BALWANT SINGH AND ANR versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1995] 2 S.C.R. 411 · Decided: 01-03-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND, FAIZAN UDDIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

-
I 
; 
) 
BALWANT SINGH AND ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
MARCH 1, 1995 
[DR. AS. ANAND AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.) 
Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 124A and 153A-Sedition--Raising 
slogans casually couple of times by some persons-No reaction from 
public-Offence u/s 124A or 153A not made out. 
The appellants who are government servants were arrested for rais-
ing slogans like 'Khalistan Zindabad', 'Raj Karega Khalsa', and Hinduan 
Nun Punjab wi Chon Kadh Ke Chhadange Hun Manka Aya Hai Raj 
Kayam Karan Da' on the day Smt. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister 
A 
B 
c 
of India was assassinated. Both appellants raised the slogans together. The D 
first slogan was raised five or six times, the second two or four times and 
the third only once or twice. They did not raise any slogans after their 
arrest. The appellants were tried for offences u/s 124A and 153A of the 
· Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined police constables who con-
ceded that the people in general did not gather on hearing the slogans. 
The appellants submitted that the prosecution had not been able to 
establish the case against them beyond a reasonable doubt. It was argued 
that though the occurrence had taken place in a busy place, no independent 
person had been associated at the time of arresL Relying on the evidence 
E 
.... ..;, 
of the Munshi of the District jail the appellants contended that the entire F 
case again~ ; them was a made up affair. 
The respondents submitted that keeping in view the tension which 
had been generated on the date of the assassination of the former Prime 
Minister SmL Indira Gandhi, the raising of the slogans by the appellants 
attracted the p~ovisions of Section 124A IPC and 153A of the IPC. Also, G 
as no animosity or reason to falsely implicate the appellants was attributed 
to PWs 2 and 3, their evidence was re~iable even though no independent 
witness had been associated. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
411 
H 
412 
_- SUPREMECOURTREPORTS 
J1995) 2 S.C.R. 
A 
.. HELD : 1.1 The fact and circumstances of this case unmistakably 
show that there was rm disturbance or semblance of disturbance of law 
and order or of public order or peace and tranquility in the area from 
where the appellant were apprehended while raising slogans. The intention 
to cause disorder or incite people to violence is the sine qua non of the 
B offence under Section 153A IPC and the prosecution has to prove the 
existence of mens rea in order to succeed. In this case, the prosecution has 
not been able to establish any mens rea on the part of the appellants, as 
envisaged by the provisions of Section 153A IPC. (417-G-H, 418-A] 
1.2 Raising of some slogans only a couple of times by two lonesome 
C appellants, which did not evoke any response or reaction from the public 
cannot attract the provisions of S.124A or S.153A IPC. Some more overt 
act was required. The police officials exhibited lack of maturity and 
sensitivity in arresting the appellants. The arrest could have created a law 
aDfl order situation, keeping in view the tense situation prevailing on the 
date of the assassination. Raising of some lonesome slogans, a couple of 
D times by two individuals, without anything more, did not constitute any 
threat to the Government of India nor could the same give rise to feelings 
of enmity or hatred among different communities or religious or other 
groups. Conviction and sentence for the offences under Section 124A and 
153A IPC, cannot be sustained. (419-C-F] 
E 
F 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
266of1985. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.3.85 of the Special Court 
Chandigarh in Crl. C. No. 6/2 of 14.1.1985. 
V.M. Tarkunde, Krishan K. Gogna and AK. Panda for the Appel-
lants. 
R.S. Suri and Rohit Aggarwal for the Respondents. 
: G 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Balwant Singh, who was working as an Assistant in the office of 
D.P.I. Punjab in Chandigarh and Bhupinder Singh serving as a Senior 
Oerk in the Punjab School Education Board, Chandigarh, at the relevant 
time, were on 31st October, 1984 at about 5.45 p.m. arrested from near 
ff Neelam Cinema, Chandigarh and after completion of the investigation, 
-t-
' 
I 
~ 
\ 
B. SINGH v. STAIBOFPB. 
413 
tried for offences under section 124-A and 153-A IPC. They were each A 
sentenced to suffer one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500 
on each of the two counts. In default of payment of fine, they had to 
undergo three months f

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