RANJIT SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [2011] 3 S.C.R. 1107 · Decided: 29-03-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.S. BEDI, C.K. PRASAD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 3 S.C.R. 1107 
RANJIT SINGH · 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
·{Criminal Appeal No. 389 of 2004) 
MARCH 29, 2011 
[HARjlT SINGH BEDI AND CHANDRAMAULI KR. 
PRASAD, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860: s.302 - Murder- Allegation that the 
•ictim-deceased was strangulated by her husband, sister-in-
C 
aw and grandmother-in-law which caused her death - Trial 
~ourt acquitted all the accused on the ground that there was 
•O motive for the murder and the sanctity of the extra judicial 
·onfession was doubtful - High Court held the appellant-
·Usband guilty, however upheld the order of acquittal as far D 
1e other accused were concerned - On appeal, held: There 
•as no evidence to connect the appellant with the crime -
:xtra-judicial confession was made by the appellant to PWs 
and 9 - Trial court gave good reason for discarding the 
•vidence of PWs 8 and 9 by observing that the appellant and 
E 
1e other accused were in custody from the 2nd September, 
990 onwards when· the incident occurred and as such the 
irosecution story that he was arrested on 10th September 
fter he had made the extra judicial confessions was 
inbelievable - High Court observed that the extra judicial 
F 
<Jnfessions were irrelevant in the circumstances, and yet 
elied on those confessions - There was no other evidence 
gainst the appellant - Some of the conclusions drawn by 
ligh Court were merely conjectural and were not borne out 
iv evidence - The view taken by trial court was possible and 
G 
"1ould not have been interfered with by High Court -
,ppellant acquitted. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
10. 389 of 2004. 
1107 
H 
1108 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 3 S.C.R. 
-A . 
From the Judgment & Order dated 4.12.2003 of the 
B 
c 
D 
Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at 
Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 93-DBA of 1994. 
O.P. Khullar and R.C. Kohli for the Appellant. 
Kuldip Singh, K.K. Pandey and H.S. Sandhu for the 
Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
This appeal has been filed by Ranjit Singh challenging his 
conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the IPC for 
having committed the murder of his wife on 1st September 1990 
in the area of village Sandhwan, District Faridkot. 
As per the prosecution story Gurtej Singh-PW.10 of village 
Sandhwan found the dead body of Gurmail Kaur lying in the 
house of the appellant on the 1st September 1990. None of the 
family members of the appellant were present in the house at 
E that time but an electric wire was lying near the dead body. 
Gurtej Singh-PW. thereafter informed PW.3-Harjinder Singh-the 
brother of the deceased, who rushed to village Sandhwan 
accompanied by his son Mohan Singh and Sarpanch 
Harbhajan Singh. They found the dead body lying in the house. 
F The matter was reported by Harjinder Singh to the Police 
Station at 5.30 a.m. on the 2nd September, 1990. ASl-Sant 
Parkash (PW.14) thereafter reached the house of the appellant 
in vlllage Sandhwan. He recorded the inquest proceedings and 
sent the dead body for its post-mortem examination. He also 
G picked up an electric wire 15 feet in length from the spot. The 
post-mortem examination conducted on the 2nd September at 
1.45 by Dr. K.K.Agarwal revealed ten injuries on the dead body. 
The Doctor opined that the death had been caused by asphyxia 
due to strangulation. It was also opined that after the deceased 
had been done to death efforts had been made to electrocute 
H 
RANJITSINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
1109 
her as well. During the course of the investigation it was found 
A 
that Ranjit Singh - appellant and his sisters Manjit Kaur and 
Baljit Kaur and grandmother-Gurcharan Kaur were also 
involved in the murder. Baljit Kaur and Manjit Kaur were 
accordingly arrested on the September 12, 1990 whereas, as 
per the prosecution story, the appellant was produced before 
B 
the Investigating officer on the same day by PW.8 Geja Singh 
before whom he had made an extra judicial confession. A 
charge-sheet was also filed against Ranjit Singh, Baljit Kaur 
and Manjit Kaur whereas Gurcharan Kaur was shown in Column 
No.2 but was subsequently summoned and sent up for trial on c 
the basis of an application made under Section 319 of the 
Cr.P.C. On appearance of Gurcharan Kaur charges under 
Section 302/34 of the IPC were framed against all the accused. 
The prosecution in support of its case relied inter alia on 
the evidence of Dr. K.K. Aggarwal (PW.1) who had conducted 
D 
the

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