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

1995 Supreme(Raj) 87

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : B.R. Arora,V.G. Palshikar
Amarjeet Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 279 of 1991
Decided On : 02/03/1995

Advocates Appeared:
M.L. Garg, for the Appellant
V.R. Mehta, Public Prosecutor for the Respondents

The court held that the appellant's claim of self-defense was not credible, as he had fired three shots at the deceased, indicating that he had time to cool down between shots.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302, 302/34, 120B, I.P.C, AND SECTION 27 OF THE INDIAN ARMS ACT - FACTUAL MATRIX AND WITNESS TESTIMONY - MEDICAL EVIDENCE - BALLISTIC REPORT - LINK EVIDENCE - PROVOCATION - EXCEPTION 1 TO SECTION 300, I.P.C - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE UPHELD.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, Amarjeet Singh, was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Bikar Singh and six months' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, along with his sister Atam Kaur, went to the house of the deceased and shot him three times, killing him. The appellant claimed that he acted in self-defense, as the deceased was molesting his sister.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution witnesses were reliable and their testimony was corroborated by the medical evidence, the ballistic report, and the link evidence. The court also found that the appellant's claim of self-defense was not credible, as he had fired three shots at the deceased, indicating that he had time to cool down between shots.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution witnesses were reliable and their testimony was credible. 2. Whether the appellant's claim of self-defense was credible.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution witnesses were reliable and their testimony was credible, as they were present at the scene of the crime and their statements were consistent with each other and with the other evidence in the case. 2. The court held that the appellant's claim of self-defense was not credible, as he had fired three shots at the deceased, indicating that he had time to cool down between shots.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appellant's conviction and sentence.

Judgment

B.R. Arora, J.-This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 9-8-1991, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar (Camp Sri Karanpur), by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellant for the offences under Section 302, I.P.C, and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act, and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one year’s rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C, and six months’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month’s rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act.

2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded in the F.I.R. (Ex. P. 1), lodged at Police Station, Sri Karanpur on 21-9-1987 at about 11.30 p.m. by Bagha Singh R/o Kharla, is that at about 11.00/11.30 a.m. he was in his cote (Nobra) and was arranging the wood. In the meanwhile he heard the sound of a gun-fire. The ladies in the house raised alarms. He thereafter went towards the Court-yard and saw accused Amarjeet Singh standing in the room of the house and was armed with a 12-bore gun. Accused Amarjeet Singh opened the second fire on his son Bikar Singh, who, on receiving the fire injuries, raised the cries. Accused Amarjeet Singh re-loaded the gun and opened third fire on Bikar Singh. Amarjeet Singh’s sister accused Amat Kaur was armed with a Takua and was instigating accused Amarjeet Singh to fire again. On seeing this, Bagha Singh and other members of the family, viz., his wife Harmendra Kaur, daughter-in-law Jasbir Kaur and daughter Bhuri raised alarms. After killing Bikar Singh, accused Amarjeet Singh and Atam Kaur left the house. Accused Tarsero Singh was standing out-side the house and enquired from accused Amarjeet Singh and Atam Kaur whether the work had been done or not, whereupon both the accused said that Bikar Singh had been done to death. It was only on the instigation of accused Kishan Singh the father of the other three accused - that the murder of Bikar Singh was committed and he had sent the accused along with his licened gun. Bagha Singh alias Bag Singh, Harmendra Kaur, Jasbir Kaur and Miss Bhuri thereafter entered in the room and found Bikar Singh dead. The accused had committed the murder of Bikar Singh who was a student of B.A., on the allegation that he used to tease accused Atam Kaur. On this basis of the report, a case under Sections 302, 302/34 and 120B, I.P.C, and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act was registered against accused Amarjeet Singh, Tarsem Singh, Atam Kaur and Kishan Singh. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the challan against accused Amarjeet Singh and Kumari Atam Kaur but submitted the Final Report against accused Tarsem Singh and Kishan Singh. The Final Report, submitted by the police in favour of Tarsem Singh and Kishan Singh was accepted by the Court and the remaining accused, viz., Amarjeet Singh and Atam Kaur were tried by the learned trial Court for the offences under Sections 302, 302/34, I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined nine witnesses. The accused did not examine any witness in their defence. The case of the accused, in defence, was that accused Amarjeet Singh was coming from his field and at that time he was armed with a gun. In the way he heard the cries of his sister Atam Kaur from the house of Bikar Singh; he went near the outer-door of the house of Bikar Singh and saw Bikar Singh molesting his sister Atam Kaur. He asked Bikar Singh to leave his sister and in order to save her from being further molested, he opened the fire and both the triggers worked together. Thereafter he came to his house along with his sister. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after trial, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant Amarjeet Singh, as stated but acquitted accused Atam Kaur by









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
whatsapp-icon Back to top