LexMOHAN LAL & ANR. versus AJIT SINGH AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
' • j ~ ( l .; 823 MOHAN LAL & ANR. v. AJIT SINGH AND ANR. May 2, 1978 [P. N. SIIINGHAL AND D. A. DESAI, JJ.] Evidence Act, 1872-S.114 (a)-Presumption to be drawn against the accused is a niatter lvhich depends on the circumstances of each case. Crin1inal Procedure Code, 1973, s. 313-It is permissible to accept that part of the staten1ent which accords with the evidence on the record and ta act upon it-Evidence-f"'inger print evidence at crime, scenes, reliability of. Nishan Chand (deceased), son of appellant l\fohan Lal, resident of Roran- \vali, was the Secretary of Roranwali, and Phulukhere Co-operative Societies. Respondent Ajit Singh, Nishan Chand's friend, was the Secretary of Roranwali Patti Sikhan Co-operative Society. He also lived in village, Roranwa.li, with his maternal Uncle Gurdial Singh who was the viilage Chairman. On June 17, 1974 both Nishan Chand and the respondent left for villages Lambi and Malaut on the farmer's bicycle for depositing the moneys realised on account of the dues of the Co-operative societies. They did not, howev'er, return to Roranwali that night. On the next day, Satpal, the younger brother of Nishan Chand, found the bicycle of his brother lying at some distance from the boundary of the village near a culvert and his brother's body in a field at a short distance from there anci informed his father Mohan Lal. Mohan Lal and his brother Dharam Chand went to the place where the dead body lay. The dead body had· many in1uries, and a blood stained blade of a knife (Ex. P3) was lying near it. A black piece of cloth "fifty" was lying at some distance on the road, and as it was worn by Ajit Singh the_ previous day, a report was lodgca with the police. Ajit Singh was arrested on 21st June, 1974 and on his infor- mation that be had buried a sum of 41.00/~ and a gold ring in his purse, tied in a handkerchief, near the 'J.rater lift. and had concealed the blood stained clothes and a shoe inside the heap of· cotton 'sticks' in a kiln on a road, the Police recovered those articles at his instance. The bundle of currency .notes which was recovered at the instance of the respondent contained one currency note of Rs. 100/- \Vhich was suspected to have fingerprints. Ajit Singh '\\'as tried· ·and was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge of offences under ss. 302, 392 and 397 I.P.C. The Additional Sessions Judge sentenced him to death for the offence under secton 302 I.P.C. a:nd to rigorous imprisonment for flve years and seven vears respectively for the offences under sections 392 and 397 J.P.C. On appeaJ, the High Court gave him the benefit of doubt and acquitted him. Mohan Lal (father of the deceased) and one Surinder Kuniar filed the present appeal, by special leave. Allowing the appeal, the Court, IIELD : (I) While considering the statement of the accused under section 313 Cr!. P.C .. 1973 it is permissible to reject the exculpatory part .of the state- ment if it is disproved. by the evidence on record, and to acts upon it. l832 BC] :\Tishfkant Jha v. State of Bihar [1969] 2 SCR 1033~ Applied. (2) The evidence on record \Vas sufficient to sbo'v that the staten1ent of the respondent which led to the recovery of certain articles was not only volun- tary but fell within the purview of section 27 of the Evidence Act in as much as the ''fact discovered" was the place from which the various articles were pro- duced by the respondent and his knowledge of it. Moreover the actual recovery of the currency qotes. the ring (be~ring the initials of the deceased) ~nd the purse (containing a libi;ary card having the address of the resl?on9ent) in pur- suance of the information given by the respondent, and at his instance, was sufficient -marantee of the truth of that information and it could safely have been relied upon by the High Court. [834 C-D] (3) There is no gainsaying the fact that a majority ?f. fingerprints fo'!nd at crime scenes or crime articles are partially smudged, and 1t 1s for the expenenced and skilled fingerprint expert to say whether a mark is usable as fingerprint A B c D E F G H A B c D E F G H 824 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1978] 3 S.C.R. evidence. Similarly it is for a competent technician to examine and give his opinion whether the identity can be established, and if so whether that can be done on eight or even less identical characteristics in an appropriate case. Jn this case there was t
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.