LexSTATE OF PUNJAB versus RAJINDER SINGH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 13 (ADUL.) S.C.R. 609 STATE OF PUNJAB v. RAJINDER SINGH (Criminal Appeal No.1252 of 2006) AUGUST 11, 2009 [HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.] PENAL CODE, 1860: A B s .. 302; - Death of victim by fire-arm injury - Conviction c by trial court - Acquittal by High Court -- Ocular evidence discordant' with medical evidence - Injuries on accused not explained< -- Held: As per the ocular account, injury on the .,,. head of ileceased was caused by a shot gun, but the injury ~long with single exit wound is compatible with the use of a o 1 rifle and not a shot gun -In view of the categoric statement of the doctor in his examination-in-chief that the injury was possible with a single projectile 12 bore cartridge, the use of a shot gun becomes suspect, as single projectile cartridges are not available in India and, even otherwise, they can be E used with a measure of accuracy only in specialized shot guns -- In view of the fact that eye witness account does not ~upport the medical evidence and vice versa, serious doubt is cast on the prosecution story - Besides, the second ground taken by High Court in its judgment of acquittal is non- explanation of injuries on the accused - The said injuries could .F not have been self-inflicted - Apart from that, on re- investigation, two senior police officers had come to conclusion that the defence put up by accused was in fact the correct one and they had been victims of the attack rather then ,. the other way round - These facts indicate that the G "1' investigation in the case was tainted and the defence version was not even taken into account- The judgment of High Court calls for no interference - Evidence - Medical evidence vis- a-vis oral evidt:Jnce - Medical jurisprudence - Fire arm 609 H 610 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A injuries. B WORDS AND PHRASES: Word 'pakki' used for a fir-arm in villages of Punjab - Connotation of. CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 1252 of 2006. From the Judgment & Order dated 22.7.2004 of the High C Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal .Nos. 481 DB of 1999. H.M. Singh, Jasneet Kaur, Praveen Kumar Singh and Kuldip Singh for the Appellant. D Sushil Kumar, Tajinder Kaur, Adity Kumar, Meenakshi Kumar and Sheetal Prasad Juneja for the Respondent. The following Order of the Court was delivered: ORDER E This appeal by way of special leave arises out of the judgment and order dated 22.07.2004 in Criminal Appeal No. 481 of 1999 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana whereby the High Court had allowed the F appeal filed by the accused-respondent Rajinder Singh setting aside his conviction and sentence of life imprisonment and fine under Section 302 IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, by giving him the benefit of doubt and had also dismissed the appeal against acquittal filed by the appellant-State against the G acquittal of Kuldip Singh and Rachhpal Singh, by the Sessions Judge, Faridkot. The brief facts leading to this appeal are as follows:- Madan Lal - P.W. 2, the father of the deceased- Harinder H ... .-- ,. I' ~ 'r "" STATE OF PUNJAB v. RAJINDERSINGH 611 Kumar was the co-owner of brick kilns in villages Madooke and A Ajitwal with Rajinder Singh, respondent herein. About one year prior to the occurrence, a settlement had been arrived at between the parties aforesaid and the brick kiln in village Madooke had fallen to the share of Madan Lal and the one in Ajitwal to the share of Rajinder Singh. As per the settlement, a B truck bearing registration No. PJB 2155 had also come to the· share of Rajinder Singh who was to pay a sum of Rs. 1,68,000/ - to Madan Lal in lieu thereof. On 30th November, 1995, Madan Lal and his son Harinder Kumar, the deceased along with P.W. 3 - Shamsher Singh and P.W. 4 -Anil Kumar had visited the c brick kiln at Madooke to make payment to the labour and as they reached that place at about 7:30a.m., they observed that bricks were being loaded onto a tractor trolley by Rajinder Singh, and Kuldip Singh (armed with shotguns) assisted by four or five persons. As soon as the complainant party intervened 0 Rachhpal Singh who too was present, raised a lalkara calling on Rajinder Singh to fire on the complainant party. Rajinder Singh thereupon fired a shot which hit Harinder Kumar near his left eye. Rachhpal Singh and Kuldip Singh thereafter
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.