LexSTATE OF PUNJAB versus CHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
t [2008] 16 S.C.R. 23 STATE OF PUNJAB v. CHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2002) NOVEMBER 11, 2008. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA,· JJ.] PENAL CODE, 1860: A B ss. 376,366, 363 and 308 - Accused prosecuted on' the C basis of dying declarations and statements of eye witnesses - During trial, eye witnesses did not support prosecution version - Acquittal by trial court finding discrepancies in two dying declarations - Upheld by High Court- HELD: Reasons recorded by courts below do not warrant interference ~ D Evidence - Dying declarations. The respondents were prosecuted for commission of offences punishable u/ss 376, 366, 363 and 308 IPC. An FIR was lodged against the accused-respondents on the E basis of the statement made by the deceased victim of the crime. She alleged that she was taken under the threat of her broth.er's life and was ravished by the accused and as she had been defamed, she poured kerosene on her clothes and set herself afire; Another dying declaration of the victim was recorded by the F Executive Magistrate. The trial court found discrepancies in the dying declarations and acquitted the accused. The . High Court upheld the ac~uittal. Dismissing the appeal filed by the S,ta~e, the .Court G HELD: 1.1. PWs 13 and 15 the so-called eye- witnesses, who happen to be the brother an·d the friend of the deceased did not support the prosecution version and resiled from their statements made during· 23 H 24 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 16 S.C.R. y A investigation. Therefore, the residual question is the acceptability of the two dying declarations. The trial court did not place"any reliance on the dying declarations. [Para 7] [27-B-C] 1.2. When two courts on analysis of the evidence B found the respondents not guilty, there is no scope for ' ,. interference in the appeal. The reasons indicated by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court discarding the two dying declarations do not suffer from any infirmity. [Para 9] [27-F-G] c CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2002. From the Judgmerit and Order dated 20.12.1999 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. Appeal D No. 167-DBA/1991. Ajay Pal for the Appellant. NareshBakshi, D.P,. Singh and Subramonium Prasad for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by E DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of th·e Punjab and Haryana High Court upholding the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar. The respondents faced trial for alleged commission 'of offences punishable under Sections F 376, 366, 363 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC). The background facts as projected by the prosecution during trial are as follows: G The FIR, Exhibit PD'3 in this case was recorded on July 29, 1989 at 9.30 P.M. in Police Station Mohali under Sections 383 and 378 IPC on the basis of statement (Exhibit PD) made by Kumari Poonam (since deceased) recorded by Head Constable Bishnu Dutt in PGI Chandigarh at 1.30 P.M. on July H 29, 1989. In the said statement it was alleged by Kumari STATE OF PUNJAB v. CHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS. 25 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] Poonam (since deceased) aged about 16-1/2 years that she A was a student of 9th Class in Senior Secondary School, Mohali and that on that date i.e. on July 29, 1989 at about 10.15 A.M. she had committed suicide by putting kerosene oil on her clothes and putting the same on fire on account of misbehaviour by accused Honey who was resident of H.No. 112, Phase II, B -i Mohali. It was alleged that on July 17, 1989 when she was going to the school at about 7.00 a.m. along with her brother Anil, on the way Honey accused met them and he asked her to accompany him, failing which he would not spare her brother and out of fear she went with him and he took her to Rose c Garden, Chandigarh in an Ambassador car. It was further alleged that on that previous day i.e. July 28, 1989, in the same manner she was coming to the school at about 7.00 a.m. along with her brother Anil and her friend Rajni when accused Honey along with two others who she could recognise met them in D white coloured Ambassador car and they made her brother Anil sit in the said car and told her that if she wanted her brother then she should sit with them and out of fear she sat in the car and they al
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.