2008 Supreme(P&H) 288
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
J.S.Khehar and Sham Sunder JJ.
Daljit Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Decided On : FEBRUARY 1, 2008
Headnote:
Criminal Law - Murder - Indian Penal Code, Section 302, Section 34 - The judgment discusses the conviction of the accused for the murder of Karaj Singh based on circumstantial evidence, including last seen evidence, extra judicial confession, motive, and recovery of incriminating items. The court emphasizes the need for caution in cases based on circumstantial evidence and cites legal principles from Hanumant Givind Nargundkar v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of Madhya Pradesh to establish the standard for conviction based on circumstantial evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Karaj Singh, a milk vendor, was found murdered with a sharp-edged weapon. The prosecution presented circumstantial evidence, including last seen evidence, extra judicial confession, motive, and recovery of incriminating items to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of the murder of Karaj Singh based on the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution. The court emphasized the need for caution in cases based on circumstantial evidence and cited legal principles to establish the standard for conviction based on circumstantial evidence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the accused, including the credibility of last seen evidence, extra judicial confession, motive, and recovery of incriminating items.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for caution in cases based on circumstantial evidence and cited legal principles from Hanumant Givind Nargundkar v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of Madhya Pradesh to establish the standard for conviction based on circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction of the accused for the murder of Karaj Singh was upheld based on the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution.
J.S.Khehar, J.
1. The instant appeal has been filed by Daljit Singh and Lakhbir Singh against the judgement rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, in Sessions case No. 120 of 1997, decided on 18.2.1998, wherein the appellants have been held guilty of the murder of Karaj Singh, as also, against the order dated 18.2,1998 by which both the appellants #19; Daljit Singh and Lakhbir Singh have been sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-each. In default of payment of fine, they have been ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.
2. The prosecution version of the incident is, that deceased #19; Karaj Singh was a milk vendor. He used to go daily from his residence at about 6 P.M. in the evening to village Kalas to collect milk from different houses and he used to return to his residence at about 9/10 P.M. after having collected the milk. Likewise, on 20.7.1996, he was alleged to have left his residence at about 6 P.M. for the purpose of collecting milk, but he did not return home till late in the night. His two sons, Tarsem Singh PW 1 and Jaspal Singh PW 11, are stated to have gone out to search for their father on foot. While they were proceeding from their residence to Village Kalas on a kacha passage at about midnight, they found the body of their father Karaj Singh alongside the fields of Bhagwan Singh. Their father Karaj Singh had been murdered with a sharp edged weapon. He had been beheaded. His cycle and two milk drums were also found lying on the ground nearby. Tarsem Singh PW 1 left his brother Jaspal Singh PW 11 with the body of deceased -Karaj Singh and proceeded towards Village Kalas which is at a distance of about 3 furlongs from the place of occurrence. On reaching Village Kalas, he informed Amarjit Singh and Jagir Singh about the incident. Both Amarjit Singh and Jagir Singh accompanied Tarsem Singh PW 1 to the place of occurrence. After taking Sarpanch Sajjan Singh from his residence, they proceeded towards Police Station, Khem Karan to lodge their report. On their way, they met SI Anokh Singh PW 9, who recorded the statement of Tarsem Singh PW 1 at 5.50 AM. After having recorded his statement, SI Anokh Singh accompanied the complainant and the others with him, to the place of occurrence. A First Information Report bearing No. 36 was registered at Police Station, Khem Karan in police district Taran Tarn, on the intervening night of 20/21.7.1996 at 5.50 A.M. SI Anokh Singh PW 9 prepared the inquest report of the dead body of Karaj Singh on 21.7.1996 itself. The aforesaid report reveals, that two moulds of the footprints at the site of the incident were also taken. SI Anokh Singh PW 9 then sent the dead body of Karaj Singh for postmortem examination. The postmortem examination of the dead body of Karaj Singh was conducted by Dr. Sham Lal Gupta PW 5 on 21.7.1996 at 11.30 A.M. In the opinion of Dr. Sham Lal Gupta PW 5, the head neck had been separated from the trunk of the body, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. He also opined, that the aforesaid injury was ante-mortem in nature and had been caused by a sharp edged weapon.
3. On the completion of investigation, a challan was presented in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patti, on 14.9.1996. The Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patti committed the case to the court of Session for trial. On 28.11.96, the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, framed charges against accused Daljit Singh and Lakhbir Singh for having committed the offence of murder of Karaj Singh, punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the accused were confronted with charge to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. During the trial of the case, the prosecution examined Tarsem Singh son of deceased -Karaj Singh as PW 1. In his deposition, Tarsem Singh PW 1 re-affirmed the factual position expressed by him wh