SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(SC) 1026

2010 (7) Supreme 696
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Markandey Katju and T. S. Thakur, JJ.
Central Bureau of Investigation — Appellant
versus
Kishore Singh & others — Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 2047-2049 of 2010
[Arising out of SLP(Criminal) Nos. 8485-87 of 2009]
Decided on : 25-10-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
Policemen who commit criminal acts deserve harsher punishment than other persons who commit such acts.

Headnote:(a) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 325 – Person concerned kept in police station for 4 days in violation of Article 22 of the Constitution and section 57, Cr. P.C. – Torture given to the person concerned cannot be said to be result of sudden provocation – Section 325 not attracted. (Para 19)

        (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 326 – Offence committed in a pre-meditated manner – Third degree methods meted out to the person concerned – Section 326 applies. (Para 19)

        (c) Criminal Trial – Injured witness – Normally Court gives more weight to the evidence of an injured witness. (Para 23)

        (d) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 342 – Third degree methods are outlawed – Practicing these methods makes the police officials liable u/s 342. (Para 26)

       (1997) 1 SCC 416 – Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

        This case raised the issue of police atrocities in custody.

       Finding of the Court:

        Judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained.

       Result : Appeal by CBI allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

Markandey Katju, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. What should be done to policemen who ‘bobbitt’ a person in a police station and think that they can get away with it? That is the question to be decided in this case.

3. These appeals by special leave have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 19.11.2008 passed in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 235/2006, SB Criminal Appeal No. 31/2006 & SB Criminal Appeal No. 70/2006 of Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur.

4. This case reveals how some policemen in our country have not got over their old colonial mentality and are still persisting in barbaric acts in a free country which claims to be run by a democratic Constitution and the rule of law. It also reveals a grisly state of affairs prevailing in our police set up even today.

5. Heard Mr. J.S. Atri, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, CBI, Mr. KTS Tulsi, learned senior counsel for respondent constable Kishore Singh, Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel for respondent Assistant Sub-Inspector Sumer Dan and Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned counsel appearing for respondent S.H.O. Sohan Singh.

6. The prosecution case is that one Jugta Ram, the injured witness in this case, was an employee of one Bheru Singh and was working in his liquor shop. Jugta Ram also lived in the house of Bheru Singh in one room of the upper floor, while the family of Bheru Singh was living in the ground floor. Bheru Singh had two sons and three daughters. Jugta Ram is said to have had an affair with Bheru Singh’s wife and eldest daughter. This was suspected by Bheru Singh, whose relative was accused constable Kishore Singh.

7. On 2.2.1994, at about 8 P.M. Jugta Ram was carrying a bottle of liquor when accused constable Kishore Singh met him and snatched the liquor bottle and in the course of the scuffle the bottle fell down and got broken. Kishore Singh then took Jugta Ram to the Sadar police station where the accused SHO Sohan Singh and some policemen were also present. Sohan Singh allegedly assaulted Jugta Ram and at that time Bheru Singh also came to the police station. Accused Kishore Singh, constable, is the son of Bheru Singh’s brother-in-law (sala).

8. Jugta Ram was taken to the police station on 2.2.1994 and kept locked up there till 5.2.1994. He was beaten up in the police lockup by Bheru Singh, constable Kishore Singh and A.S.I. Sumer Dan. On 4.2.1994 at about 2 or 3 P.M., Jugta Ram’s brother Kheraj Ram came to the police station and he stated that the policemen demanded Rs. 40-50 thousand otherwise Jugta Ram will not be released.

9. On 5.2.1994, Jugta Ram was again assaulted by Bheru Singh, Sumer Dan and Kishore Singh who kept asking about his illicit relationship and then he stated that he had illicit relationship with Gaj Kanwar, wife of Bheru Singh. At this, Bheru Singh and Sumer Dan caught hold of Jugta Ram. Accused A.S.I. Sumer Dan held Jugta Ram by the neck and put his hand on his mouth and then accused constable Kishore Singh chopped off Jugta Ram’s penis with a sharp edged weapon (‘ustra’ or barber’s razor). At this, Jugta Ram became unconscious and when he gained consciousness he found that he was admitted in Barmer hospital.

10. Jugta Ram related the story to the doctors in the hospital and also his brother Kheraj Ram who came there with some persons.

11. The police registered the F.I.R. of Jugta Ram on 5.2.1994 under sub-Section 307/326. Initially the investigation was handed over to the Additional S.P., Barmer, but thereafter it was transferred to the C.I.D., Crime Branch which added the offences of Sections 343 and 120B I.P.C. Thereafter, at the instance of the State Government the investigation was transferred to the C.B.I., which investigated the case and submitted a charge sheet.

12. The accused denied the prosecution case, but the trial court found all the three accused guilty vide its judgment dated 21.12.2005. The fourth accused Bheru Singh died during the trial.

13. The trial court sentenced accused Ki























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top