BAKHSHISH SINGH versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1958] 1 S.C.R. 409 · Decided: 17-09-1957 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUVNESHWAR PRASAD SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
BAKHSHJSH SINGH 
v. 
THE STATE OF PUNJAB 
(B. P. SINl{A, P. GOVINDA MENON and 
J. L: KAPUR JJ). 
409 
Criminal lair-Dying declaration-Scope of-Recording state-
ment in Urdu. while deceased spoke in Punjahi-Reliability-
Discretion of .the prosecutor in calling witnesses-Tndian 
Ei•idence 
Act, 1872 (/of 1872). s. 22 (I). 
The appellant was convicted for murder on the basis inter 
alia of the dying declaration of the deceased. The Sessions Court 
rejected it on the ground that though the deceased gave the 
narrative of events in Punjabi the statement was taken down in 
Urdu. 
Held, that in view of the fact that in the Punjab the language 
used in the subordinate courts and by the Police for recording 
statements has always been Urdu, the recording of dying 
declarations in Urdu cannot be a ground for saying that the 
statement does not correctly reproduce what was stated by the 
declarant. Accordingly, the dying declaration should not have 
been rejected. 
The dying declaration in the instant case was a long docu-
ment containing a narrative of a large number of incidents which 
happened before the actual assault, which was more in the nature 
of the First Information Report :-
Held, that the object of a dying declaration being to get from 
the person making the statement the cause of his death or the 
circumstances of the transaction which resulted in 
his death, 
persons who record such declaration should not include in that 
statement details which are not relevant under s. 32(1) of the 
Indian Evidence Act, 1872, unless .they are necessary to make 
the statement coherent or complete. 
It is desirable that rules should be framed for the 
guidance 
of persons recording dying declarations, and included in the Rules 
and Orders made by the High Court. 
Where a person who was stated in the dying declaration to 
have witnessed the occurrence was not examined by the 
prosecution at the trial on the ground that he had been won over 
and it was contended that this was a serious omission and an 
adverse inference should be drawn :-
Held, that there was no obligation on the part of 
the 
prosecution to examine this witness and that the court would not 
.interfe1'e with the discretion of the prosecutor. 
1957 
September 17; 
410 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1958] 
1957 
Abdul Mohammad v. Attorney General of Palestine, A.I.R. 1945 
Bokshish Singh 
P. C. 42, Stephen Senaratne v. The King, A. I. R. 1936 P. C. 298, 
v. 
and Habeeb Mohammed v. The State of lf.l'derabad, 1954 S.C.R. 
The State of Punjab 475, referred to. 
KapurJ. 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION: 
Criminal 
Appeal No. 205 of 1956. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and 
order dated the 30th ~ovember, 1955, of the Punjab 
High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 1955, 
arising out of the judgment and order dated the 15th 
February, 1955, of the Court of the Additional Sessions 
Judge at Amritsar in Sessions Case No. 64 of Trial 
No. 6 of 1955. 
R. L. Anand, and S. N. Anand, for the appellant. 
Kartar Singh Chawla, Assistant Advocate-General, for 
the State of Punjab and T. M. Sen, for the respondent. 
1957. September 17. The following Judgment of the 
Court was delivered by 
KAPUR J.-This is an appeal against the judgment 
and order of the Punjab High Court reversing an order 
of acquittal by 
the 
Additional Sessions 
Judge, 
Amritsar. 
The appellant Bakshish Singh and his 
brother Gurbakshi Singh were tried for an offence 
under ss. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code but were 
acquitted. Against this judgment the State took an 
appeal to the High Coart. As Gurbaksh Singh was 
s~.id to be absconding the appeal against the appellant 
alone was heard and decided by the High Court. 
On August 1, 1954, sometime between 7 and 8 p.m. 
Bachhinder Singh son of Bhagwan Singh of village 
Kairon was shot in the lane in front of their house and 
as a result of bullet injuries he died the next day in 
the hospital at Amritsar. 
He was 
at the time of 
shooting accompanied by his younger brother Narvel 
Singh, a boy of 13, and after getting injured Bachhinder 
Singh and his brother r~turned to the house. Bhagwan 
Singh 
states 
that 
he was 
informed of the 
identity of the assailants 
by 
Bachhinder Singh 
who was, at his own request, carried from the house to 
the hospital at Kairon but as the injuries were serious 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
411 
the doctor at Kairon rendered "first aid" and advised 
1957 
the father to take his son to V.J

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.