LexSTATE OF PUNJAB versus GURDEV SINGH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008) 14 S.C.R. 680 ~~ ~ A STATE OF PUNJAB v. GURDEV SINGH & ORS. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 349-350 of 2002) B OCTOBER 17, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM ";!( SHARMA, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - s. 302-rlw s. 34 - Murder - By six c ·accused - Parties were in inimical terms - Investigating Of- ficer stating that he did not fihd blood from the scene of occur- rence and found no sign of homicidal attack - Medico-Legal report stating the incident as a roadside accident - Convic- tion of four accused by trial Court-Acquittal of all the accused D by High Court - On appeal, held: In the facts of the case, ac- quittal justified - Prosecution tried to project a vehicular acci- dent into a case of homicidal death. ~ Respondents-accused were prosecuted for causing death of one person. According to prosecution, the six ac- E cused who were in a jeep knowingly hit the scooter which the deceased was driving. When the deceased fell down, all the accused started attacking the deceased with their re- spective weapons i.e. rods and hockey sticks. PW5 (com- ~ . plainant) and PWB were the eye-witnesses to the incident. F The victim was taken to the hospital by the eye-witnesses. \l He died after 55 days of the occurrence. The motive behind the occurrence alleged by was that the complainant (brother of the deceased), pursuant to direction of the Court, had taken possession of their land from the accused. In the G Medico-Legal Report it was mentioned that it was a road- side accident. Trial Court convicted four of the six accused for offence punishable uls. 302 r/w 34 IPC. High court ac- '.- - quitted all the accused holding that the deceased died as a result of vehicular accident. Hence the present appeals. H 680 STATE OF PUNJAB v. GURDEV SINGH 681 & ORS. ~ Dismissing the appeals, the Court A HELD: 1.1 The High Court has analysed the evidence and come to the conclusion that the prosecution has tried to make a vehicular accident'~ case into a case of homi- cidal death. The aspects highlighted by the High Court B are germane and relevant. That being so, there is no scope .. for interference in these appeals. The Investigating Officer (PW12) clearly stated that he did n9t find any blood on the scene of occ1:1rrence and also found no sign of the homicidal attack as projected. Even the scooter number was wrongly mentioned. The High Court further noticed c that the scene of occurrence was shifted. [Para 8] [686-G- H; 687-A-C] 1.2 PW8 stated that about 15 to 20 injuries were in- flicted by each of the accused on the person of the de- ceased. The High Court found it to be totally out of con- D ~ text and also highlighted unusual conduct of PWs 5 and 8. It was pointed out that the accused persons and the deceased, PWs. 5 and 8 were in inimical terms and some of the litigation between them had travelled upto this Court. The background facts highlighted by the defence E to indicate false implication on the background facts was accepted by the High Court. [Paras 5, 6 and 7] [686-B-D] CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal Nos. 349-350 of 2002 ~/ From the Judgment and final Order dated 14.3.2001 of F the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. Appeal No. 192-08 of 1997 and 596-DB of 1997 Kuldip Singh, R.K. Pandey, T.P. Mishra and H.S. Sandhu for the Appellant. G ·~. Kawaljit Kochar and Kusum Chaudhary for the Respon- dents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in these appeals H 682 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 14 S. C.R. A is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court directing acquittal of the respondents. It is to be noted that four out of six respondents were found guilty of offence pun- ishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') and sentence of impris- B onment for life and fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation. It was awarded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur. 2. Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows: Gursewak Singh on 24.5.1994 reported to the police that c he is the resident of village Gurdaspura and they are five broth- ers and he is eldest to all. Bhupinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') is younger to him and Raj Kanwar Singh is younger to Bhupinder Singh and Chitranjan Singh is young- est to all. Being the eldest to all brothers, the complaina
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.