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

2004 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 72

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
N.S.Shekhawat, Sukhvinder Kaur, JJ
Rajinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
CRA-D-264-DB-2004|CRA-D-616-DBA-2004



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.S Mamli, Rajinder Kumar Banku, Rajiv Sidhu
For the Respondents: P.K.S Phoolka

An appellate court will only interfere with an order of acquittal if the lower court's approach is found to be perverse, legally unsustainable, or manifestly erroneous; mere possibility of a different view does not justify overturning an acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302/34 - Murder - Conviction based on eyewitness testimony - Whether the Trial Court's acquittal of co-accused was perverse.

(B) Appeals against acquittal - Scope of appellate interference - Appellate court should not substitute its view for that of the trial court unless the trial court's approach is perverse, illegal, or untenable.

Facts of the case:
The deceased was attacked at night by multiple individuals, including the appellant, a family member, and an associate. The attack resulted in the death of the deceased due to injuries. The complainant, son of the deceased, identified the attackers. While the appellant was convicted and sentenced, the trial court acquitted two other accused citing, among other factors, lack of motive and long-standing relations.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction of the appellant based on consistent eyewitness testimonies. Regarding the state's appeal against the acquittal of the other two accused, the court observed that the trial court's assessment was plausible and not perverse, therefore refusing to interfere with the acquittal.

Issues: Whether the conviction of the appellant was justified and whether the acquittal of the co-accused by the trial court warranted appellate interference.

Ratio Decidendi: Conviction is sustainable where eyewitness testimony is consistent and corroborated. An appellate court will not disturb an acquittal unless the lower court’s findings are manifestly erroneous or legally unsustainable.

Result: Appellant's appeal dismissed; State's appeal against acquittal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural background and overview of criminal charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. summary of prosecution evidence and witness testimony. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)

***

N.S.Shekhawat J.

1. By way of common judgment, this Court shall dispose of two appeals i.e. CRA-D-264-DB-2004 titled as “Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Haryana” and CRA-D-616-DBA-2004 titled as “State of Haryana Vs. Ran Singh and Anr.”

2. Since, both the appeals involve common questions of facts and law and arise out of the same FIR, both the appeals are being disposed of, simultaneously.

3. Rajinder Singh, appellant/accused in criminal appeal No. CRA-D-264-DB-2004 has challenged the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.01.2004, passed by the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Jhajjar, whereby, he was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of IPC and was senteced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine, he would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months, whereas, in criminal appeal No.CRA-D-616-DBA-2004, the State of Haryana has challanged the acquittal of respondents No.1 & 2/accused by the same Court.

4. The FIR Ex.PD/2 in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement Ex.PD made by Ranbir Singh son of Shish Ram, resident of Village Dhakla and the statement Ex.PD is reproduced below:-

“Statement of Ranbir Singh s/o Shish Ram Jat r/o Dhakla aged 40 years and stated that I am the resident of above address and do agricultural work. We are two brother. Elder brother of mine is Ram Singh, who is residing separately for the last 20-21 years. My mother has already expired. My father was alive. My father's Sister(Buwa) Bhagwani had 16 Killas of land in her name. Who had quathed her land in half share i. e 8 killas each in the name of two brother but my father had 16 killas of land in his name. Whole of that land has been given to me. No share was left in this land for my brother Ran Singh. My father had suffered a decree of 16 killas of land in favour of my three sons. My brother Ran Singh and his family member had grudge for this. They used to threat him time and again that they would not let him deprive them from their right in ancestral land. Today previous night my father went to sleep in the garrage near the tractor as usual. I, my wife Ram Bateri and my daughter Krishna after having our meals slept at about 10.P.M.(night) on the roof. At about 11.30 P.M. we heard the noise of 'Bachao.-Bachao' from the garrage. I, my wife and my daughter came in the stair and saw that Krishna w/o my brother was catching hold my father and Rajender son of Chander Jat r/o chara brother-in-law of Ran singh was having a pharsa in his hand. Satbir son of my brother Ran Singh was having a pistol in his hand. They were giving injuries to my father. They were exclaiming that they are teaching lesson for suffering a decree of ancestral land in favour of one side. We gave a call that we are coming and raised alarm of BachaoBachao. Then they ran away with their respective weapons. Thereafter, Deep Chand s/o Daya Nand and Ranbir S/o Teka, Jat of the same village also reached at the spot. My father expired at the spot. Because of being fears stricken and raining at the night I could not come to make a report. Now I was going to police station to make a report that you have met me. Ranbir and Deep Chand are left at the spot with the dead body. I have got recorded my statement to you. Heard and correct. Legal action may be taken.”

5. After the registration of the FIR Ex.PD/2, Sumer Singh, S.I along with other police officials went to the spot and inspected the site. He prepared the inquest report Ex.PN, which was identified by Ranbir Singh and Deep Chand and also sent the dead body to Civil Hospital, Jhajjar for post mortem examination. The blood stained earth was picked from the spot and was taken into possession vide

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