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

2008 Supreme(P&H) 767

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Sham Sunder, J.
Surjit Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Criminal Appeal No. 5460 of 1997,
Decided On : MARCH 26, 2008

The reliability of the victim's statement, corroboration by witnesses and medical evidence, and the distinction between offenses under sections 365 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code were central legal points established in the judgment.

Headnote:

Abduction - Indian Penal Code - 451, 365 - The judgment discusses the abduction of Karamjit Kaur by the accused, their attempt to force her into marriage, and the subsequent legal proceedings. The court considered the delay in lodging the FIR, the reliability of the victim's statement, and the evidence provided by witnesses and medical examination. It also addressed the issue of the accused's right to take law into their own hands and the distinction between offenses under sections 365 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

Fact of the Case:

The accused forcibly abducted Karamjit Kaur, attempted to force her into marriage, and kept her confined in different locations. The delay in lodging the FIR was explained as a result of consulting family members due to the sensitive nature of the matter.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the victim's statement to be reliable, corroborated by witnesses and medical evidence, and upheld the judgment of conviction and sentence by the trial court.

Issues: The issues included the delay in lodging the FIR, the reliability of the victim's statement, and the distinction between offenses under sections 365 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the reliability of the victim's statement, the corroboration provided by witnesses and medical evidence, and the distinction between offenses under sections 365 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence were upheld. The bail bonds of the appellants were cancelled, and necessary compliance steps were directed to be taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala.

Judgment

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 2-6-1997, rendered by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide which it convicted the accused/ appellants and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each and to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00 each, and in default of payment of the same, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for another period of one month u/s. 451 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 300.00 each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for a period of one month each u/s. 365 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The facts, in brief, are that Karamjit Kaur, P.W. 1 was married to Karnail Singh, P.W. 3, complainant on 20-10-1993, Gurmit Kaur other sister of Karamjit Kaur, was married to Surjit Singh, accused No. 1. Gulzar Singh, accused No. 6, is the brother of Surjit Singh, Surjit Singh wanted that Karamjit Kaur be married to Gulzar Singh. Father of Karamjit Kaur did not agree with this proposal, because Gulzar Singh had some mental problem. Hence against the wishes of Surjit Singh, the father of Karamjit Kaur married her on 20-10-1993 with Karnail Singh. On 22-12-1993 at about 12.00 noon, all the accused namely Surjit Singh, Jit Singh, Babli, Bahadur Singh, Darshan Singh and Gulzar Singh came to the house of Karnail Singh in Village Khanpur Gandian in a Matador. Karamjit Kaur, P.W. 1 and her mother-in-law Nand Kaur were present in the house. All the accused forcibly tried to lift Karamjit Kaur. They also gave beatings to Karamjit Kaur. Didar Singh and Mehar Singh, who reside near the house of Karnail Singh came there and tried to stop the accused from forcibly lifting Karamjit Kaur. Despite their intervention, the accused forcibly put Karamjit Kaur in the Matador and brought her to Patiala. She was kept in a house at Patiala for 3-4 hours. Then she was taken to Village Ramgarh Chhanna. She was kept in a house at Ramgarh Chhanna for 3-4 days. During this period, they had been compelling Karamjit Kaur, to marry Gulzar Singh. Gulzar Singh also wanted to have a sexual intercourse with Karamjit Kaur. After 3-4days, the accused ran away from the house, and Karamjit Kaur was left alone. Karamjit took a bus, from that Village, and came to the house of her father. Her father took her to Police Station, Sadar, Rajpura where her statement was recorded by the police.

3. At the time when Karamjit Kaur was forcibly taken away by the accused, Karnail Singh, her husband had gone to work in a factory. When he returned from the factory at about 4.00 p.m. her mother Nand Kaur informed him that the accused had forcibly taken away Karamjit Kaur. Then he consulted his father-in-law, because it was a family dispute. On 28-12-1993, he was going to lodge a report to the police. When at the bus stop of Village Ganda Kheri, ASI Salinder Singh, met him and recorded his statement Ex. PA. That statement was sent to the Police Station, on the basis whereof, FIR Ex. PA/1 was recorded. ASI Salinder Singh also visited the place of occurrence and prepared the rough site plan Ex. PC. On 29-12-1993, Karamjit Kaur was produced before him. He sent Karamjit Kaur for medical examination to A. P. Jain Hospital. Dr. Savita Dhawan conducted medicolegal examination of Karamjit Kaur on 29-12-1993, at 4.45 p.m. and found that there were small abrasions on her hands. There was also bruise of the size of IVi inch on left side of her thigh. There were multiple bruises, on anterior aspect of her right leg. All the injuries were simple in nature, caused within a probable duration 6f 4/5 days. After medical examination, the clothes of Karamjit Kaur were handed over to the police, which were taken into possesion, vide recovery memo Ex. PE. Scaled map of the place of occurrence was prepared by Sachde Na

















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
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