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

1971 Supreme(P&H) 70

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Ranjit Singh Sarkaria and C.G.Suri JJ.
Mohinder Singh Nand Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Decided On : APRIL 19, 1971

The admissibility of a complaint made by a deceased person expressing apprehension of death at the hands of the accused, and its relevance to the circumstances of the transaction resulting in the death, as per Evidence Act, Section 32(1) and Section 8.

Headnote:

Criminal Law - Murder - Evidence Act, Section 32(1), Section 8 - A complaint in writing made to the police by a person who dies some time thereafter, expressing apprehension of death at the hands of a certain person is admissible in evidence under Sections 32(1) and 8 of the Evidence Act when the person whose conduct is the source of the apprehension is charged with the offence of murder of the person making the complaint. The statement is admissible as relating to 'the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death' within Sec.32(1). It cannot be held in such cases that there was no proximate connection between the death of the complainant and the complaint from the fact that the complaint was made nearly two months before the death. In any event, the fact of the making of the complaint is admissible as explanatory of the conduct of the complainant under Sec.8.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a murder where the deceased had sustained three gunshot injuries, and the appellant, a military personnel, was accused of the crime. The deceased had made a complaint to the police expressing apprehension of death at the hands of the appellant before his demise.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellant guilty based on the dying declaration of the deceased, the admissibility of the complaint made by the deceased, the absence of the appellant from duty without proper leave, and the appellant's false alibi and evasion of arrest for over two months.

Issues: The issues revolved around the admissibility of the deceased's complaint, the credibility of the witnesses, the appellant's absence from duty, and the establishment of a motive for the crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The admissibility of the deceased's complaint and its relevance to the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, the significance of the appellant's conduct before and after the crime, and the inference drawn from the failure of the appellant's alibi formed the basis of the court's decision.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's conviction and sentence were maintained.

Judgment

C. G. Suri, J.

1. Mohinder Singh aged 25 years, a military sepoy, resident of village Chalopur h_as filed this appeal against his conviction and life sentence Under Sec.302, Indian Penal Code, for the murder of Thakur Singh of his village on the night intervening 10th and 11th of May, 1969.

2. Thakur Singh deceased had retired as a major in the Indian Army and had settled down in the village. The plan. Exhibit D. W.7/1, prepared at the appellants instance shows that the deceased owned two houses shown by red colour in this plan. One of these houses has extensive lawns and a garrage attached. The deceased was. however, living separately from the rest of. the family in a smaller house which is at a distance of about a furlong from his main family house. , His brother Sadhu Singh P. W, lives on the back of that smaller house of the deceased.

3. In August, 1965. Major Thakur Singh (deceased) had lodged a report with the police Under Sections 307.326 and 452, Indian Penal Code, against three brothers of the appellant, including Jogin-der Singh. The police had not filed any challan in that case but the deceased had filed a civil suit for recovery of Rupees 10,000.00 as damages for the injuries sustained by him. The copy of the plaint dated 22-8-1966 is Exhibit P. S. This civil suit was still pending on the. date of the occurrence (10/11-5-1969) in the present case. Four or five days before this occurrence, the deceased had gone to the District Headquarters at Hoshiarpur to get a complaint, Exhibit P. H. , dated 45-1969 drafted from a petition-writer. . This complaint was addressed to the Superintendent of Police. " It had been alleged therein that the "deceased had been making reports at frequent intervals against the appellant, his brothers and some others from time to time and that the police which was colluding with these persons had not been taking any action on these complaints and that the deceased apprehended great danger to his life. Amongst other things, it had been alleged that during the preceding night, a party of hoodlums under the leadership of Mohinder Singh appellant and his brother Joginder Singh had come armed with fire-arms outside the complainants house and had threatened and challenged him and that he had saved his life by staying indoors and keeping the doors closed-In spite of his cries for help, nobody had come to his rescue as all the neighbours were afraid of these desperate characters. It is mentioned that Mohinder Singh appellant was armed with a pistol at the time and that his brother Joginder Singh was carrying a " revolver. These two brothers were said to have been ac companied by three or four others similarly armed with dangerous weapons or fire-arms. The relevancy of this complaint, Exhibit PH, has been objected to by Shri Kaushal, the learned Counsel for the appellant, and the objection would be dealt with and discussed further on in this judgment.

4. On the night of occurrence, the deceased had gone to sleep inside a room of his smaller house. He had put bed near a window which had been kept open apparently because of the hot summer season. The window frame was fitted with iron bars so that nobody could have access or agress through the window.

5. Sadhu Singh P. W. was sleeping in the courtyard of his house adjoining that of the smaller house of the deceased. At about midnight, he got up to urinate when he heard the report of gun-fire coming from the side of deceaseds house. He came up the roof of the house and raised an alarm as he had heard the deceased crying mar Gai, (I am dead, I am de,ad ). Mewa Singh and Kewal Singh P. Ws. who are the sons of the deceased happened to be returning at that time after watering their fields. They had also heard the report of-gunfire and the alarm "raised by their uncle Sadhu Singh P- W. They had also gone towards the smaller house of the deceased and with the light of a torch. Exhibit P.1, that they were carrying at the time, they saw Mohinder Singh adp








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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