LexHARCHAND SINGH & ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c 0 E F G H HARCHAND SINGH & ANR. ,, STATE OF HARYANA August 31, 1973 [ff. R. KHANNA AND A. ALAGIRISWAMI, JJ.] 583 Indian Penal Code-Accused convicted under s. 304 II read wit/1 s. 34 hy the trial court-On crns.t llpoeal. Hif!h __ Court suhstitu:ed conviction u fs. 304 fo convic1io11 uls 302 R.W.S. 34,-Whether-- oonviction possible, when prosecut/011 products a .ret of evidence which contradict and strikes at the other. Six persons were tried in the Court of Addi. Sessions Judge in connectioO with the death of the victim. The trial Court acquitted 3 but convicted 2 under Sec. 304 Part II read with '· 34 l.P.C. and the other one w., convicted under s. 323 I. P .C. and they were sen'.enoed accordingly. Two cros.~ appeals were, thereafter, fi.led~ne by the convicts challenging cheir conviction and the other by the Sta e p· aving that the convictions of 1he 3 accused be under s. 302 read with s. 34, I. P. C. The High Court acquit'ed one of them but C"lnvicted the other two under s. 302 read wi~h S. 34 I. P. C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for lire and hence the appeal before thi• Court. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined two sets of eye witnt>ssts. The evidence of one set consisted of the testimony of three eye witnes!!es. The trial court, dfd not place any reliance upon their testimony rior upon the dying declaration. The other eye witness upon whose testimony the prosecution and the trial court placed reliance was PW. 14, who professed to be \Vorking With the deceased at the time of occurrence. Allowing the appea1, HELD : The function of the Court in a Criminal Trial ls to find whether the person arraigned before it is guil·y of th ... Offence wi+h which h~ is charged. For this purpose. th .. Court scans the material on recorcfl to find whether there ia anv reliable and trusfworthv evidf"nce UT\On tbf' bac::i.;: of which it is po~sible to convict the accused and to bold tha· he is guiltv of th .. offence with which he is chaTged. If in a case, the proserution leads tw11 s~ts of evidence. ri.ch one of ·which contradict and strikes at th .. other and shows it to be nnreliab1e. the conviction cannot be sustained. [587E1 Jladivalu Tllel'a1 v. The State of Madras, f1957] S.C.R. 981, referred to and di~tin~ished. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1970. From the Judgment and order dated the 23rd April, 1969 of the Puniab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 320 and 672 ot 1967. Nuruddin Ahmed and D. Goburdhan, for the appellants. H. S. Marwah and R. N. Sachthey. for the respondent The Judgment of the Court was delivered bv KHANNA, J. Harchand Singh, Jaswant SiMh, Jaswinder Singh, Sadhu Singh, Gaiian Singh and Labh Singh were tried in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in connection with an occurrence S84 1 SUPllEME COUIT llEPORTS ( 1974] 1 S.C.R. which resulted in the death of. Ajaib. Singh: The trail court acquitted Sadhu Singh, Gajjan Singh and Libh Siiigb. Harcband and J as.want Singh were ronvicted by the trail ·court under section 304 part 11 - read with section' 34 Indian Penal Olde and each of them was sen- tenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. Jaswinder Singh was convicted under sWion 323 Indian Penal Code aDd sentenced to· undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period · oJ ooe year. Two cross appeals were thereafter filed in the Punjab & Haryana High Court. One of the appe3.Is was by Harchand Singh, Jaswant Singh and Jaswinder Singh. challenging their conviction •. The other appeal was by ·the State al Punjab wherein. it was prayed that the conviction of Harchand Singh, Jaswant Singh and Jaswinder Singh should be under section 302 read with section ·34 Indian ·Penal Code. The High Court acquitted J aswinder Singh. -The appeal by the State against Harchand Singh and J aswant Singh was accepted and those two =used were convicted under section 302 read with sec- tion 34 Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to under· go imprisonment for life. Ruchand Singh and J as want Singh there· after came up in appeal to this Court by special leave. · · The prosecution case is that Guiab Kaur widow of J wala Singh made__a .will of· land measuring about fifty bighas in favour of Ajaib Singh deceased and his brother Tej Singh. Guiab Singh died about two years before the present occurrence. After her death, the land of Guiab Kaur _was
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.