STATE OF PUNJAB versus BHAJAN SINGH & OTHERS.

Citation: [1975] 1 S.C.R. 747 · Decided: 16-08-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HANS RAJ KHANNA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
747 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
v. 
BHAJAN SINGH & OTHERS. 
August 16, 1974 
(H. R. KHANNA AND Y. V. CHANDRACHUD JJ.) 
Crilnina/ law-Accused charged with murder-Omission by prosecution to esta· 
hlish that death was homicidal-Suspicion against accused-Effect-Extra judicial 
confession-Weight of-Evidence of association of accused and deceased-Weight of. 
Practice and Procedure-Acquittal by High Court-Interference by Supreme 
Court. 
The four respondents were charged with the murder of three persons. The evi· 
dencc in the case was circumstantial. The trial Court found them guilty relying 
on the facts : (a) that the accused wanted to grab the shares of the deceased in a 
property hence had a motive to commit the murder; (b) that three of the accused 
made extra judicial confessions confessing to the murders; (c) that two dead bodies 
were recovered as a result of a statement of the fourth accused from a place in front 
of his house where they were buried and (d) that there was evidence of association 
of one of the accused and the third person alleged to have been murdered. 
On appeal, the High Court acquitted all the accused, on the grounds that the iden-
tity of the dead bodies was not established, that it was not established that the death 
was homicidal, that the extra judicial confessions did not inspire confidence, and 
that the evidence of association was not acceptable. 
Dismissing the appeal to this Court, 
HELD : Jn an appeal to this Court, against acquittal by the High Court, this 
Court does not interfere with the appraisement of the evidence by the High Court 
unless that appraisement is vitiated by some glaring infirmity. No such infirmity 
has been established in the present case. The circumstantial evidence adduced is 
far from satisfactory and suffers from a number of infirmities. [752 B-C] 
(a) There was no evidence to show that the two dead bodies were those of two 
of the deceased and that the death was homicidal. The medical evidence shows 
that the features were unrecognizable, and that the cause of their death could not be 
foLnd out. Maybe the doctor who Performed the post ITiOrten1 shculd have sent 
the dead bodies to an anatomy expert who might have -been able to give an opinion 
as to the cause of death and thus established that it was a case of homicide, but it 
would be contrary to all accepted principles of crhninal jurisprudence to give the 
benefit of that on1ission to the prQsccution. [750F-751 BJ 
(b) An extra judicial confession, in the very nature of things, is a weak piece of 
evidence. In the present case, the evidence adduced regarding the making of the 
ccnfession also lacks plausibility and does not inspire confidence. [751 F] 
(c) The date on which the witness stated to the police as having seen one of the 
accused and the third deceased together was about 15 days thereafter. On the 
evidence on record, it is not possible to fix the date of the .association and conse-
quently, the prosecution cannot derive much benefit from such evidence. 
[75JG-H] 
(d) Even if it be assumed that the dead bodies were those of two of the deceased 
and that the death was homicidal, it is difficult to say whether the crime was the act 
of one or more culprits. In any case, it is difficult to fix the identity of the culprits. 
[752A-B] 
(e) The circumstances of the case undoubtedly create suspicion against the ac~ 
cused, but suspicion by itself, however strong, is not sufficient to take the place of 
proof of guilt. (751 HJ 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 75 
of 1974. 
748 " 
SUPREME COURT RliPOR TS 
[1975] 1 S.C.R. 
Appeal by special leave from the Judgmeut & Order dated the 
13th August, 1973 of the Punjab & Har~ana High Court in Crimiral 
Appeal No. 291 of 1973. 
0. P. Shanna, for the appellant. 
Nuruddtit A/11nad'<l.nd U. P. Singh, for the respondents. 
A 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
B 
KHANNA, J. Bhajan Singh (60), bis wife Charan Kaur (40), their 
son Surjit Singh (20) and daughter Jito (16) were ccnvicttd by the 
learned Sessions Jt:dge Amritsar for offences under section 302 and 
section 302 read with section il4 Indian Penal Cede on charges on 
triple murder of Harbans Singh (50), Bachan Singh (40) and Ishar 
Singh (12). 
Bhajan Singh and Surjit Singh were sentenced to death 
c 
while Ch1ran Kaur and Jito were sentenced to undergo imprirnnrnent 
for life. Conviction was also recorded against the four accused 
under section 201 Indian P

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