Darshan Singh vs State of Punjab - 2010 Supreme(Raj) 69

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2010 Supreme(Raj) 69

[Citation : 2010(1) RLW 935 (SC)]
(Supreme Court)
Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (Bhandari, J.)
HON'BLE DALVEER BHANDARI, J.
HON'BLE ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.
Darshan Singh
Versus
State of Punjab & Anr.
Criminal Appeal No. 1057 of 2002, decided on 15.01.2010

Headnote:Penal Code, Secs. 96 to 106 — Right to private defence — Close and intimate family members — Dispute over partition of land — Deceased gave a gandasa blow hitting appellant father on the head as a result of which he fell down — Deceased then advanced towards appellant holding gandasa — Appellant felt that his father has been killed and he apprehended that he too would be killed then he pulled the trigger of his gun in self defence — Deceased died of gun shot injury — Trial Court acquitted — High Curt reversed the judgement only on the ground that the version given by complainant is more truthful — Held — In order to make out the case of right to private defence, the relevant factors to be considered are: the injury received by accused, imminence of threat to his safety, injury caused by accused and the circumstances whether the accused had time to have recourse to public authorities — There is presumption of innocence which is further fortified with acquittal of accused by trial Court — Appellate Court would not be justified in reversing the judgments of acquittal unless it comes to a clear conclusion that the judgment of trial Court is utterly perverse, and on the basis of evidence on record, no other view is plausible or possible than the one taken by appellate Court — The role attributed to the appellant is fully covered by his right of private defence . (Paras 56, 58, 61 to 63)
       Appeal allowed.
        n.M lafgrk] /kkjk 96 ls 106 & futh izfrj{kk dk vf/kdkj & utnhdh ,oa ?kfu"B ikfjokfjd lnL;& Hkwfe foHkktu ij fookn & e`rd us vihykFkhZ ds firk ds flj ij xaMklk ls okj fd;k ftlds QyLo:i og fxj iM+k & e`rd fQj xaMklk ysdj vihykFkhZ dh rjQ >iVk & vihykFkhZ us ns[kk fd mlds firk dh gR;k dh tk pqdh gS vkSj mls vkkadk gqbZ fd vc mldh Hkh gR;k dj nh tk;sxh rc mlus viuh futh izfrj{kk esa cUnwd dk ?kksM+k nck fn;k & e`rd dh cUnwd dh xksyh yxus ls e`R;q gks xbZ & fopkj.k U;k;ky; us nks"keqDr fd;k & mPp U;k;ky; us dsoy bl vk/kkj ij fu.kZ; myV fn;k fd ifjoknh }kjk fn;k x;k fooj.k T;knk lR; gS & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & futh izfrj{kk dk ekeyk lkfcr djus ds fy, ftu lqlaxr rF;ksa ij fopkj djuk gksrk gS] os gS % vfHk;qDr dks igqaph pksV] mldh lqj{kk gsrq /kedh dh lfUudVrk] vfHk;qDr }kjk dkfjr dh xbZ {kfr vkSj os ifjfLFkfr;kWa fd D;k yksd izkf/kdkjh dk vkJ; ysus ds fy, vfHk;qDr ds ikl le; Fkk & funksZ"k gksus dh mi/kkj.kk ekStwn jgrh gS tks fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk vfHk;qDr dh nks"k eqfDr ls vkxs vkSj n`<+ gksrh gS & vihyh; U;k;ky; nks"keqfDr ds fu.kZ; dks myVus esa rc rd U;k;ksfpr ugha gksxk tc rd fd og bl Li"V fu"d"kZ ij ugha igqap tkrk fd fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ; iw.kZ :i ls vuqfpr gS vkSj vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lk{; ds vk/kkj ij vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk viuk;s x;s n`f"Vdks.k ds vykok vU; dksbZ n`f"Vdks.k Lohdk;Z ;k lEHko ugha gS & vihykFkhZ dh Hkwfedk futh izfrj{kk ds mlds vf/kdkj iw.kZ :is.k vko`r gksrh gS& vikLr fd;kA ¼in la[;k 56] 58] 61 ls 63½
       vihy Lohdkj dhA

Hon'ble BHANDARI, J.— This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No.446-(Division Bench) of 1994 dated 6.8.2002.

2. Both Darshan Singh and Bakhtawar Singh were acquitted by the Sessions Court, Ludhiana. The said judgment of acquittal was set aside by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.

3. Darshan Singh and Bakhtawar Singh filed appeal against the said judgment before this court. During the pendency of this appeal, Bakhtawar Singh died and consequently the appeal filed by him abated.

4. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated as under:-

The dispute is between very close and intimate family members. Deceased Gurcharan Singh was the brother of Bakhtawar Singh and uncle of Darshan Singh. He was the father of Gurdish Singh, PW7, the informant. The agriculture fields of both brothers, Gurcharan Singh and Bakhtawar Singh were situated adjoining to each other. According to the prosecution, on 15.7.1991 at about 8 a.m. Gurdish Singh, PW7 and his father, Gurcharan Singh were irrigating their aforesaid fields and were also mending its ridges and at that time Gurdev Singh, PW8 and Ajit Singh were also present there. In the meantime, Darshan Singh and Bakhtawar Singh came there from the side of their fields raising lalkaras and abused the complainant party. Darshan Singh, accused was armed with D.B.B.L. gun and his father Bakhtawar Singh was carrying a Gandasa and they were saying that they would teach a lesson to the complainant party for cutting the ridges.

5. According to the further story of the prosecution, Bakhtawar Singh gave a Gandasa blow causing injuries on the chest of Gurcharan Singh. Gurcharan Singh was also having a Gandasa with him and in order to save himself he also caused injury on the head of Bakhtawar Singh. Thereafter, Darshan Singh fired two shots from his licensed gun which hit Gurcharan Singh in the chest and some of the pellets hit Gurdish Singh PW7 on his left upper arm and Gurdev Singh, PW8 on his left thigh. Gurcharan Singh fell down and died at the spot. Gurdish Singh and others retraced their steps in order to save themselves. Both the accused in order to save themselves ran towards their respective houses. Gurdish Singh, PW7 left the dead body of Gurcharan Singh and proceeded to the police station to lodge a report. Gurdev Singh PW8 also accompanied him. They met Om Prakash, ASI at about 9 a.m. at Barnala crossing where Gurdish Singh PW7 gave his statement. It was then read over and explained to him who signed the same admitting the contents thereof to be correct. Om Prakash, ASI made his endorsement (Ex. N/1) and forwarded the statement to the police station, Rajkot and on the basis of which the case was registered against both the accused.

6. Om Prakash, ASI accompanied Gurdish Singh and Gurdev Singh to the place of occurrence. He prepared inquest report in respect of the dead body of Gurcharan Singh and then sent the dead body for post-mortem examination through Constable Milkha Singh and Head Constable Pargat Singh. Om Prakash, ASI lifted blood stained earth from the place where dead body of Gurcharan Singh was lying and took the same into possession after preparing the recovery memo. One gandasa and an empty cartridge of 12 bore were found lying near the dead body. The gandasa and the empty cartridge were also taken into possession. The Investigating Officer prepared visual site plan of the place of occurrence with marginal notes. Gurdish Singh and Gurdev Singh’s injury statements were also prepared and sent for medico legal examination.

7. Dr. Mukesh Gupta PW4 conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Gurcharan Singh on 15.7.1991 at 4.30 p.m. On the same day at 5.50 p.m. Dr. Gupta also conducted medico legal examination of Gurdev Singh and found one abrasion on his left thigh. Dr. Gupta found a superficial abrasion on Gurdish Singh on his elbow. Darshan Singh and Bakhtawar Singh were

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2010 Supreme(Raj) 69

[Citation : 2010(1) RLW 935 (SC)](Supreme Court)Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (Bhandari, J.)HON'BLE DALVEER BHANDARI, J.HON'BLE ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.Darshan SinghVersusState of Punjab & Anr.Criminal Appeal No. 1057 of 2002, decided on 15.01.2010

Cases Referred (13)

[Citation : 2010(1) RLW 935 (SC)]
(Supreme Court)
Darshan Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (Bhandari, J.)
HON'BLE DALVEER BHANDARI, J.
HON'BLE ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.
Darshan Singh
Versus
State of Punjab & Anr.
Criminal Appeal No. 1057 of 2002, decided on 15.01.2010