ghula Singh (P.W.8), Swaran Singh and Bakhshish Singh were sitting near the office of the Truck Union, Khanauri Mandi when accused Mohan Singh armed with a SBBL gun, Paramjit Singh, Sukhchain Singh and Swaran Singh armed with gandasas and Harbhajan Singh unarmed came to the spot in Truck No. HYA 6595, being driven by Harbhajan Singh.
       2.After parking the truck at a distance of 6-7 kadams from the Cabin, the accused got down and raised a lalkara that they would teach them a lesson for being instrumental in making them lose the elections held to the various offices of the Truck Union.
       3.Mohan Singh and Harbhajan Singh fired gun shots at Jit Singh Singh and Ghula Singh. Swaran Singh, Paramjit Singh and Sukhchain Singh also caused injuries to Swaran Singh, Nishan Singh and Ghula Singh. All the accused thereafter re-boarded the truck and escaped from the spot.
       4.Jit Singh and Jaswant Singh died almost immediately whereas Ghula Singh, who was in a serious condition, was taken to the Hospital by some persons.
       5. The trial court held that the accusations were not established so far as the present respondents are concerned but found the two co-accused persons Mohan Singh and Paramjit Singh guilty of various offences.
       6.High Court approved the Trial court verdict.
       Finding of the Court :
       Impugned judgments do not warrant interference.
       Result : Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

Criminal Appeal No. 254 of 2002

1.Challenge in this appeal is to the order of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court upholding the acquittal of the respondents. The responders were respondents in Criminal Appeal No. 537 DBA of 1997. The High Court heard four appeals but we are concerned with the two appeals only i.e. Criminal appeal no. 537 DBA of 1997 and Criminal appeal No. 170- DB of 1997 (Paramjit Singh v. State of Punjab) and disposed the appeals along with two other appeals. Respondents faced trial along with two others namely Mohan Singh and Paramjit Singh for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 307, 326, 325, 323/302 read with Section 149, 307 read with Section 149, 326/149, 325 read with Section 149 and 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1960 (in short the ‘IPC’). Another accused Harbhajan Singh died during trial.

2.The trial court held that the accusations were not established so far as the present respondents are concerned but found the two co-accused persons Mohan Singh and Paramjit Singh guilty of various offences. Criminal Appeal No. 537 DBA of 1997 was filed by the State questioning acquittal of the respondents. The connected Criminal appeal No. 587 of 2002 has been filed by the accused Paramjit Singh who was appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 170 DB of 1997 before the High Court.

Prosecution version leading to the trial of the accused persons is as follows:

On 6th September, 1987 at about 6.30 PM Jit Singh and Jaswant Singh (both deceased) alongwith Nishan Singh (P.W.7), Ghula Singh (P.W.8), Swaran Singh and Bakhshish Singh were sitting near the office of the Truck Union, Khanauri Mandi when accused Mohan Singh armed with a SBBL gun, Paramjit Singh, Sukhchain Singh and Swaran Singh armed with gandasas and Harbhajan Singh unarmed came to the spot in Truck No. HYA 6595, being driven by Harbhajan Singh. After parking the truck at a distance of 6-7 kadams from the Cabin, the accused got down and raised a lalkara that they would teach them a lesson for being instrumental in making them lose the elections held to the various offices of the Truck Union. Mohan Singh accused thereupon fired two shots at Jit Singh Singh and Ghula singh. Harbhajan Singh then snatched the gun from Mohan Singh and fired one shot hitting Jaswant Singh on his arm and back. Swaran Singh, Paramjit Singh and Sukhchain Singh accused also caused injuries to Swaran Singh, Nishan Singh and Ghula Singh. All the accused thereafter re-boarded the truck and escaped from the spot. Jit Singh and Jaswant Singh died almost immediately whereas Ghula Singh, who was in a serious condition, was taken to the Hospital by some persons who had come to the spot whereas Nishan Singh and Swaran Singh left for Police Post, Khanauri. Along the way, however, they came across a police party headed by ASI Shamsher Singh(P.W.12). Nishan Singh made his statement to him at 8.00 P.M. and on its basis, the formal F.I.R was registered at Police Station, Moonak, 25 kms away at 9.30 P.M.; with the special report being delivered to the Iliaqa Magistrate at Sunam at 2.30 AM on September 7,1987. ASI Shamsher Singh (P.W.12) also went to the place of occurrence and made the necessary inquiries and amongst other articles picked up three spent cartridges cases of .12 bore. The accused were arrested on 12.9.1987 and Truck No. HYA-6595 belonging to Harbhajan Singh was taken into possession. Mohan Singh accused also produced his .12 bore gun and two live cartridges. The spent cartridges and the gun belonging to Mohan Singh accused were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the Laboratory in its report (Exh.PRR) opined that the said cartridges had been fired from the gun in question. On the completion of the investigation, the accused were charged for offences punishable under section 302 and other offences of IPC as noted above and the Arms Act, 1959 (in short the ‘Arms Act’) and as they pleaded not guilty, were

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2008 Supreme(SC) 1655

IMPORTANT POINTBoth questions of fact and of law are open to determination by the High Court in an appeal against an order of acquittal.

Cases Referred (9)

IMPORTANT POINT
Both questions of fact and of law are open to determination by the High Court in an appeal against an order of acquittal.