RAM NARAIN SINGH versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1976] 1 S.C.R. 27 · Decided: 15-07-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.L. UNTWALIA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

.. 
\) • 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
RAM NARAIN SINGH 
v. 
THE STATE OF PUNJAB 
luly 15, 1975 
fN. L. UNTWALIA AND S. M. fAz,\L ALI, JJ.J 
27 
l11co11sistency betlree!l direct evidence and expert evidence -fY hen experr 
el'idence prevaiis. 
The first appellant was charged \Vith having shot the deceased and killed 
him. 
According to the prosecution case he shot at the deceased 011/y once . 
The Sess:ons Judge convicted and sentenced him to death and the other appel· 
!ants, who were alleged to have accompanied the first appellant to various terms 
of imprisonment. 
The High Court affirmed the conviction and sentences. 
Allowing the appeal to this Court, 
HELD : { 1) The evidence of some of the witnesses. unmistakably points tn 
the conclusion that the occurrence really took place at 8 P.h-f. 
when it was 
dark, a·nd if that is so, then thi::re is no evid~nce on the record to show how 
the appellant could have been identified by the witnesses. [35D] 
( 2) A combined reading of the report of the medical 
expert and 
the 
ballistic expert in the present case clearly established that the deceased died of 
of two gun shot injuries and the prosecution has not been able to explain this 
important circumstance. 
The evidence of the two e)"e witnesses is wholly in· 
consistent with the medical evidence as also the evidence of the ballistic expert 
and must be rejected on that ground alone, apart from other inherent impro· 
babilities which aopear in the evidence. Where the evidence of the prosecution 
witnesses is lotally ini:onsistent with the medical evidence or the evidenee of 
the ballistic expefr, tn1s ts a most fundamental defect in the prosecution case 
and unless reasonably explained it is sufficient to discredit the entire case. Where 
the direct evidence is not supported by expert evidence then the evidence is 
wanting in the most ma"erial part of the prosecution case and it would be diffi-
cult to convict the accused on the basis of such evidence. [33C; 36H; 37C] 
Mdl1inder Singh v. The State, [1950] &.C.R. 821, followed. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeals Nos. 258 
and 259 of 1974. 
F 
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 
G 
19th February, 1974 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Crimi-
nal Appeal No. 778 of 1973 and Murder Ref. No. 41 of 1973. 
A. N. Mu/la, H. S. Marwaha, K. B. Rohtagi and D. R. Gupta, for 
the appellants. 
(In Crl. A. No. 258/74). 
0. P. Sharma and Dewan Balak Ram, for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
FAZAL ALI, J. Crimianl Appeal No. 258 of 1974 by special leave 
has been preferred by the appellant Ram Narain Singh who was tried 
by the Sessions Judge, Bhatinda who convicted the appellant under 
s. 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to death and a fine of Rs. 2,000/· or 
in default further rigorous imprisonment for two years. 
Ram Narain 
Singh was also convicted under s. 307 /34 and sentenced to three years 
R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/-, under s. 449 I.P.C. and sentenced to three 
year; R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/-. 
There was a further conviction 
_) 
28 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1976) 1 S.C.R. 
in so far as Ram Narain Singh is concerned un!ler s. 324/34 I.P.C. 
under which he was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and 
under s. 323/34 I.P.C. to six months R.I. 
All the sentences to nm 
concurrently. 
The other appellants Jaggar Singh, Habm Singh and 
Mal Singh in Criminal Appeal No. 259 of 1974 were convicted under 
s. 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for lifo and a fine of 
Rs. 1000/- each or in default one year's R.I. each. 
Jaggar Singh was 
also convicted under s. 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to three years R.I. 
and a fine of Rs. 300/-, under s. 449 I.P.C. to three years R.I. and 
a fine of Rs. 300, and under s. 324/34 I.P.C. to one year·s R.I. Hakam 
Singh and Mal Singh were also convicted under s. 307 /34 I.P.C. and 
sentenced to three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/- each, Hakam 
Singh was also convicted under s. 324/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to one 
year's R.f. and under s. 323 l.P.C. and sentenced to six months R.I. 
while Mal Singh was convicted under s. 324 I.P.C. and sentenced to one 
year JU. and under s. 323/34 l.P.C. and sentenced to six months R.J. 
Al! the sentences to run concurrently. 
The learned Sessions Judge has 
also made a reference to the High Court of Punjab & Haryana for 
confirmation of the death sentence passed on Ram Narain Singh. 
All 
the appellants had filed separate appeals before 

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