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) 3676

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
STATE OF PUNJAB – Appellant
Versus
JASWINDER SINGH – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-D-492-DBA-2004 (O&M)

Date of Reserve:13.02.2026 Date of Decision: 16.02.2026 Uploaded on:- 19.02.2026 State of Punjab …Appellant Vs.

Jaswinder Singh …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S Grewal Present: Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill, Sr.DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sidhant Vermani, Advocate for the respondent (through VC).

***

N.S.Shekhawat J.

1. By way of the instant appeal, the State of Punjab has challenged the legality of the impugned judgment dated 20.01.2003 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby, the respondent was ordered to be acquitted of the charge under Section 302 of IPC.

2. The FIR Ex.PG/3 in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Kashmir Singh Lamberdar son of Sohan Singh and the same has been reproduced below:-

“It is stated that I am the resident of the abovementioned address. My three sons and two daughters had been born from the wedlock of my wife Pritam Kaur. I have one elder daughter Piar Kaur and two younger sons Piara Singh and Sarabjit Singh. Amongst them is my daughter Narinder Kaur, whom I had got married to Jaswinder Singh @ Jassa son of Gurnam Singh, Jat, r/o Vallah in the year 1983 and they have one son Sonu aged 15 years and a daughter Raman, aged 13 years. For the last about 4/5 years, there had been quarrel between my daughter and son-in-law due to consumption of liquor. My daughter Narinder Kaur used to stop him from consuming liquor. About this, she tried to make him understand, but he did not desist. On 27.6.2000, Jaswant Singh, Sarpanch r/o Kad, Police Station City Tarn Taran, who was mediator of my daughter Piar Kaur w/o late Kabul Singh r/o Dhol Chak, P.S. Ghuman,came to my village and told me that your daughter has been burnt on 25.6.2000 at about 4 p.m. and has been admitted to Talwandi Hospital near Bus Stand, Amritsar. My brother Baldev Singh, my son Kewal Singh, myself and my nephew Satnam Singh came to Talwandi Hospital to know about the health of my daughter where I enquired from my daughter who told me that I already knew about the quarrels between her and her husband, who had sprinkled kerosene oil on her and set her on fire to kill her. Jaswant Singh mediator of my daughter, alongwith my daughter Piar Kaur told us that her husband himself is getting her treated and perhaps she may be saved. So you should not take any action against her husband and in case, she died you may do anything against her husband.Therefore, due to that reason we did not inform the police about the occurrence and we went on visiting our daughter to know about her so that our daughter may be saved. On 07.07.2000 my daughter expired. I saw the dead body of my daughter in the house of my son-in-law and I was coming to inform you after leaving my brother Baldev Singh for the safety of dead body of my daughter and I met you. I am the complainant. Action may be taken against him. My son-in-law Jaswinder Singh has burnt my daughter with the intention to kill her. Statement heard and the same is correct”.

3. After the registration of the FIR, the inquest proceedings were

conducted and the post mortem examination on the dead body of Narinder Kaur was conducted. Even, the statements of various witnesses were recorded and the accused was arrested on 20.07.2000. The rough site plan was also prepared.

4. After completion of investigation, the challan was presented before the Court of Illaqua Magistrate. Since, the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed and vide order dated 28.11.2000, the Trial Court ordered the framing of charge under Section 302 IPC against the respondent in the present case. The respondent/accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried by the Trial Court.

5. To prove the charge, the prosecution placed reliance on the testimonies of eight prosecution witnesses.

6. The prosecution examined PW-1 Dr. Ashok Chanana, Assistant Professor, Department of Forens

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