Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
N.S.SHEKHAWAT, SUKHVINDER KAUR
State of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Baljit Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N.S. Shekhawat, J.
1. By way of the present judgment, this Court shall dispose of two petitions i.e. CRA-D-475-DBA-2004 titled as ‘State of Punjab Vs. Baljit Singh and others’ and CRR-301-2004 titled as ‘Kashmira Singh Vs. Baljit Singh and others’, whereby State of Punjab and the complainant have challenged the impugned judgment dated 10.07.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Sangrur, acquitting the respondents of the charge under Sections 307, 452, 148, 149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
2. During the pendency of present appeal/petition, Balkar Singh, Sucha Singh and Nachhattar Singh (Respondents No.2, 3 and 6) had expired and the appeal/petition stands abated qua them.
3. The FIR (Ex.PH/2) in the present case was ordered to be registered on the basis of the statement made by Kashmira Singh, son of Phoola Singh, which reads as under:-
“Statement of Kashmira Singh son of Phoola Singh, Jat, resident of Kasba Bharal, aged about 80 years stated that I am resident of above said address and do agriculturist. I have four sons and eldest to all Gurdeep Singh, younger to him is Inderjit Singh, younger to him is Charanjit Singh, who is employed in the
The judgment emphasizes the importance of valid reasons for recording a judgment of acquittal and the parameters for entertaining appeals against orders of acquittal.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; if evidence allows for two reasonable conclusions, the one favoring the accused prevails.
Appellate court should not interfere with reasonable acquittal view despite alternate possibility, factoring FIR delay, night identification doubts, intoxication-enabled fall injuries, strained relat....
Material contradictions in witness statements and doubts about the prosecution's case can lead to acquittal if the prosecution fails to prove the case beyond a shadow of doubt.
Conviction affirmed – Offence of Murder - Prosecution evidence is trustworthy and prosecution has brought home the guilt of all the appellants by cogent, credible and trustworthy evidence.
The prosecution failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to delays, inconsistencies, lack of corroboration, and an unaddressed alibi, necessitating their acquittal.
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
