BALBIR SINGH AND ANR. versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1991] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 239 · Decided: 01-10-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

BALBIR SINGH AND ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
OCTOBER 1, 1991 
A 
[ S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN AND M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.] 
B 
Supreme Cowt (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 
1970-:-Section 2--Appeal-Ciarge under ss. 302134, /PC-Acquittal order 
. .A__ 
of trial Court-Conviction by High Court-Appreciation of evidence -Find-
C 
ings of High Court approved-Acquittal of companion accused-Whether 
affects the case of appella11ts. 
The appellants along with another were tried of the charge of mur· 
der under Section 302, I.P.C., read with Section 34, I.P.C. 
The prosecution case was that the appellants as well as the 
deceased's brother and his son were residing in a village. The· deceased 
came to the village on 6.7.1974. On 8.7.1974 at about 10.30 a.m., the 
D 
'f 
deceased's brother along with his wife and his son had gone to the mango 
grove across the choe to collect mangoes to give to the deceased. While 
they were returning home along the pathway, the deceased was seen com· E 
Ing in the opposite direction. The two appellants along with another ac· 
cosed, emerged on the scene and ·attacked the deceased. Appellant No. 1 
had a datar and Appellant No. 2 had a sua and their companion had a 
lathi. After inflicth1g injuries with the weapons the appellants escaped • 
.,; 
The deceased was removed to the house of one Darbara Singh for being F 
rushed to the hospital, but within a short time, he breathed his last. 
The· first information was lodged at the police station, around 7 .00 
P.M.; and the crime was registered and investigated and finally char· 
gesheeted. The post-mortem examination of the dead body revealed that 
the deceased had sustained lacerated injuries and three stab wounds and G 
that he died on account of the shock and hemorrhage as a result of the 
injudeii. 
The motive alleged was that th~re had been some grouse on account 
of ~he tr.msfer of agricultural land that belonged to the family, among the 
H 
239 
240 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1991) SUPP. 1 S. C.R. 
A children of the three brothers. 
_The Sessions Judge acquitted the accused of the charge. The High 
Court, in appeal preferTed by the State convicted the appellants and sen· 
tenced them to undergo imprisonment for life, against which, this appeal 
B under Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appel· 
late Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 was filed. 
The appellants contended that the view taken by the trial court was 
reasonable and there was no justification for upsetting the judgment even 
~ 
if a different view could have'been taken by the appellate court on reap-
C praisal or the evidence; that the High Court did not dislodge the various 
D 
reasons given by the trial court for discarding the evidence and that the · 
conclusion drawn by the High Court on the evidence on record was wrong. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD: 1. The prosecution evidence in the case is wholly reliable and 
it leads to irresistible conclusion that the appellants had intentionally 
caused the death of the deceased. The occurrence took place in broad day 
light at a place close to the residence of the witnesses. The appellants are 
the near relations of the deceased and the witnesses and It has happened 
E in ·the background of the family fued. The first information has been 
recorded within a few hours which in the circumstances of the case cannot 
be considered as unreasonably delayed. The version given In the F.I.R. Is 
I 
·F 
substantially the same as the one spoken to by the witnesses before the 
Court. (243 C·Di 
,. 
2. The eye witnesses have given consistent account of the role played 
by each of the appellants. There would not have been any difficulty for the 
witnesses to identify the appellants from a distance and across the reeds 
even If they could get only a glimpse of them In the course of their action, 
G and the medical evidence is not Inconsistent. [243 E·F] 
3. The fact that the acquittal of the companion of the appellants had 
y 
.not been Interfered with by the High Court cannot advance the case of the _ 
appellants. The High Court has given him the benefit of doubt on the 
materials that emerged In the evidence. That is no reason to discard· the 
H evidence of the witnesses so far as the appellants.are concerned when such 
BALBIRSINGH v. SfATE [ FATHIMA BEEVI, J.) 
241 
evidence does not suffer from any serious in(irmity. (243 H; 244 A] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
214of 1979. 
A 
,~ --... 
:

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