Harjinder Singh @ Kala vs State Of Punjab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 1373

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH AND SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Harjinder Singh @ Kala – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No(s). 330 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No(s). 8944 of 2022)
Decided on : 22-01-2025

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Extra-judicial confession - Circumstantial evidence - The case revolved around the murder of a hermit, where the trial Court convicted the appellant on the basis of circumstantial evidence including an extra-judicial confession. The Supreme Court emphasized that extra-judicial confessions must be treated with caution and require corroboration to be reliable - The prosecution's case failed as no motive was established, and the evidence regarding the confession and recovery of the weapon was unreliable. (Paras 13, 16, 30, 34, 36)

(B) The evidentiary value of an extra-judicial confession and importance of motive in circumstantial cases were discussed, noting that a conviction should not solely rest on weak evidence. (Paras 10, 24)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted of murdering a hermit after allegedly being asked to vacate premises he occupied. The conviction was based on an extra-judicial confession and circumstantial evidence.

Findings of Court:
The Court found that the extra-judicial confession did not inspire confidence and was not corroborated, nullifying its weight.

Issues: The primary issues addressed were the veracity of the extra-judicial confession, the establishment of a motive, and the reliability of circumstantial evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The Supreme Court held that the prosecution failed to establish a credible chain of evidence connecting the appellant to the crime, particularly due to the dubious nature of the extra-judicial confession and lack of motive.

Result: The conviction was quashed and the appellant was acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC.

Table of Content
1. background of the case and initial trial details. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. appellant's defense and claims. (Para 9 , 10)
3. analysis of circumstantial evidence principles. (Para 12 , 13)
4. evidentiary standards for extra-judicial confessions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. suspicions regarding the extra-judicial confession's credibility. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
6. motive and its significance in circumstantial evidence. (Para 22 , 23)
7. analysis of motive as proved or conjectured. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
8. recovery of murder weapon and its evidentiary shortcomings. (Para 30 , 31)
9. disclosure statement's deficiencies and overall evidence evaluation. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
10. final ruling against the conviction. (Para 37)
11. acquittal and conclusion of the appeal. (Para 38 , 39)

ORDER :

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellant Harjinder Singh @ Kala was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali[Hereinafter referred to as 'trial Court'.] in Sessions Case No. 83 of 1.12.2014, for the offence punishable under Section 302 , INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860[For short, 'IPC'.]. Vide judgment dated 17th September, 2015, the trial Court convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

4. The appellant filed an appeal[CRA-D No. 1557-DB of 2015 (O&M).] against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the trial Court before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.[Hereinafter referred to as 'High Court'.] The Division Bench of the High Court, vide judgment dated 19th March, 2019, rejected the criminal appeal preferred by the appellant, which is assailed in this appeal by special leave.

5. Brief facts that are relevant and essential for the disposal of this appeal are noted hereinbelow.

6. Mahant Narain Dass was a hermit who had been residing in the Village Garagan since last 30-35 years. Narain Dass had constructed a room on the shamlat land of the village about 7 years back in which he had permitted Santokh Singh of Village Chonta, District Ludhiana to reside. Santokh Singh was living in the said room with his family, and he had been providing food to Narain Dass in lieu of the permission to live in his premises. Four to five days prior to the murder of Narain Dass, the Gram Panchayat had issued a notice to Narain Dass to vacate the said premises as it was illegally constructed on the public property of the village.

Resultantly, Narain Dass asked Santokh Singh and his family members to vacate and leave the premises.

7. On 14th August, 2014, Nachhattar Singh(PW-3), a village panch, tried to reach Narain Dass. Upon finding that Narain Dass was not responding, he visited his place and found him lying lifeless on the cot. Nachhattar Singh(PW-3) noticed injury marks made by sharp weapons on the right side of the face and abdomen of the deceased Narain Dass and accordingly, he immediately reported the matter to the police whereupon, FIR No. 117[Ex. PW7/B.] dated 14th August, 2014 came to be registered under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC at the Police Station Sadar Kharar against unknown assailants. Dr. Parminderjit Singh(PW-5) conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Narain Dass and the cause of death was opined to be shock and haemorrhage due to ante mortem injuries.[Ex. PW5/A.] S.H.O. Bhagwant Singh(PW-7) started investigation of the case. The prosecution alleges that on 19th August, 2014, the appellant Harjinder Singh[Hereinafter referred to as 'appellant'.] approached the village Sarpanch, Balwinder Singh(PW-4) and tendered an extrajudicial confession to the effect that he had murdered Narain Dass.

The Sarpanch convinced the appellant to surrender and thereupon, he was arrested. The appellant made a disclosure statement(Ex.PW2/D) to the Investigat