SARWAN SINGH versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1957] 1 S.C.R. 953 · Decided: 10-04-1957 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B. JAGANNADHADAS, BHUVNESHWAR PRASAD SINHA, P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
SARW AN SINGH 
v. 
THE STATE OF PUNJAB 
(with connected appeal) 
[]AGANNADHADAS, B. P. SrNHA and 
GA JENDRAGADKAR JJ.] . 
953 
Confession-Procedure-Duty 
of the Magistt·ate-Time 
to be 
given to accused to decide to make the confession-Corroboration--
Approver-Reliability- Test- Corrobation-Code 
of 
Criminal 
Proc:edure (AC! V of 1898), s. 164. 
The appellants and G were convicted of the offence of murder 
by the Sessions Court on the basis of the evidence of the approver, 
which it considered reliable, and the confession made by the first 
appellant which it found 
to 
be voluntary 
and true. The High 
Court held that the evidence of the approver as against G was very 
discrepant and unreliable and set aside 
his conviction but, never-
theless, confirmed the conviction of the appellants. The appellants 
appealed to the Supreme Court. It was found ( 1) that the statement 
originally made by the 
approver as _against the second 
appellant 
was wholly inconsistent and irreconcilable with the evidence given 
by 
him in Court and that the High Court did not consider the 
question as to whether the approver was a reliable witness at all, 
(2) that the Magistrate who recorded the confession 
did not fully 
.comply with the procedure to be adopted to ensure that it was 
voluntary, ( 3) that the prosecution story as deposed to by the 
approver 
was inconsistent 
with 
the material 
statement 
in the 
confession, and ( 4) that the High Court while decid;ng whether 
the confession was voluntary assumed that it was true 
Held, that the conviction of the appellants must be set aside. 
The appreciation of an t.pprover's c.idence has 
to satisfy a 
double test. It must show that he is a reliable witness 
and that 
his evidence receives sufficient corroboration. 
The act of recording confessions under s. 164 of the Code of 
Criminal Procedure is a solemn one and in discharging his 
duties 
under the said section the Magistrate must take care 
to see 
that 
the requirements of sub-s. (3) of s. 164 are fully satisfied. 
When an accused person is produced before the Magistrate by 
the investigating officer, it is of the utmost importance 
that the 
mind of the accused person should be completely freed from any 
possible influence of the police and he must be sent to jail custody 
and given adequate time to consider whether he should make 
a 
confession at all. Ordinarily, he should be given at least 24 hours 
to decide. 
Even if a confession is voluntary, it must also be 
established 
that it is true and, for that purpose, it is necessary to examine it 
19.57 
Ajllil 10 
1957 
Sarwan Singh 
v. 
The State of 
Punjab 
Gajendragt1dkar J. 
954 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1957] 
and compare it with the rest of the prosecution evidence and the 
probabilities of the case. 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION: 
Criminal 
Appeals Nos. 22 and 23 of 1957. 
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and 
order dated August 7, 1956, of the Punjab High Court 
at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeals Nos. 253 and 250 
of 1956 and Murder Reference No. 38 of 1956 arising out 
of the judgment and order dated May 21, 1956, of the 
Court of Additional Sessions Judge at Ludhiana in 
Trial No. 17 of 1956 and Case No. 9 of 1956. 
Cyan Chand Mathur, for the appellant in Criminal 
Appeal No. 22 of 1957. 
R. L. Kohli, for the appellant in Criminal Appeal 
No. 23 of 1957. 
Gopal Singh and T. M. Sen, for the respondent in 
both the appeals. 
1957. 
April 
10. The Judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
GAJENDRAGADKAR 
J.-Harbans 
Singh, 
Gurdial 
Singh and Sarwan Singh were charged in the court of the 
learned Additional Sessions 
Judge at Ludhiana with 
having committed an offence 
of murder punishable 
under s. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The case 
against them was that they, along with Banta Singh, 
the approver, had intentionally caused the death of 
Gurdev Singh by inflicting injuries on his person with 
kirpan, toki and dang on November 23, 1955, within 
the limits of the village Sohian, police station Jagraon. 
The learned trial judge held that the charge framed 
against all the three accused had been proved beyond a 
reasonable doubt. That is why he convicted them of 
the offence charged and sentenced each one of them to 
death. On appeal to the High Court of Punjab, the 
order 
of conviction 
and sentence imposed against 
Harbans 
Smgh and Sarwan Singh was 
confirmed 
whereas the order of conviction and sentence against 
Gurdial S

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