THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
SURESH SINGHAL ..... Appellant
versus
STATE (DELHI ADMIN) ..... Respondent
CRL.A. 232/1997, CRL.A. 217/1997
Decided on: 01.09.2010
V.K. JAIN, J
1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 29th March 1997 and the Order on Sentence dated 31st March 1997, whereby Suresh Singhal, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 232/1997 and his father and co-appellant Pritpal Singhal, who died during the pendency of the appeal, were convicted under Section 302 and 307 of IPC, read with Section 34 thereof, whereas their co-accused Roshan Lal was acquitted. The appellants Suresh Singhal and late Pritpal Singhal were sentenced to imprisonment to life and to pay fine of `5,000/- each under Section 302/34 of IPC, for committing murder of Krishan Lal. The appellant Suresh Singhal was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of `5,000/- or to undergo R.I. for 6 months in default under Section 302 of IPC, for committing murder of Shyam Sunder. Both, Suresh Singhal and his father Pritpal Singhal, were also sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years each and to pay fine of `3,000/- each or to undergo R.I. for 6 months in default under Section 307/34 of IPC. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Criminal Appeal No. 226/1997 is directed against the acquittal of Roshan Lal, whereas Criminal Appeal No.217/1997 has been filed by the State seeking death penalty to the convict Suresh Singhal.
3. On 4th March 1991 at about 5.45 PM deceased Shyam Sunder and Krishan Lal, both brothers, were brought to Deen Dayal Upadhaya Hospital in two separate PCR Vans. On the same day, their brother Hans Raj was also brought to RML hospital in injured condition, by his brother Ram Narayan. The Investigating Officer, when he reached the hospital, on receipt of this information, was informed that both, Shyam Sunder and Krishan Lal were dead, when brought to the hospital. He thereupon reached the shop of Lala Harkishan Dass, at Rajendra Park, Nangloi, where the incident had taken place and recorded his statement, on the basis of which the FIR was registered. Lala Harkishan Dass told the Investigating Officer that Krishan Lal, Shyam Sunder, Hans Raj and Raju, all sons of Shri Mohan Lal of Bahadurgarh were doing business of property dealers under the name and style of M/s Vijay Property Dealer at Bahadurgarh. They had arranged a deal of a property of Suresh Singhal with Tarsem, Sarovar and Tilak Raj, hereinafter referred to as the Gurdaspur Party. Since there was some misunderstanding and altercation between them, on the issue of payment, the parties had approached him for getting the matter settled and were called by him to his office at 4.00 PM. Shyam Sunder, Hans Raj, Raju and Krishan Lal, all brothers, accordingly came to his office at 4.00 PM. Gurdaspur Party reached his office at 5.10 PM. Suresh Singhal and his father Pritpal Singhal, accompanied by a man, aged about 35-36 years, then reached his office. As soon as they entered his office, there was an altercation between Suresh Singhal and Shyam Sunder. Suresh Singhal took out his revolver and shot Shyam Sunder, which led to a commotion. Being scared, he (the informant) escaped, using the rear door of his office. Later, he came to know that Krishan Lal was also shot by those people. He also stated that car No. DL4C-0532 in which Suresh Singhal, his father Pritpal Singhal and their companion had come to his office, was left by them on the spot and they had fled away in the Fiat car of another visitor Subhash, who had left the key of the car in its ignition. The information given to the police by Lala Harkishan Dass was supplemented by the statement of Raj Kumar, recorded on the same day. He, while confirming the version given by Lala Harkishan Dass, stated that his brother Shyam Sunder had brokered a deal with Pritpal Singhal and Suresh Singhal and that on 03rd March, 1991, there was an altercation between his brother Shyam Sunder on the one hand and Suresh Singhal and his father Pritpal Singhal on the other hand on the question of some payment. He also stated that when Sur
Chanan Singh v. State of Punjab
State of U.P. v. Madan Mohan & Ors.
Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration
Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Awadesh and Anr. v. State of M.P.
Seriyal Udayar v. State of Tamil Nadu
State of Punjab v. Harbans Singh & Anr.
Surender Kumar v. Union Territory of Chandigarh
Ranjit Singh Chandra Singh Atodaria v. State of Gujarat
Ravindra Shalik Naik & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra
Lachman Singh v. State of Haryana
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
State of Punjab v. Manjit Singh
Ajit Savant Majagvai v. State of Karnataka
Mohammed Ankoos and Ors. v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad
Krishna Gope v. State of Bihar
Umar Mohammad and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan
Ambika Prasad & Ors. v. State and Ors.
Puran Singh v. State of Uttranchal
Mer Dhana Side v. State of Gujarat
Makan Jivan and Ors. v. State of Gujarat
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.