MAJOR SINGH AND ANR. versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 7 S.C.R. 486 · Decided: 19-10-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
MAJOR SINGH AND ANR. 
V. 
ST A TE OF PUNJAB 
OCTOBER 19, 2006 
[S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KAT JU. JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860-Section 302 read with Section 34-Murder-
Prosecution case supported by version of eye-witness and medical evidence-
C Motive for the offence was suspicion of accused agaimt deceased that he had 
caused death of their sister (wife of deceased)-Conviction and death sentence 
by trial court-Confirmed by High Court-On appeal, held: In the facts of 
the case, accused rightly convicted-However, death sentence reduced to life 
imprisonment. 
D 
Principle-Principle of 'Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus'-
E 
Applicability-Held: It is not an acceptable principle. 
Criminal Trial-Minor discrepancies in prosecution case-Effect a/-
Held: Such discrepancies not a good ground for rejecting the entire 
prosecution case. 
Criminal Law-Motive-Evidentiary value of-Held: Motive is not very 
material in a case of direct evidence-It assumes importance in a case cf 
circumstantial evidence-Evidence. 
The appellants-accused herein along with their brother were alleged to 
F have caused death of a person by severing his head from the body. The incident 
was seen by PW-4 and 'C'. Medical evidence corroborated the version of the 
eyewitness. The motive for murder was that the accused suspected that the 
deceased had caused death of their sister, who was married to the deceased 
12 years ago, within two months of the marriage. Triai Court found the 
appellants guilty of offence under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced them to 
G death. Co-accused were acquitted. Conviction as well as sentence was confirmed 
by High Court. 
H 
In appeal to this Court, appellants contended that it was a case of false 
implication as the incident was not seen by anyone due to lack of light; that 
486 
MAJOR SINGH v. ST A TE OF PUNJAB 
487 
they had no motive to kill the deceased; and that acquittal of the co-accused A 
shows that the prosecution case is false. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. There is no reason to set aside the conviction of the accused. 
in a case of circumstantial evidence. Since, there is direct evidence in this 
Motive is not very material in a case of direct evidence but it is very important B 
case, the court is not inclined to go into the motive in the present case. 
Although, it is true that in the month of January usually it becomes dark at 
7.30 p.m. but in the present case there was electric light by which the 
witnesses recognized the assailants. From the statement of PWS SDC, Punjab 
State Electricity Board it is clear that there was uninterrupted electric supply C 
in the village in question at the relevant time. It has come in evidence that the 
witnesses identified the assailants in the electric light fixed on a bamboo pole. 
The medical evidence also corroborates the prosecution version. 
(491-F; 490-C-D) 
1.3. Even if assumed that 'C' was not a witness of the incident, there is D 
no reason to disregard or disbelieve the evidence of PW 4 who was an eye 
witness to the incident. He is a natural witness and he has clearly deposed 
about the incident in question in detail. (490-H; 491-A) 
1.4. Minor discrepancies and minor defects in the prosecution case is 
not a good ground for rejecting the entire prosecution case. (491-B) 
E 
1.5. Merely because the co-accused have been acquitted the entire 
prosecution case cannot be rejected. The principle of/alsus in uno falsus in 
omnibus is not an acceptable principle. It is well known fact that in our country 
very often the prosecution implicates not only real assailants but also 
implicates innocent persons so as to spread the net wide. The court can always 
discriminate and find out that who were the real assailants and who were not. F 
(491-E) 
2. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering 
the fact that there was probably some enmity due to suspicion about death of 
the sister of the acused two years after her marriage to the deceased which 
could have a motive for the crime, the sentence awarded to both the accused G 
from death sentente is reduced to life sentence under Section 302 IPC. 
(491-F-G) 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 1231 of 
2005. 
H 
488 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 7 S.C.R. 
A 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated t. 7 .2005 of the High Court of 
Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 575-DB of 2004. 
K.B. Sinha, Kawaljeet Kochar, D. Jha, Kusum Chaudhary for t

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