2009 Supreme(SC) 1493

2009(6) Supreme 526
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Harjit Singh Bedi and Dr. B.S. Chauhan, JJ.
Jarnail Singh and Ors. — Appellants
versus
State of Punjab — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1288 of 2007
Decided on 26-08-2009

IMPORTANT POINTS
1. The FIR is not the encyclopedia of all the facts relating to crime. The only requirement is that at the time of lodging FIR, the informant should state all those facts which normally strike to mind and help in assessing the gravity of the crime or identity of the culprit briefly.
2. Deposition of an injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies, for the reason that his presence on the scene stands established in case, it is proved that he suffered the injury during the said incident.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 148, 149, 307, 364, 342, 506, 201, 120-B r/w Section 30 of Arms Act, 1959 – Prosecution of accused persons for causing death of deceased by firing shot at him and for injuring one another-Conviction by Trial Court – Appeal – Dismissed by High Court – Appeal – Undoubtedly, in the FIR appellants’ name had not been mentioned – The FIR is not the encyclopedia of all the facts relating to crime – The only requirement is that at the time of lodging FIR, the informant should state all those facts which normally strike to mind and help in assessing the gravity of the crime or identity of the culprit briefly – Complainant was not aware of the names of all the accused persons-The motive for committing offence had fully been explained that they wanted the forcible possession of the land from the complainant party- The delay in lodging FIR had fully been explained by the prosecution – (PW-6) and (PW-7) were two independent witnesses who had come from Bihar as migrant labourers- No explanation could be furnished by appellants as to for what reason either of the said witnesses could depose falsely – PW-4 injured witness, gave full details of the incident as he was present at the time when assailants reached tube well – Investigating officer made it clear in his cross examination that identification parade could not serve any purpose for reason that witnesses were present at the time of arrest of accused, rather they had been arrested on identification by the witnesses-Dead body of deceased had been identified by two fellow labourers and the medical evidence was same as that of ocular evidence -Dead body was found with the clothes which deceased was wearing at the time of incident- Issue of identification did not require any further consideration-Appeal having no merit dismissed. (Paras 17 to 19, 22 to 27)

        Criminal Trial – Evidence of a chance witness – The evidence of a chance witness requires a very cautious and close scrutiny and a chance witness must adequately explain his presence at the place of occurrence – Deposition of a chance witness whose presence at the place of incident remains doubtful should be discarded – Conduct of the chance witness, subsequent to the incident may also be taken into consideration particularly as to whether he has informed anyone else in the village about the incident. (Para 13 to 15)

       (2005) 9 SCC 650), (1997) 4 SCC 192; (2004) 11 SCC 253; (2006) 13 SCC 643; (2007) 13 SCC 360),(2004) 10 SCC 632), Relied upon.

        Criminal Trial – Evidence of a injured witness – Deposition of an injured witness should be relied upon unless there are strong grounds for rejection of his evidence on the basis of major contradictions and discrepancies, for the reason that his presence on the scene stands established in case, it is proved that he suffered the injury during the said incident-Testimony of a stamped witness has its own relevance and efficacy – The fact that the witness sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence, lends support to his testimony that he was present during the occurrence- In case the injured witness is subjected to lengthy cross examination and nothing can be elicited to discard his testimony, it should be relied upon (Para 19 to 21)

       (2006) 12 SCC 459),1994 Supp (3) SCC 235, (2004) 7 SCC 629, Relied upon.

        Criminal Trial – Identification parade – Identification parade is of paramount importance in a criminal case-When the accused person is not previously known to the witness concerned, the identification of the accused by the witness soon after his arrest is of great importance because it furnishes an assurance that the investigation is proceeding on right lines in addition to furnishing corroboration of the evidence to be given by the witness later in court at the trial – But the position would be entirely different when the accused or culprit who stands trial had been seen at times by the witness as it may do away with the necessity of identification parade – Where the accused has been arrested in presence of the witness accused has been shown to the witness or even his photograph has been shown by the Investigating Officer prior to test identification parade, holding identification parade in such facts and circumstances remained inconsequential. (Paras 23 to 24)

       AIR 1994 SC 2420, AIR 1998 SC 1922; (2004) 3 SCC 106; (2007) 12 SCC 654), Relied upon.

       Facts of the Case :

        Accused persons were prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by firing shot at him and for injuring one another. Trial Court convicted accused persons. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.

        2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        Undoubtedly, in the FIR appellants’ name had not been mentioned. The FIR is not the encyclopedia of all the facts relating to crime. The only requirement is that at the time of lodging FIR, the informant should state all those facts which normally strike to mind and help in assessing the gravity of the crime or identity of the culprit briefly. Complainant was not aware of the names of all the accused persons. The motive for committing offence had fully been explained that they wanted the forcible possession of the land from the complainant party. The delay in lodging FIR had fully been explained by the prosecution.(PW-6) and (PW-7) were two independent witnesses who had come from Bihar as migrant labourers. No explanation could be furnished by appellants as to for what reason either of the said witnesses could depose falsely.PW-4 injured witness, gave full details of the incident as he was present at the time when assailants reached tube well. Investigating officer made it clear in his cross examination that identification parade could not serve any purpose for reason that witnesses were present at the time of arrest of accused, rather they had been arrested on identification by the witnesses. Dead body of deceased had been identified by two fellow labourers and the medical evidence was same as that of ocular evidence .Dead body was found with the clothes which deceased was wearing at the time of incident. Issue of identification did not require any further consideration. Appeal having no merit was dismissed.

       Result : Appeal dismissed