Page 1

JUDGMENT

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.8

70 of 2007

State of Rajasthan

…..Appellant

Versus

Darshan Singh @ Darshan Lal

….. Respondents

JUDGMENT

Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.

l.

This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the

judgment and order dated 29.5.2006 in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 96

of 2003 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at

Jodhpur setting aside the judgment and order dated 15.1.2003 passed

by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Hanumangarh,

convicting the respondent herein of the offences punishable under

Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as

`IPC’) and imposing the punishment to suffer rigorous imprisonment

Page 2

JUDGMENT

for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further undergo

one month simple imprisonment.

2.

Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that:

A.

Buta Singh (PW.15) lodged an oral report on 4.5.2001 at

1.00 a.m. at P.S. Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh stating that

on intervening night between 3/4.5.2001 at about 12.15 a.m.,

Jaswant Singh (PW.1) received a telephone call from Dr. Amarjeet

Singh Chawla (PW.4) to the effect that Jaswant Singh’s daughter

was perturbed and, therefore, he must immediately reach the house

of his son-in-law Kaku Singh. Buta Singh (PW.15), informant, also

proceeded towards the house of Kaku Singh deceased, alongwith his

son Gurmail Singh. They met Jaswant Singh (PW.1) and Geeta

(PW.16), his daughter in the lane. The main door of the house was

closed but the window of the door was open. They went inside

through the window and found two cots lying on some distance

where fresh blood was lying covered with sand. They also found the

dead body of Kaku Singh in the pool of blood covered by a quilt in

the room.

B.

On being asked, Geeta (PW.16) (deaf and dumb), wife of

Kaku Singh deceased communicated by gestures that Darshan Singh,

respondent-accused, had stayed with them in the night. He had

2

Page 3

JUDGMENT

given a pill with water to Kaku Singh and thus he became

unconscious. Two more persons, accomplice of Darshan Singh

came from outside and all the three persons inflicted injuries on

Kaku Singh with sharp edged weapons. Geeta (PW.16) got scared

and ran outside. The motive for committing the offence had been

that one Chhindri Bhatni was having illicit relationship with Kaku

Singh, deceased, and about 8-10 months prior to the date of incident

Kaku Singh caused burn injuries to Geeta (PW.16) at the instigation

of Chhindri Bhatni. However, because of the intervention of the

community people, Kaku Singh, deceased, severed his relationship

with Chhindri Bhatni, who became annoyed and had sent her brother

Darshan Singh alongwith other persons who killed Kaku Singh.

C.

On the basis of the said report FIR No. 262 of 2001 was

registered under Sections 449, 302, 201 and 120B IPC against the

respondent at P.S Hanumangarh and investigation ensued. The

respondent was arrested and during interrogation, he made a

voluntary disclosure statement on the basis of which the I.O. got

recovered a blood stained Kulhari and clothes the respondent was

wearing at the time of commission of offence.

D.

After completion of the investigation, the police filed

chargesheet against the respondent under Sections 302 and 201 IPC

3

Page 4

JUDGMENT

and the trial commenced. During the course of trial, the prosecution

examined as many as 23 witnesses and tendered several documents

in evidence. However, Geeta (PW.16) was the sole eye-witness of

the occurrence, being deaf and dumb, her statement was recorded in

sign language with the help of her father Jaswant Singh (PW.1) as an

interpreter. After completion of all the formalities and conclusion of

the trial, the trial court placed reliance upon the evidence