LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
βš–οΈ Ask the AI about your situation:πŸš— Car AccidentπŸ’Ό Work / Job🏠 Housing / EvictionπŸ‘ͺ Family / DivorceπŸ“‹ Contract DisputeπŸ’° Money Owed

STATE OF PUNJAB versus GURPREET SINGH & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 1039 · Decided: 06-02-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SURYA KANT · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 2 S.C.R. 1039 : 2024 INSC 154
State of Punjab 
v. 
Gurpreet Singh & Ors.
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 664-665 of 2024)
06 February 2024
[Surya Kant* and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
High Court, if justified in acquitting the main accused and the co-
accused of the charges u/s. 302/34 IPC.
Headnotes
Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 – Murder – Acquittal by High 
Court, if sustainable – Prosecution case that main accused 
armed with pistol shot his ex mother-in-law resulting in her 
death – Other co-accused accompanied the main accused 
– Motive behind the murder was that the main accused 
believed that his ex-mother-in-law was responsible for 
the divorce from his ex-wife, sabotaging his plan to settle 
abroad – Conviction and sentence of the main accused u/s. 
302 and the co-accused u/ss. 302/34 by the trial court, on 
basis of the testimonies of the complainant-husband of the 
deceased and his daughter – However, acquittal by the High 
Court – Sustainability:
Held: Reasons assigned by the High Court for disbelieving the 
testimonies of the complainant-husband of the deceased and 
his daughter, cannot be concurred with – There is no suggestion 
to the complainant, and his daughter that they had some other 
reason to implicate the main accused falsely, who happens to be 
the former husband of the elder daughter – On the contrary, the 
prosecution successfully established that main accused had been 
nursing a grudge against the deceased, which stands proved 
– Presence of the complainant at the time of occurrence, his 
prompt reporting of the crime, and the swift action taken by the 
police immediately upon receipt of the said report, cumulatively 
and unequivocally established the prosecution case beyond any 
doubt – There could not be, in all probabilities, any meeting 
of the minds within a few minutes after the occurrence, so as 
1040
[2024] 2 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
to create a false narrative only to implicate main accused – 
Unfiltered version of the complainant conclusively established the 
veracity of his subsequent deposition – Overwhelming evidence, 
to establish the recovery of weapon of crime-pistol along with 
live cartridges and one empty shell at the instance of the main 
accused – Submission that none of the neighbours came forward 
to witness the occurrence totally illogical and a misconceived 
notion – Thus, the reasons assigned by the High Court while 
granting acquittal to the main accused totally perverse and as a 
result of misreading of the evidence on record – Order of acquittal 
qua main accused u/s. 302 set aside, and that of the trial court 
convicting him and sentencing him to life imprisonment restored 
– However, the reasons assigned by the High Court in support 
of the acquittal of co-accused are possible and plausible – High 
Court seems right in extending the benefit of doubt qua them. 
[Paras 24-33, 35, 36]
Constitution of India – Art. 136 – Intervention in acquittal 
orders under:
Held: Once the appellate court acquits the accused, the 
presumption of innocence as it existed before conviction by the 
trial court, stands restored, and this Court, while scrutinizing 
the evidence, would proceed with great circumspect and would 
not routinely interfere with an order of acquittal, save when the 
impeccable prosecution evidence nails the accused beyond 
any doubt – Where on consideration of the material on record, 
even if two views are possible, yet this Court, while exercising 
powers Art. 136 would not tinker with an order of acquittal – An 
erroneous or perverse approach to the proven facts of a case 
and/or ignorance of some of the vital circumstances would amount 
to a grave and substantial miscarriage of justice – In such a 
case, this Court would be justified in exercising its extraordinary 
jurisdiction to undo the injustice mete out to the victims of a 
crime. [Paras 15, 18]
First Information Report – Prompt lodging of – Significance:
Held: Prompt lodging of an FIR helps dispel suspicions related to 
the potential exaggeration of the involvement of individuals and 
adds credibility to the prosecution’s argument – Promptly lodged 
FIR reflects the first-hand account of what happened and who was 
responsible for the offence in question. [Para 30]
[2024] 2 S.C.R. 
1041
State of Punjab v. Gurpreet Singh & Ors 
Witness – Natural witness, when – Evidentiary value:
Held: Incident, which transpires partly within the confines of the 
house, the family me

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