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

2011 Supreme(Raj) 1160

[Citation : 2011(4) RLW 3666 (SC)]
(Supreme Court)
Prithipal Singh etc. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (Dr. Chauhan, J.)
HON'BLE P. SATHASIVAM, J.
HON'BLE DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.
Prithipal Singh etc.
Versus
State of Punjab & Anr. Etc.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 523-527 with 528 of 2009, decided on 04.11.2011

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India, Art. 21, 22 read with Penal Code, Sec. 302/34 and 120-B and Cr.P.C., 1973, Sec. 386(e) — Police atrocities — Torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during investigation, interrogation or otherwise — Held — Police atrocities are always violative of the Constitutional mandate particularly, Art. 21 and Art. 22 — Arbitrary arrest and detention are not to be made — Tolerance of police atrocities would amount to acceptance of systematic subversion and erosion of the rule of law. (Para 48)

       ¼d½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku] vuqPNsn 21] 22 lifBr n.M lafgrk] /kkjk 302@34 ,oa 120-[k( na-iz-la-] 1973] /kkjk 386¼M+½ & iqfyl vR;kpkj & vUos"k.k] iwNrkN ;k vU;Fkk ds nkSjku ;kruk nsuk ;k Øwj] vekuoh; rFkk viekfur djus okyk O;ogkj djuk & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & iqfyl vR;kpkj lnSo gh laoS/kkfud vkKk fo'ks"kdj vuqPNsn 21 o 22 dk mYya?kudkjh gS & euekuh fxjrkjh rFkk fujks/k ugha fd;s tk;s & iqfyl vR;kpkj dks lgu djuk fof/k ds 'kklu dk Øe'k% fouk'k ,oa {k; djus dh Lohd`fr nsus dh Js.kh esa vkrk gSA

        ¼in la[;k 48½

       (b) Evidence Act, 1872, Sec. 133 read with Sec. 114, Illustration (b) — Evidence of accomplice not put on trial — Reliability — Held — Deposition of an accompliance in a crime who has not been made an accused/put to trial, can be relied upon, however the evidence is required to be considered with care and caution — Accompliance is a competent witness as he deposes in the Court after taking oath and there is no prohibition in any law not to act upon his deposition without corroboration. (Para 21)

       Appeals dismissed.

       ¼[k½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872] /kkjk 133 lifBr /kkjk 114 n`"VkUr ¼[k½ & lg-vijk/kh ds lk{; ij fopkj.k ugha djuk & fo'oluh;rk & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & fdlh vijk/k esa lg vijk/kh ds lk{; ij fo'okl fd;k tk ldrk gS] ftls vfHk;qDr ugha cuk;k x;k gS@fopkj.k ij ugha j[kk x;k gS fQj Hkh lk{; ij lko/kkuhiwoZd ,oa lrdZrk ls fopkj djuk gksrk gS & lg-vijk/kh ,d lk{; lk{kh gksrk gS D;ksafd og 'kiFk ysus ds i'pkr~ U;k;ky; esa lk{; nsrk gS rFkk lEiqf"V ds fcuk mlds lk{; ij dk;Zokgh ugha djus gsrq fdlh Hkh fof/k esa izfr"ks/k ugha gSA ¼in la[;k 21½

       vihysa [kkfjt dhA

       

Hon'ble Dr. CHAUHAN, J.—All the above appeals have been preferred against the common judgment and order dated 8.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal Nos. 864-DB of 2005, 2062-SB of 2005, 2073-SB of 2005, 2074-SB of 2005, 2075-SB of 2005 and order dated 16.10.2007 in Crl. R.P. No. 323 of 2006, whereby the High Court has dismissed the appeals of the appellants filed against the conviction and sentences awarded to them by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, in Sessions Case No. 49-T of 9.5.1998/30.11.2001 vide judgment and order dated 18.11.2005, whereby he had convicted Jaspal Singh, DSP – appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 528 of 2009 and one Amarjit Singh, ASI, under Sections 302/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as `IPC’), and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (hereinafter called `RI’) for five months. Both were also convicted under Section 120-B IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months. They were further convicted under Sections 364/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for five months. They were also convicted under Sections 201/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months.

Prithipal Singh, Satnam Singh, Surinderpal Singh and Jasbir Singh, appellants, were convicted under Section 120-B IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for two months. These four accused/appellants were also convicted under Sections 364/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo for seven years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for five months.

The High Court while dismissing the Criminal Appeals filed by appellants, allowed the Criminal Revision Petition No. 323 of 2006 filed by Smt. Paramjit Kaur (PW.2), wife of the deceased, vide order dated 16.10.2007 and enhanced the sentence of the four appellants from seven years RI to imprisonment for life under Section 364 IPC.

2. Facts:

A. Shri Jaswant Singh Khalra, a human right activist, having allegiance to Shiromani Akali Dal, was alleged to have been abducted from his residential house No. 8, Kabir Park, Amritsar, on 6.9.1995 at 1.00 O’Clock. Shri Rajiv Singh (PW.15) was present in the house of Shri Khalra at the time of abduction, Kirpal Singh Randhawa (PW.7) had seen appellants, namely, Jaspal Singh, DSP, Surinderpal Singh, Jasbir Singh and Satnam Singh alongwith other accused persons rushing through Kabir Park with the deceased Jaswant Singh Khalra inside a Maruti van.

B. Smt. Paramjit Kaur (PW.2) wife of the deceased, came to her house from the University, where she was working, on being informed by Rajiv Singh (PW.15). She made a search for her husband but in vain. She made a complaint on the same day at 4.00 PM making a statement to SI Baldev Singh at Kabir Park that her husband had been kidnapped at 1.00 O’Clock by some persons in police uniform in Maruti van of white colour bearing No. DNB-5969. On the basis of the said statement, an FIR No. 72 (Ex.PA) was registered on 7.9.1995 at P.S. Islamabad, District Amritsar, at 9.30 AM under Section 365 IPC. However, no progress in investigation could be made and whereabouts of Jaswant Singh Khalra could not be known.

C. Smt. Paramjit Kaur (PW.2), wife of the deceased, filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 497 of 1995 before this Court, wherein this Court vide order dated 5.11.1995 transferred the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred as `CBI’). The CBI registered R.C.No. 14/S/95/SC

















































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top