BALWANT SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1976] 2 S.C.R. 684 · Decided: 11-11-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.K. GOSWAMI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

68 4 
, 
A 
BALWANT SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
November 11, 1975 
B 
[P. K. GOSWAMI AND N. L. UNTWALIA, JJ.J 
' 
Code of Criminal Pr_ocedw·e (Act II) 19'73-Section 354(3 )_ Scope of. 
The appellant, 'B' aged 60 years, on 13-4-1974 was convicted u/s 302 I.P.C. 
\ 
for the murder of 'M' by poisoning on that date. 
On appeal by special leave 
on the limited question of sentence under the new Criminal Procedure Code of 
~ 
C 
1973, the Court 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
HELD : (i) In India the Legislature in its wisdom has not thought it fit and 
proper to abolish the death penalty altogether, but there has been a gradual 
swing against the imposition of such penalty. [685-F] 
(ii) Unc!er section 354(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the Court 
is required to state the reasons for the sentence awarded and in the case oi' 
sentence of death special re~ons are required to be stated. 
Awarding of the 
sentence other than the sentence of death is the general rule now and only 
special reasons or special facts and circumstances in a given case will warrant 
the passing of a death sentence like ( i) the crime having been committed 
by professional or a hardened criminal (ii) crime committed in a very brutal 
manner or on a helpless child or woman. [686, C, DJ 
(iii) In. the instant case (a) even after noticing the provisions of_ the section 
354(3) of the new Criminal Procedure Code, the High Oourt wrongly relied 
on the principle of absence of exllenuating circumstance and (b). There was no 
special reason nor any has been recorded by the High Court for confirming 
the death sentence. 
[686 F, G] 
Mangal Singh v. State of U.P., A.I.R. 1975 S.C. 76 and Perumal v. The 
State of Kera/a, A.I.R. 1975 S.C. 95 not applicable. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 301 
of 1975. 
· 
Appeal by Special Leave lrom the Judgment and Order dated the 
25th April, 1975 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh 
in Criminal Appeal No. 132_5 of 1974 and Murder Reference No. 59 
of 1974y. 
S. K. Mehta, M. Qamaruddin and K. R. Nagaraja 
for 
the 
Appellant. 
0. P. Sharma for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
UNTWALIA, J.-Balwant Singh, the sole appellant in this appeal, 
was convicted under section 302 of the Penal Code and sentenced to 
death by the Trial Court. 
His conviction and sentence have 
been 
confirmed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. 
Special leave 
to appeal was granted by this Court limited to the question of sen-
tence oely. We have, therefore, to see whether on the facts of this 
.. 
• 
)-
--
BAL WANT SINGH v. PUNJAB ( Untwalia, J.) 
685 
case the High Court was right in confirming the death sentence im-
A 
posed upon the l\ppellant o_r was it a case where the lesser sentence 
of life imprisonment ought to have been awarded. 
The appellant was aged about 60 years at the time of .the o~~ur­
rence. 
He was working as a Granthi of a Gurudwara m village 
Salihna District Faridkot. Mohan Singh the deceased was a member 
of the Managing Committee of the Gurudwara. 
He made 
certain 
complaints against the appellant to the President of the 
Managing 
Committee and asked for his removal from the post of the Granlhi. 
The appellant, therefore, bore a grudge against the deceased. 
In the 
early hours of April 13, 1974 the appellant gave Karah Parshad of 
Granth Sahib to Mohan Singh mixing opium in 
it. 
As 
soon as 
Mohan Singh took the Parshad he felt sick and his heart began to 
sink. 
In spite of the medical aid he could not survive and died about 
4 hours after the administering of the poison to him by the appel-
lant. 
On the facts found by the learned Sessions Judge and as affirm-
ed by the High Court, the appellant was convicted under section 302 
of the Penal Code. 
The ques_tion for consideration is whether 
the 
sentence of death was rightly passed. 
It may be noticed that the 
occurrence took place on April 13, 1974 after coming into force of 
the Criminal Procedure Cod~, 1973 on and from April l, 1974. 
Provisions of Section 354(3) of the new Code, as noticed by the 
High Court, governed this case. 
Yet the High Court confirmed the 
sentence of death relying upon two decisions of this Court which were 
not concerned with the application of law engrafted in section 354(3) 
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 but were given with refe-
rence to the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 as it stood at 
the relevant time. 
It is well-known that in many parts of the world an agi

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