Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.R. Shah, Aniruddha Bose, JJ.
Amrik Singh - Appellant
Versus
The State of Punjab - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.993 of 2012
Subhash Chander - Appellant
Versus
The State of Punjab - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.992 of 2012
Decided On : 11-07-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302/34 and 392 – Murder and robbery – Common intention – Life sentence – Conviction of accused in present case is solely on identification of accused by PW1 in court room – Prior thereto no TIP has been conducted by Investigating Agency – To connect accused for having conducted evidence of loot of Rs.5 lakhs, primarily prosecution was required to establish and prove that person from whom amount which was having to have looted – Thereafter prosecution is required to establish and prove that amount which is recovered from accused is very amount which complainant/person from whom amount is looted – FIR cannot be encyclopedia – However, at the same time when no TIP was conducted first version of complainant reflected in FIR would play an important role – There are some contradictions in first statement of complainant recorded in form of FIR and in deposition before Court – Impugned judgment and order passed by Trial Court as well as High Court convicting accused for offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and Section 392 IPC quashed and set aside and accused acquitted. (Paras 6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 7 and 8)
Facts of the case:
Appellant assails judgment and order dated 01.04.2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.645 of 2004 and Criminal Appeal No.563 of 2004 by which the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed said appeals preferred by the accused and has confirmed conviction and sentence passed by Trial Court convicting the accused for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 392 of the IPC.
Findings of Court:
Trial Court as well as the High Court have committed a grave error in convicting the accused. The judgment and orders passed by Trial Court confirmed by the High Court convicting the accused for the offence under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and Section 392 IPC respectively are unsustainable and they deserve to be quashed and set aside and the accused are to be acquitted for the purpose for which they were tried.
Result : Appeals allowed.
JUDGMENT :
M. R. Shah, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 01.04.2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.645 of 2004 and Criminal Appeal No.563 of 2004 by which the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the said appeals preferred by the accused and has confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court convicting the accused Amrik Singh and Subhash Chander for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 392 of the IPC, the accused Amrik Singh and Subhash Chander have preferred the present appeals.
2. That the appellant herein was charged along with one Subhash Chander and Pritpal Singh for committing robbery and murdering one Gian Chand (deceased) during the course of the robbery. As per the prosecution case, the deceased Gian Chand, one Munshi Ram, father of the deceased along with the complainant Des Raj (PW1) were proceeding from the office of Sub-registrar District Fazilka and after dropping of the father of the deceased at the local bus stand, they proceeded towards their village. It was further alleged that on route to their village, three persons came on a scooter and tried stopping them. When the complainant who was driving the scooter did not stop, co-accused Subhash Chander thrown red chilli powder into the eyes of the complainant after which the scooter stopped and the complainant was temporarily blinded. That all the three tried to snatch the scooter of the complainant and in the said scuffle, present appellant – accused – Amrik Singh shot the deceased Gian Chand in the chest. The complainant arrived into the fields and upon his return he saw that the assailants have taken away the scooter and Gian Chand was lying unconscious with blood oozing out of his chest. As per the case of the prosecution the motive was that the father of the deceased had executed a sale deed in favour of sons of the complainant (PW1) for the purpose of which they had gone to the office of the Sub-registrar. The consideration for the sale had not been paid and an amount of Rs.5 lakhs was in the dicky of the scooter, which the assailants had stolen. That thereafter PW1 proceeded to the police station. His statement was recorded by PW11 Inspector Karamjit Singh who proceeded to the scene of occurrence and found the dead body of Gian Chand lying over there. He prepared inquest report. He collected the necessary evidence. PW6 Dr. M.M. Singh conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Gian Chand. Post mortem was conducted on 08.05.2001 at about 6.30 p.m. As per the medical evidence death could have occurred about 6 hours prior to the examination. In course of the investigation Subhash Chander and Amrik Singh – accused were arrested on the basis of the disclosure statement of the appellant accused – Amrik Singh. ASI - PW7 recovered a sum of Rs.1 lakh alleged to have been looted out of Rs.5 lakhs which according to the complainant PW1 was kept in the dicky of the scooter. On the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused Subhash Chander a further sum of Rs.1 lakh was recovered. After completion of the investigation, the IO filed the chargesheet. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The accused pleaded not guilty and therefore they came to be tried by the Sessions Court for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 and 392 read with Section 397 IPC.
2.1 To bring home the guilt of accused, prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses which included PW1 the original complainant - the eye witness Karamjit Singh, Inspector - PW11, Dr. M.M. Singh – PW6 and other police officials. After the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses the accused were examined and their further statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded. All the incriminating circumstances appeared against them in the prosecution evidenc
When no TIP was conducted first version of complainant reflected in FIR would play an important role.
The TIP conducted by the prosecution must be in accordance with the law, and the recovery of evidence must be of substantial value to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The evidence of identification before the court is substantive, while the evidence of the identification parade is weak and only has corroborative value. The prosecution must prove that the accused w....
Murder – Identification of accused in Court is acceptable without prior TIP and absence of TIP may not be fatal for prosecution.
The unexplained delay in the test identification parade rendered the prosecution's evidence unreliable, leading to the acquittal of the accused for insufficient proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
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
