Back
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
D.P.SOOD,A.L.VAIDYA
JOGINDER SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF H.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 4 and 277 of 1992
Decided On : 03/25/1994
1. MAIN LEGAL POINT: In a criminal case, the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. A reasonable doubt is a state of mind when the Presiding Officer cannot say and feel with moral certainty of truth that the charge in a criminal case stood proved in a manner resulting in conviction. 2. FACTS: - The deceased, Dilavar Singh, was killed by four accused persons, Joginder Singh, Balwinder Singh, Jagtar Singh, and Bajinder Singh, in a dispute over land. - The prosecution relied on the testimony of three eyewitnesses, Satya Devi (the deceased's wife), Kewal Krishan, and Piara Singh, who witnessed the occurrence. - The accused persons were armed with weapons and attacked the deceased, inflicting fatal injuries. - The deceased was taken to the hospital but succumbed to his injuries. - The accused persons fled from the scene but were later arrested. 3. ISSUE: - Whether the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused persons beyond a reasonable doubt. 4. RATIO DECIDENDI: - The court held that the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused persons beyond a reasonable doubt. - The court relied on the testimony of the eyewitnesses, which was consistent and corroborated by other evidence. - The court also considered the fact that the accused persons had fled from the scene, which indicated their guilt. 5. FINAL DECISION: - The court convicted the accused persons of murder under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment. - The court also acquitted one of the accused persons, Bajinder Singh, who was found to have played a lesser role in the occurrence. 6. CATEGORY: Criminal 7. SUB-CATEGORY: Murder
A. L. Vaidya J. : The present appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1992 and the respon dent Bajinder Singh in Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 1992 were tried together in the same trial for the offences under Sections 302/34 IPC. Joginder Singh appellant is the father while appellants Jagtar Singh, Balwinder Singh in Criminal Ap peal No. 4 of 1992 and Bajinder Singh respon dent in Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 1992 are the sons of Joginder Singh. All of them were charged for committing the murder of deceased Dilavar Singh, the real brother of Joginder Singh. As both these appeals arise out of the same trial pertaining to the same occurrence, accordingly, they are being disposed of by the same judgment.
2. The prosecution case, as put up against the accused persons has been that father of Joginder Singh and that of Dilavar Singh deceased had four plots of land which he left for his four sons Joginder Singh, the deceased Dilavar Singh and two other brothers. Joginder Singh and Mohinder Singh two brothers were already alleged to have raised some construction on their plots while Dilavar Singh had a proposal to raise some con struction on his plot. Joginder Singh was having some dispute with Dilavar Singh about the con struction being raised by the deceased on his plot.
3. The occurrence took place on 17th August, 1990. In the morning of that fateful day Dilavar Singh had gone to leave his son at Shivalik School Nangal by his Maruti Van No. HIU 1671. Dilavar Singh as well as his brothers and the accused persons were the residents of village Raipur Sohra, Tehsil and District Una. This de ceased Dilavar Singh before going to Nangal to leave his son there in the school had informed his wife Satya Devi (PW 2) and Jai Kaur, his mother (PW 3) that Bajinder Singh accused had pro claimed that the accused persons intended to do away with Dilavar Singh and his son. These two ladies asked for the details from Dilavar Singh who informed that he would be informing those ladies the details of threats given to him by the accused persons after his return from Nangal.
4. It was about 7-20 in the morning when Dilavar Singh came back from Nangal in his Maruti Van after leaving his son there in the school. While he was coming in his vehicle all the four accused persons stopped his van at Chowk Raipur Sohra. At that time, according to the prosecution, accused Joginder Singh was armed with a Barchha (Ex.P2), Balwinder Singh was carrying a Takua (Ex.P 1), Jagtar Singh was hav ing a Gandassi (Ex.P3) while Bajinder Singh was having a Danda (Ex.P4) with him. As the vehicle stopped, Joginder Singh gave a Barchha blow on the body of Dilavar Singh from the window of the drivers seat. At that time Dilavar Singh was driving the vehicle and, as such, was occupying the drivers seat. At the same time Jagtar Singh gave a Gandasi blow on the forehead of Dilaver Singh from the front side glass of the Maruti van. Prosecution case further has been that thereafter Dilavar Singh was pulled out of the van by Joginder Singh as a result of which Dilavar Singh fell down and Balwinder Singh gave a Takua blow on the abdomen of Dilavar Singh. Bajinder Singh, the fourth accused, also gave Danda blows to Dilavar Singh. These four accused were al leged to have given more blows to the deceased Dilavar Singh.
5. At the time of the aforesaid occurrence Kewal Krishan (PW 5), Piara Singh (PW 6) and Satya Devi (PW 2) were present near the spot who witnessed the said occurrence. This Kewal Krishan was running a shop at Chowk Raipur Sohra and he opened his shop at about 7-00 in the morning on the date of occurrence and was, as such, one of the witnesses who himself witnessed the entire occurrence from his shop which was situated near the place of occurrence. It has been the prosecution case that Piara Singh (PW 6) at the time of occurrence was in the shop of Mool Raj Barber which was situated near the place of occurrence and he also witnessed the occurrence. According to the further story o
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
