Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jatinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 7 January, 2025
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur, Sudeepti Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -1-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
1. CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M)
Reserved on: 17.12.2024
Date of Decision: 07.1.2025
Jatinder Singh alias Satnam Singh ......Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ......Respondent
2. CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
Charanjit Singh alias Channi ......Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ......Respondent
3. CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M)
Amanpreet Singh @ Meetu ......Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ......Respondent
4. CRR-1406-2004
Jatinder Singh ......Petitioner
Versus
Charanjit Singh alias Channi and others ......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Argued by: Mr. Anmol Partap Singh Mann, Advocate
for the appellant(s) (in all appeals)
Mr. Maninderjit Singh Bedi, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Charanjit Singh Bakshi, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel)
for the petitioner (in CRR-1406-2004).
****
1 of 30
::: Downloaded on - 09-01-2025 22:21:27 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -2-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.
1. Since all the appeals (supra) as well as the criminal revision
petition (supra) arise from a common verdict, made by the learned trial
Judge concerned, hence both the appeals (supra) as well as the revision
petition (supra) are amenable for a common verdict being made thereons.
2. All the appeals (supra) are directed against the impugned
verdict, as made on 18.12.2003, upon case bearing No. 55 of 3.10.2001, by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, wherethrough in respect of
charges respectively drawn against the convicts-appellants qua offences
punishable under Sections 302, 382, 34 IPC, thus the learned trial Judge
concerned, proceeded to record a finding of conviction against the convicts-
appellants.
3. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of even date, the
learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced the accuseds-appellants in the
hereafter extracted manner-
Convict Charanjit Singh alias Channi
Under Section 302 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and
to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six
months.
Under Section 382 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for five
years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in
default of payment of fine to undergo further
rigorous imprisonment for one month.
Convict Amanpreet Singh alias Meetu
Under Section 302 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and
to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six
months.
Under Section 382 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for five
years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in
default to undergo further rigorous
imprisonment for one month.
Convict Jatinder Singh alias Satnam Singh
Under Section 302/34 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and
2 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -3-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six
months.
Under Section 382 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for five
years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in
default to undergo further rigorous
imprisonment for one month.
4. Both the above imposed sentences of imprisonment upon the
convicts-appellants, were ordered to run concurrently. However, the period
of detention undergone by the accused-appellants, during the investigations,
and, trial of the case, was, in terms of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., rather
ordered to be set off from the above imposed sentence(s) of imprisonment.
5. Convicts-appellants Jatinder Singh alias Satnam Singh,
Charranjit Singh alias Channi and Amanpreet Singh @ Meetu become
aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, become
aggrieved from the consequent thereto sentences of imprisonment, and, of
fine as became imposed, upon them, by the learned convicting Court
concerned, and, hence have chosen to institute thereagainst the criminal
appeals respectively bearing Nos. CRA-D-49-DB-2004, CRA-D-165-DB-
2004 and CRA-D-169-DB-2004.
6. Criminal Revision No. 1406 of 2004 has been preferred by
Jatinder Singh, father of the deceased, seeking a directions upon the
accused-appellants to pay Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten lacs) as compensation to
him under Section 357 Cr.P.C.
Factual Background
7. The genesis of the prosecution case, becomes embodied in the
appeal FIR, to which Ex. PE/2 is assigned. As per the prosecution case, on
24.7.2001, complainant Jaswinder Singh got recorded his statement to the
3 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -4-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
police to the effect that on 23.7.2001, at about 8.00 P.M., he alongwith his
friend, namely, Amanpreet Singh alias Banni were watching television in his
house. However, all of a sudden the cable connection went defective. He
alongwith Banni, in his vehicle Mohindera Bolero bearing No. PB-10AS-
4562 went to cable operator Parminder Singh alias Shanu at H. No. 4290
Phase II, Urban Estate, LIG Quarter Dugri as Banni had taken the cable
connection from him. He further stated thereins, that Banni stopped his jeep
near the office of said Shanu, and, after alighting from the vehicle, he went
to the office of Shanu to lodge a complaint, whereas, he kept on sitting in the
vehicle (supra), the engine of which was still in motion. After 2-3 minutes,
Banni came out of the office of Shanu. Amanpreet Singh alias Meeta,
brother of Shanu alongwith Charanjit Singh alias Channi, who was holding a
cricket bat, and, Satnam Singh who is also known to him were quarreling
with him and were exchanging hot words, came out of the office. The
complainant further stated that when he went near them and tried to
persuade them, thereupon Charanjit Singh alias Channi gave a bat blow on
the head of Banni, as a result of which, he fell on the ground. Satnam Singh
alias Jatinder Singh raised a Lalkara that today they should not be spared. In
the meantime, Meetu brought a cricket bat from his office, and gave a blow
with the same on the head of Banni. Satnam Singh caught hold of the
complainant and Channi and Meetu gave bat blows to him. On raising hue
and cry by the complainant, one Avtar Singh son of Basant Singh came at
the spot, and told that and he will settle the dispute. On seeing Avtar Singh,
all the three accused escaped from the spot alongwith their weapons in the
above vehicle. He further stated thereins, that in the jeep (supra), the
4 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -5-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
licenced pistol of Banni and some other articles belonging to Banni were
lying. The complainant called Tejinder Singh, who reached the spot in his
car, and, they took Banni, who was in an unconscious condition, in the car to
Arora Neuro Hospital for treatment. In the said occurrence, the complainant
also received injuries. After C.T.Scan, and, due to serious condition of
Banni, he was removed to D.M.C. Hospital Ludhiana, where on 24.7.2001,
at about 9.00 A.M, he succumbed to his injuries. The complainant also stated
that, the motive behind the occurrence, is that a cable connection, supplied
by Shanu, was running in the house of Banni, which used to generally
remain defective and with regard to the above, they had also made
complaints to Shanu 2-3 times prior to the above incident for not removing
the defect in time. Due to the said reason, the accused were nursing a grudge
and, had caused injuries to them. On the basis of the said statement, the
appeal formal FIR became registered
Investigation proceedings
8. During the course of investigations, the accused were arrested.
The disclosure statements of the accused were recorded, pursuant to which,
they got recovered the incriminatory weapons of offence and other
incriminatory items, which were taken into police possession. After
conclusion of investigations, the investigating officer concerned, proceeded
to institute a report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., before the learned
committal Court concerned.
Committal Proceedings
9. Since the offence under Section 302 of the IPC was exclusively
triable by the Court of Session, thus, the learned committal Court concerned,
5 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -6-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
through a committal order made on 20.9.2001, hence proceeded to commit
the accused to face trial before the Court of Session.
Trial Proceedings
10. The learned trial Judge concerned, after receiving the case for
trial, after its becoming committed to him, made an objective analysis of the
incriminatory material, adduced before him. Resultantly, he proceeded to
draw charge against accused-appellants Charanjit Singh @ Channai, and
Amanpreet Singh @ Meetu, for the offence punishable under Section 302
IPC, whereas, he drew charge against accused-appellant Jatinder Singh @
Satnam Singh under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The learned trial
Judge concerned, also drew charge(s) against all the accused-appellants qua
commission of an offence punishable under Section 382 IPC. The afore
drawn charges were put to the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty,
and, claimed trial.
11. In proof of its case, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses,
and, thereafter the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, closed the
prosecution evidence.
12. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the learned trial
Judge concerned, drew proceedings, under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., but
thereins, the accused pleaded innocence, and, claimed false implication. The
accused-appellants led six defence witnesses into the witness box.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant(s)
13. The learned counsel for the aggrieved convicts-appellants has
argued before this Court, that both the impugned verdict of conviction, and,
the consequent thereto order of sentence, thus require an interference. He
6 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -7-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
supports the above submission on the ground, that they are based on a gross
misappreciation, and, non-appreciation of evidence germane to the charge.
They further rest the above submissions inter alia on the ground,
(i) That there is inordinate delay in lodging the present FIR,
inasmuch as the alleged occurrence took place on 23.7.2001, at about 8.00
P.M., whereas the present FIR was lodged on 24.7.2001 at 12.05 P.M.
(ii) That the medical evidence does not corroborate the ocular
account.
(iii) That since the alleged occurrence took place all of a
sudden and that too after some altercation being taken place, therefore, the
offence under Section 302 IPC was not made out against the appellants,
rather the offence, if any, as became committed by the accused, was the one
thus falling within the exceptions to an offence of culpable homicide
amounting to murder, exceptions whereof become embodied in Section 300
of the IPC, exceptions whereof become extracted hereinafter.
“300. Murder.-
Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is
murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the
intention of causing death, or–
(Secondly) If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily
injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the
person to whom the harm is caused, or–
(Thirdly)- If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to
any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient
in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or–
(Fourthly)- If the person committing the act knows that it is so
imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or
such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act
7 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -8-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such
injury as aforesaid.
Exception 1.- When culpable homicide is not murder.– Culpable
homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst deprived of the power
of self-control by grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of
the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any
other person by mistake or accident. The above exception is subject
to the following provisos:–
(First)- That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked
by the offender as an excuse for killing or doing harm to any person.
(Secondly)- That the provocation is not given by anything done in
obedience to the law, or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of
the powers of such public servant.
(Thirdly)- That the provocation is not given by anything done in the
lawful exercise of the right of private defence.
Explanation.– Whether the provocation was grave and
sudden enough to prevent the offence from amounting to murder is a
question of fact.
Exception 2 – Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, in the
exercise in good faith of the right of private defence of person or
property, exceeds the power given to him by law and causes the
death of the person against whom he is exercising such right of
defence without premeditation, and without any intention of doing
more harm than is necessary for the purpose of such defence.
Exception 3 – Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, being
a public servant or aiding a public servant acting for the
advancement of public justice, exceeds the powers given to him by
law, and causes death by doing an act which he, in good faith,
believes to be lawful and necessary for the due discharge of his duty
as such public servant and without ill-will towards the person whose
death is caused.
Exception 4 – Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed
without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon
a sudden quarrel and without the offender having taken undue
advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.
Explanation.– It is immaterial in such cases which party
8 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -9-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
offers the provocation or commits the first assault.
Exception 5 – Culpable homicide is not murder when the person
whose death is caused, being above the age of eighteen years,
suffers death or takes the risk of death with his own consent .”
Submissions of the learned State counsel
14. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has argued before
this Court, that the verdict of conviction, and, consequent thereto sentence(s)
(supra), as become imposed upon the convicts, are well merited, and, do not
require any interference, being made by this Court in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction. Therefore, he has argued that all the appeals (supra),
as preferred by the convicts-appellants be dismissed.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner
15. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued before this
Court the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, passed by the
learned convicting Court below, be upheld. However, he has prayed that
sum of Rs. 10.00 lacs (Rs. Ten lacs) be ordered to be paid as compensation
to the petitioner, who is the father of the deceased.
Analysis of the depositions of the eye witnesses to the occurrence,
who respectively stepped into the witness box as PW-2 and PW-3
16. Complainant Jaswinder Singh, who is the purported eye witness
to the occurrence, stepped into the witness box as PW-2, and, deposed that
when on 23.7.2001, at about 8.00 P.M., he and deceased Amanpreet Singh @
Bani were watching television in the house of the deceased, then all of a
sudden the cable connection went out of operation. Thereupon PW-1 and
the deceased went to the house of Parminder Singh @ Shanu in Mahindra
Ballero vehicle bearing registration No. PB-10AS-4562, belonging to the
deceased. They parked their vehicle near the office of Paramjit Singh @
9 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -10-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
Shanu. PW-2 further deposed that the deceased went to the office of Shanu
to lodge a complaint, whereas he remained in the vehicle (supra). He further
deposed that after 2 or 4 minutes, the deceased came out of the office of
Shanu along with three accused, who at that time were quarreling with the
deceased. The said witness also alighted from the vehicle and went near
them, while the engine of the said vehicle was not stopped. The said witness
further testified that when he was trying to intervene, accused Charanjit
Singh alias Channi, who was having a cricket bat, gave a blow with the same
on the head of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell on the
ground. Accused Satnam Singh raised a lalkara that they should not be
allowed to go and that their task would be finished. Thereupon accused
Amanpreet Singh alias Mittu brought a cricket bat from his office and
delivered blow thereof on the head of deceased, yet when the deceased was
lying down. PW-2 further deposed that accused Satnam Singh caught hold of
him and accused Charanjit Singh @ Channi and Amanpreet Singh @ Mittu,
started inflicting bat blows on his person, whereupons the complainant
started crying. In the meantime, Avtar Singh resident of Jawaddi reached at
the spot, who intervened and assured that he would settle their dispute.
Subsequently, all the three accused fled from the spot with their weapons in
the vehicle (supra), whose engine was still in motion. The said witness was
asked a question about the articles, which were lying in the Bollero Vehicle,
whereupon the said witness answered that a licenced pistol of the deceased
as well as his purse were lying in the said vehicle.
17. Therefore, the supra voicings made by PW-2, in his
examination-in-chief, qua the genesis of the prosecution case, are naturally
10 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -11-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
in complete alignment with his previously made statement, in writing, to
which Ex. PE becomes assigned. Moreover, though he was subjected to the
ordeal of a grilling cross-examination by the learned counsel for the accused,
but he remained unscathed in the said ordeal.
18. Significantly, since a wholesome reading of her testification, as
carried in his examination-in-chief, and, in his cross-examination, does not
unfold, qua thereins rather becoming carried any rife improvements or
embellishments viz-a-viz his previously recorded statement, in writing, nor
when his testification suffers from any further taint of its being ridden with
any intra se contradiction, thus intra se his examination-in-chief, and, his
cross-examination, therefore, utmost sanctity is to be assigned to his
testification.
19. The deposition of PW-2 is supported by the deposition of the
other eye witness to the occurrence, namely Avtar Singh, who stepped into
the witness box as PW-3. The echoings occurring in the examination-in-
chief of PW-3 are in complete harmony with the echoings, as became
rendered in respect of the crime event by PW-2.
20. Conspicuously also immense credence is to be assigned to the
testification of the injured eye witness to the occurrence. Moreover, when
the injuries entailed by him in the crime event become corroborated from the
MLR as became drawn qua the said entailed injuries. The said MLR
becomes assigned Ex. PN, and, the contents thereof become extracted
hereinafter.
1. Bruise 10 x 14 cm on superior aspect or right scapula.
2. Bruise 25×8 cm on medical on scapula extending below the
interior border of scapula.
3. Bruise 10×10 cm cm on left plank.
11 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -12-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
4. Bruise 5 x 3 cm on med forearm.
21. Since the contents (supra), as borne in Ex. PN became proven
by PW-8 Dr. Sachin Jindal, therebys the witness (supra) lends corroboration
to the supra credible eye witness account, as became rendered by him vis-a-
vis the crime event.
22. In sequel, the testifications rendered by PW-2, and, by PW-3
vis-a-vis the crime event, when rather are in complete inter se alignment, as
such, their respectively made testifications were amenable to become relied,
upon, as aptly done by the learned trial Court concerned.
Signatured disclosure statements of convicts-appellants Charanjit Singh
alias Channi, Amanpreet Singh alias Mittu and of Jatinder Singh @
Satnam Singh respectively Ex. PG, Ex. PH and Ex. PJ
23. During the course of investigations, being made into the appeal
FIR, convicts-appellants Charanjit Singh alias Channi, Amanpreet Singh
alias Mittu and Jatinder Singh @ Satnam Singh, thus made their respective
signatured disclosure statements, to which respectively Ex. PG, Ex. PH and
Ex. PJ become assigned. The signatured disclosure statements, as made by
all the accused are ad verbatim extracted hereinafter.
Disclosure Statement of convict-appellant Charanjit Singh
alias Channi
“x x x x
On 23-7-2001, at the place of occurrence, i.e. where I had
inflicted injuries on the person of the deceased, with cricket bat
alongwith my companions, Mitu alias Amanprit Singh and
Satnam Singh alias Satinder Singh, a jeep was parked at the spot,
in which Banny and Sonu had come from the said spot Mitu and
Satnam Sngh, who were also armed with bats had run away in
that jeep and on going for some distance the jeep had been
parked on Dhandra road. A pistol was lying in it and I had picked
up the said pistol and a leather purse was lying close it and that
purse had also been lifted by me. I searched the purse which
12 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -13-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
contained currency and some papers. I took out the money from
the said purse alongwith Rs.500/- and then passed on the purse to
Satnam Singh. A sum of Rs.500/- was also given to Mitu. Then we
separated from each other and then ran away. I have kept
concealed the pistol and bat in the bushes standing in the
cremation ground on Dhandra road and I alone have got
knowledge about them which are lying on the eastern side and I
can get the same recovered after pointing out.”
x x x x”
Disclosure Statement of convict-appellant Amanpreet Singh alias
Mittu
“x x x x
On 23-7-2001, Channi and Satnam Singh, had took away the jeep
from the place of occurrence, which had been parked there, after
inflicting Injuries to Binny, alongwith our bats on the said jeep
being driven by Satnam Singh, which had been later parked on
Dhandra Road. A pistol was lying in the jeep and one purse was
also lying which had been picked up by Channi. He had taken the
money out of the purse. Out of that money he paid Rs.500/- to me.
He also put back Rs. 500/- in the same purse alongwith some
papers. The purse was then given to Channi by Satnam Pingh.
Then we separated from each other. The bat with which I had
given injuries has been kept concealed me in the bushes standing
in the pits on the Dhandhra road in the open plot and I can get
the same recovered after pointing out.
x x x x"
Disclosure Statement of convict-appellant Jatinder Singh @
Satnam Singh
"x x x x
On 23-7-2001 on the place of occurrence, I alongwith my
companion Channi alias Charanjit Pal Singh and Mitu alias
Amanprit Singh, who were having bats took out the jeep in which
Banny had come, as he had parked there and we three thus had
fled away from the spot on Dhandhra road. A pistol was lying in
the jeep and one purse was also lying in the said jeep. That had
been picked up by Channi. The purse contained money and empty
papers. Channi had taken out the money and after putting some
money and papers, he handed over the purse to me. I then ran
away from the place. I noticed a purse lying in the pits situated by
the railway line leading towards Dhuri from Ludhiana and it
contained Rs. 500/- and some papers. I took out the money from
the purse and the same purse was kept concealed by me in the pits
13 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -14-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
there and I alone have got its knowledge and can get the same
recovered.
x x x x”
24. Pursuant to the above made signatured disclosure statement
(Ex. PG), convict-appellant Charanjit Singh alias Channi rather ensured the
effectuation of recovery(ies) of one pistol and a wooden cricket bat. Upon
checking of the said pistol, four live cartridges were also recovered from the
magazine. All the above items were taken into police possession, through
recovery memo, Ex. PG/2.
25. Pursuant to the above made signatured disclosure statements
(supra), convicts-appellants Amanpreet Singh alias Mittu and Jatinder Singh
alias Satnam Singh rather ensured the effectuation recovery(ies) respectively
of a cricket bat and of a purse containing certain papers, which were taken
into police possession, through recovery memos, to which respectively Ex.
PH/1 and Ex. PJ/1 become assigned.
26. The disclosure statements (supra), carries thereons the
signatures, of the convicts-appellants. In theirs signatured disclosure
statements (supra), the convicts, confessed their guilt in inflicting injuries on
the person of the deceased, hence with the recovered weapon(s). The further
speaking therein is qua theirs keeping, and, concealing the incriminatory
weapons of offence/incriminatory material. Moreover, the said signatured
disclosure statements do also make speakings about theirs alone being aware
about the location of theirs hiding and keeping the same, and, also revealed
their willingness to cause the recoveries of the incriminatory
weapons/incriminatory material, to the investigating officer concerned, from
the place of theirs hiding, and, keeping the same.
14 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -15-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
27. Significantly, since the appellants have not been able to either
ably deny their signatures as occur on the exhibits (supra) nor when they
have been able to prove the apposite denial. Moreover, since they have also
not been able to bring forth tangible evidence but suggestive that the
recovery(ies) is/are either contrived or invented. Therefore, the
exhibits(supra) are prima facie concluded to be holding the utmost evidentiary
tenacity.
28. Significantly also, since post the making of the said signatured
disclosure statements, thus by the convicts to the investigating officer
concerned, he through the recovery memos (supra), thus caused the
recovery(ies) of the weapons of offence/incriminatory material to the
investigating officer concerned. Consequently, when the said made
recovery(ies) is/are also not suggested by any cogent evidence to be planted
recovery(ies). Resultantly, the effect thereof, is that, valid recovery(ies)
was/were made vis-a-vis the incriminatory weapons of offence/incriminatory
material by the convicts, to the investigating officer concerned. In sequel,
the making of the valid signatured disclosure statements, by the convicts
besides the pursuant thereto effectuation of valid recover(ies) of the
incriminatory weapons of offence/incriminatory material, thus by the
convicts to the investigating officer concerned, but naturally prima facie
corroborates and supports the case of the prosecution.
29. However, yet for assessing the vigor of the said made disclosure
statements and consequent thereto made recovery(ies), it is apt to refer to the
principles governing the assigning of creditworthiness to the said made
disclosure statement and to the consequent thereto made recovery. The
principles governing the facet (supra), become embodied in paragraphs Nos.
15 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -16-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
23 to 27 of a judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Criminal
Appeal Nos.1030 of 2023, titled as “Manoj Kumar Soni V. State of
Madhya Pradesh“, decided on 11.8.2023, relevant paragraphs whereof
become extracted hereinafter.
23. The law on the evidentiary value of disclosure statements under
Section 27, Evidence Act made by the accused himself seems to be
well established. The decision of the Privy Council in Pulukuri
Kotayya and others vs. King-Emperor holds the field even today
wherein it was held that the provided information must be directly
relevant to the discovered fact, including details about the physical
object, its place of origin, and the accused person’s awareness of
these aspects. The Privy Council observed:
The difficulty, however great, of proving that a fact discovered
on information supplied by the accused is a relevant fact can
afford no justification for reading into s. 27 something which
is not there, and admitting in evidence a confession barred by
s. 26. Except in cases in which the possession, or
concealment, of an object constitutes the gist of the offence
charged, it can seldom happen that information relating to the
discovery of a fact forms the foundation of the prosecution
case. It is only one link in the chain of proof, and the other
links must be forged in manner allowed by law.
24. The law on the evidentiary value of disclosure statements of
co-accused too is settled; the courts have hesitated to place
reliance solely on disclosure statements of co-accused and used
them merely to support the conviction or, as Sir Lawrence
Jenkins observed in Emperor vs. Lalit Mohan Chuckerburty,
to “lend assurance to other evidence against a co-accused”. In
Haricharan Kurmi vs. State of Bihar, this Court, speaking
through the Constitution Bench, elaborated upon the approach
to be adopted by courts when dealing with disclosure
statements:
13. …In dealing with a criminal case where the prosecution
relies upon the confession of one accused person against
another accused person, the proper approach to adopt is to
consider the other evidence against such an accused person,
and if the said evidence appears to be satisfactory and the
16 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DBCRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -17-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
court is inclined to hold that the said evidence may sustain
the charge framed against the said accused person, the court
turns to the confession with a view to assure itself that the
conclusion which it is inclined to draw from the other
evidence is right.
25. In yet another case of discrediting a flawed conviction
under Section 411, IPC, this Court, in Shiv Kumar vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh overturned the conviction under Section 411,
declined to place undue reliance solely on the disclosure
statements of the co-accused, and held:
24. …, the disclosure statement of one accused cannot be
accepted as a proof of the appellant having knowledge of
utensils being stolen goods. The prosecution has also failed to
establish any basis for the appellant to believe that the
utensils seized from him were stolen articles. The factum of
selling utensils at a lower price cannot, by itself, lead to the
conclusion that the appellant was aware of the theft of those
articles. The essential ingredient of mens rea is clearly not
established for the charge under Section 411 IPC. The
prosecution’s evidence on this aspect, as they would speak of
the character Gratiano in Merchant of Venice, can be
appropriately described as, “you speak an infinite deal of
nothing.” [William Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice, Act 1
Scene 1.]
26. Coming to the case at hand, there is not a single iota of
evidence except the disclosure statements of Manoj and the co-
accused, which supposedly led the I.O. to the recovery of the
stolen articles from Manoj and Rs.3,000.00 from Kallu. At this
stage, we must hold that admissibility and credibility are two
distinct aspects and the latter is really a matter of evaluation of
other available evidence. The statements of police witnesses
would have been acceptable, had they supported the
prosecution case, and if any other credible evidence were
brought on record. While the recoveries made by the I.O. under
Section 27, Evidence Act upon the disclosure statements by
Manoj, Kallu and the other co-accused could be held to have
led to discovery of facts and may be admissible, the same
cannot be held to be credible in view of the other evidence
available on record.
17 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -18-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
27. While property seizure memos could have been a reliable
piece of evidence in support of Manoj’s conviction, what has
transpired is that the seizure witnesses turned hostile right from
the word ‘go’. The common version of all the seizure witnesses,
i.e., PWs 5, 6, 11 and 16, was that they were made to sign the
seizure memos on the insistence of the ‘daroga’ and that too,
two of them had signed at the police station. There is, thus, no
scope to rely on a part of the depositions of the said PWs 5, 6,
11 and 16. Viewed thus, the seizure loses credibility.
30. Furthermore, in a judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in
Criminal Appeal No.2438 of 2010, titled as “Bijender @ Mandar V. State
of Haryana“, decided on 08.11.2021, the relevant principles governing the
apposite assigning of creditworthiness become set forth in paragraph 16
thereof, paragraph whereof becomes extracted hereinafter.
16. We have implored ourselves with abounding
pronouncements of this Court on this point. It may be true that
at times the Court can convict an accused exclusively on the
basis of his disclosure statement and the resultant recovery of
inculpatory material. However, in order to sustain the guilt of
such accused, the recovery should be unimpeachable and not be
shrouded with elements of doubt. We may hasten to add that
circumstances such as (i) the period of interval between the
malfeasance and the disclosure; (ii) commonality of the
recovered object and its availability in the market; (iii) nature
of the object and its relevance to the crime; (iv) ease of
transferability of the object; (v) the testimony and
trustworthiness of the attesting witness before the Court and/or
other like factors, are weighty consideraions that aid in
gauging the intrinsic evidentiary value and credibility of the
recovery. (See: Tulsiram Kanu vs. The State; Pancho vs. State
of Haryana; State of Rajasthan vs. Talevar & Anr and
Bharama Parasram Kudhachkar vs. State of Karnataka).
18 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -19-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
31. Furthermore, in another judgment rendered by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.863 of 2019, titled as
“Perumal Raja @ Perumal V. State, Rep. By Inspector of Police”, decided
on 03.01.2024, the relevant principles governing the assigning of
creditworthiness become set forth in paragraphs 22 to 25 thereof, paragraphs
whereof become extracted hereinafter.
22. However, we must clarify that Section 27 of the Evidence
Act, as held in these judgments, does not lay down the principle
that discovery of a fact is to be equated to the object produced
or found. The discovery of the fact resulting in recovery of a
physical object exhibits knowledge or mental awareness of the
person accused of the offence as to the existence of the physical
object at the particular place. Accordingly, discovery of a fact
includes the object found, the place from which it was produced
and the knowledge of the accused as to its existence. To this
extent, therefore, factum of discovery combines both the
physical object as well as the mental consciousness of the
informant accused in relation thereto. In Mohmed Inayatullah
v. State of Maharashtra12, elucidating on Section 27 of the
Evidence Act, it has been held that the first condition imposed
and necessary for bringing the section into operation is the
discovery of a fact which should be a relevant fact in
consequence of information received from a person accused of
an offence. The second is that the discovery of such a fact must
be deposed to. A fact already known to the police will fall foul
and not meet this condition. The third is that at the time of
receipt of the information, the accused must be in police
custody. Lastly, it is only so much of information which relates
distinctly to the fact thereby discovered resulting in recovery of
a physical object which is admissible. Rest of the information is
to be excluded. The word ‘distinctly’ is used to limit and define
the scope of the information and means ‘directly’, ‘indubitably’,
19 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -20-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
‘strictly’ or ‘unmistakably’. Only that part of the information
which is clear, immediate and a proximate cause of discovery is
admissible.
23. The facts proved by the prosecution, particularly the
admissible portion of the statement of the accused, would give
rise to two alternative hypotheses, namely, (i) that the accused
had himself deposited the physical items which were recovered;
or (ii) only the accused knew that the physical items were lying
at that place. The second hypothesis is wholly compatible with
the innocence of the accused, whereas the first would be a
factor to show involvement of the accused in the offence. The
court has to analyse which of the hypotheses should be
accepted in a particular case.
24. Section 27 of the Evidence Act is frequently used by the
police, and the courts must be vigilant about its application to
ensure credibility of evidence, as the provision is vulnerable to
abuse. However, this does not mean that in every case
invocation of Section 27 of the Evidence Act must be seen with
suspicion and is to be discarded as perfunctory and unworthy of
credence.
25. The pre-requisite of police custody, within the meaning of
Section 27 of the Evidence Act, ought to be read pragmatically
and not formalistically or euphemistically. In the present case,
the disclosure statement (Exhibit P-37) was made by the
appellant – Perumal Raja @ Perumal on 25.04.2008, when he
was detained in another case, namely, FIR No. 204/2008,
registered at PS Grand Bazar, Puducherry, relating to the
murder of Rajaram. He was subsequently arrested in this case,
that is FIR. No.80/2008, which was registered at PS
Odiansalai, Puducherry. The expression “custody” under
Section 27 of the Evidence Act does not mean formal custody. It
includes any kind of restriction, restraint or even surveillance
by the police. Even if the accused was not formally arrested at
20 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -21-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
the time of giving information, the accused ought to be deemed,
for all practical purposes, in the custody of the police.
32. Now the principles set forth thereins are that the defence, is
required to be proving;
i) That the disclosure statement and the consequent thereto
recovery being forged or fabricated through the defence proving
that the discovery of fact, as made in pursuance to a signatured
disclosure statement made by the accused to the investigating
officer, during the term of his custodial interrogation, rather not
leading to the discovery of the incriminatory fact;
ii) That the fact discovered was planted;
iii) It was easily available in the market;
iv) It not being made from a secluded place thus exclusively
within the knowledge of the accused.
v) The recovery thereof made through the recovery memo in
pursuance to the making of a disclosure statement, rather not
being enclosed in a sealed cloth parcel nor the incriminatory
item enclosed therein becoming sent, if required, for analyses to
the FSL concerned, nor the same becoming shown to the doctor
concerned, who steps into the witness box for proving that with
the user of the relevant recovery, thus resulted in the causings of
the fatal ante mortem injuries or in the causing of the relevant
life endangering injuries, as the case may be, upon the
concerned.
vi) That the defence is also required to be impeaching the
credit of the marginal witnesses, both to the disclosure
21 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -22-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
statement and to the recovery memo by ensuring that the said
marginal witnesses, do make speakings, that the recoveries were
not made in their presence and by making further speakings that
they are compelled, tutored or coerced by the investigating
officer concerned, to sign the apposite memos. Conspicuously,
despite the fact that the said recovery memos were not made in
pursuance to the accused leading the investigating officer to the
site of recovery. Contrarily the recovery memo(s) becoming
prepared in the police station concerned.
vii) The defence adducing evidence to the extent that with
there being an immense gap inter se the making of the
signatured disclosure statement and the consequent thereto
recovery being made, that therebys the recovered items or the
discovered fact, rather becoming planted onto the relevant site,
through a stratagem employed by the investigating officer.
33. Therefore, unless the said defence(s) are well raised and are
also ably proven, thereupon the making of a disclosure statement by the
accused and the consequent thereto recovery, but are to be assigned
credence. Conspicuously, when the said incriminatory link in the chain of
incriminatory evidence rather is also the pivotal corroborative link, thus even
in a case based upon eye witness account.
34. Be that as it may, if upon a prosecution case rested upon eye
witness account, the eye witness concerned, resiles therefrom his previously
made statement. Moreover, also upon his becoming cross-examined by the
learned Public Prosecutor concerned, thus the judicial conscience of the
22 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -23-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
Court become completely satisfied that the investigating officer concerned,
did record, thus a fabricated apposite previously made statement in writing,
therebys the Courts would be led to declare that the said made apposite
resilings are well made resilings by the eye witness concerned, thus from his
previously made statement in writing.
35. Moreover, in case the Court, in the above manner, becomes
satisfied about the well made resilings by the eye witness concerned, to the
crime event, thereupon the Court may consequently draw a conclusion, that
the recoveries made in pursuance to the disclosure statement made by the
accused, even if they do become ably proven, yet therebys may be the said
disclosure statement, and, the consequent thereto made recoveries also
loosing their evidentiary tenacity. The said rule is not a straitjacket principle,
but it has to be carefully applied depending upon the facts, circumstances
and evidence in each case. Tritely put in the said event, upon comparative
weighings being made of the well made resilings, thus by the eye witness
concerned, from his previously made statement in writing, and, of the well
proven recoveries made in pursuance to the efficaciously proven disclosure
statement rendered by the accused, the Court is required to be drawing a
conclusion, as to whether evidentiary tenacity has to be yet assigned to the
disclosure statement and the pursuant thereto recovery memo, especially
when they become ably proven and also do not fall foul from the above
stated principles, and/or to the well made resiling by the eye witness
concerned, from his previously recorded statement in writing. Emphatically,
the said exercise requires an insightful apposite comparative analyses being
made.
23 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -24-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
36. To a limited extent also if there is clear cogent medical account,
which alike, a frailly rendered eye witness account to the extent (supra), vis-a-
vis the prosecution case based upon eye witness account rather unfolds qua the
ante mortem injuries or other injuries as became entailed on the apposite
regions of the body(ies) concerned, thus not being a sequel of users thereovers
of the recovered weapon of offence. Resultantly therebys too, the apposite
signatured disclosure statement and the consequent thereto recovery, when may
be is of corroborative evidentiary vigor, but when other adduced prosecution
evidence, but also likewise fails to connect the recoveries with the medical
account. In sequel, thus therebys the said signatured disclosure statement and
the consequent thereto recovery, thus may also loose their evidentiary vigor.
Even the said rule has to be carefully applied depending upon the facts,
circumstances, and, the adduced evidence in every case.
37. However, in a case based upon circumstantial evidence when
the appositely made signatured disclosure statement by the accused and the
consequent thereto prepared recovery memos, do not fall foul, of the above
stated principles, therebys they acquire grave evidentiary vigor, especially
when in pursuance thereto able recoveries are made.
38. The makings of signatured disclosure statement and the
consequent thereto recoveries, upon able proof becoming rendered qua both,
thus form firm incriminatory links in a case rested upon circumstantial
evidence. In the above genre of cases, the prosecution apart from proving the
above genre of charges, thus also become encumbered with the duty to
discharge the apposite onus, through also cogently proving other
incriminatory links, if they are so adduced in evidence, rather for sustaining
the charge drawn against the accused.
24 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -25-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
39. Consequently, since the statutory provisions enclosed in Section
25 of the Indian Evidence Act, provisions whereof becomes extracted
hereinafter, do not assign statutory admissibility to a simpliciter/bald
confession made by an accused, thus before the police officer, rather during
the term of his suffering custodial interrogation, but when the exception
thereto, becomes engrafted in Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act,
provisions whereof becomes extracted hereinafter. Therefore, therebys when
there is a statutory recognition of admissibility to a confession, as, made by
an accused before a police officer, but only when the confession, as made by
the accused, before the police officer concerned, but becomes made during
the term of his spending police custody, whereafters the said incriminatory
confession, rather also evidently leads the accused, to lead the investigating
officer to the place of discovery, place whereof, is exclusively within the
domain of his exclusive knowledge.
“25. Confession to police-officer not to be proved.–No confession made
to a police-officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any
offence.
x x x x x
27. How much of information received from accused may be proved.–
Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence
of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the
custody of a police-officer, so much of such information, whether it
amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby
discovered, may be proved.”
40. Significantly, it would not be insagacious to straightaway oust
the said made signatured disclosure statement or the consequent thereto
recovery, unless both fall foul of the above principles, besides unless the said
principles become proven by the defence. Contrarily, in case the disclosure
statement and the consequent thereto recovery enclosed in the respective
25 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -26-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
memos, do not fall foul of the above principles rather when they become
cogently established to link the accused with the relevant charge.
Resultantly, if the said comprises but a pivotal incriminatory link for proving
the charge drawn against the accused, therebys the snatching of the above
incriminatory link from the prosecution, through straightaway rejecting the
same, but would result in perpetration of injustice to the victim or to the
family members of the deceased, as the case may be.
41. Now coming to the facts at hand, since the disclosure statement
and the consequent thereto recovery do become efficaciously proven by the
prosecution. Moreover, when none of the marginal witnesses, to the said
memos become adequately impeached rather for belying the validity of
drawings of the memos nor also when it has been proven that the said
memos are fabricated or engineered, besides when it is also not proven that
the disclosure (supra) did not lead to the discovery of the apposite fact from
the relevant place of hiding, thus only within the exclusive knowledge of the
accused.
42. Conspicuously also, when the said disclosure statement is but
not a bald or simpliciter disclosure statement, but evidently did lead to the
making of efficacious recovery(ies), at the instance of the accused, to the
police officer concerned.
43. Consequently, when therebys the above evident facts rather do
not fall foul of the above stated/underlined principles in the verdicts (supra).
Consequently, both the disclosure statement, and, the consequent thereto
recovery, when do become efficaciously proven, therebys theretos immense
evidentiary tenacity is to be assigned. Preeminently also when thus they do
26 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -27-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
corroborate the rendition of a credible eye witness account as becomes
rendered the prosecution witnesses (supra). Moreover, when the memos
(supra) also lend corroboration to the medical account, therebys through all
the links (supra), the charge drawn against the accused becomes proven to
the hilt.
44. In addition, the prosecution has also proved the recovery of the
jeep used in the crime incident through recovery memo Ex.PF, besides has
proven registration certificate of the said vehicle (Ex. P3), which was in the
name of the father of the deceased, and, has also proven the arms licence
(Ex. P4), as became issued in the name of the deceased.
45. Moreover therebys corroboration is lent to the supra credible
eye witness account rendered vis-a-vis the crime event by PW-2 and by PW-
3 besides also therebys corroboration is lent to the supra recoveries, as
became respectively effected through recovery memos (supra).
Post-mortem report
46. The post-mortem report, to which Ex. PB is assigned, became
proven by PW-1. PW-1 in his examination-in-chief, has deposed that on
making an autopsy on the body of deceased Amanpreet Singh alias Banni,
by him and by Dr. Mohinder Singh, thus theirs noticing thereons the
hereinafter extracted ante mortem injuries-
“1. Surgical stitched wound 8″ long with convexty upwards on
the left frontal parietal and occipital areas. The red contusion
6″x4” above and below the stitched wound along with deffused
swelling was present.
2. Red contused swelling 4″x2″ on the top of head just right
to the midline with swelling.
3. Both eyes were blackened.
4. Red contusion 6″x1″ vertical on the anterior part of the
left deltoid.
27 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DBCRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -28-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
5. Red contusion 5″x1″ parallel and 1½ behind the injury
No. 4.
6. Abrasion ½” x ½” on the lateral side of the left elbow.
7. Three red contusions 6″ x 2″ placed obliquely midlateral
side of the left thigh.
8. Abraded contusion 3″x4″ on the left mexillary and
zygomatic area.
9. Abrasion ¾” x ½” on the left angle of mandible.
10. Multiple liner abrasion ¾” x 1/6″ on the left side of face.
11. Two liner abrasions 5″ x 1/6″ on the mid left lateral side of
chest.
12. Abraded area 2 ½” x 2″ on the left parasternal area.
13. Abrasion ¾” x ½” on the lateral and of right clevical.
On exploration of injury No. 1 there was haemotoma under
the scalp and bone piece measuring 5″ x 4″ was missing.”
47. Furthermore, PW-1 also made a speaking in his examination-in-
chief, that the cause of demise of the deceased was owing to shock as a
result of head injuries, which were stated to be ante mortem in nature, and,
also sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
48. The above made echoings by PW-1, in his examination-in-chief,
became never challenged through any efficacious cross-examination, being
made upon him, by the learned defence counsel. Therefore, the opinion, as
made by PW-1 qua the demise of the deceased, thus acquires formidable
force. Consequently, the above echoings, as made by PW-1, in his
examination-in-chief, do relate, the fatal ante-mortem injuries to the time of
the crime event hence taking place at the crime site.
49. Though the defence witnesses DW-1 and DW-3 have deposed
that two days prior to the alleged occurrence, the deceased went to the house
of a lady namely Balbiro, who was having bad reputation and the people of
the locality were having objection on his visiting the house of said lady.
28 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -29-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
They further deposed that on the day of alleged occurrence, the accused
again visited the house of the said lady, whereupon people of their locality
gathered there and surrounded the house of Balbiro. Some boys who were
playing cricket there had a scuffle with the deceased, and the the deceased
suffered a bat injury in the said scuffle.
50. However, the testifications made by the said witnesses do not
render an eye witness account vis-a-vis the crime event, but was only
suggestive, that the deceased was a regular visitor to the house of one
Balbiro. If so, the above is only suggestive of some iota of inimicality
between the accused and the deceased, but yet any inimicaility which was
prevailing amongst the accused and the deceased, thus becomes eclipsed
from all the supra made inferences by this Court.
51. Consequently, with the afore observations, all the criminal
appeals (supra) filed by the appellants are dismissed.
52. Insofar as CRR-1406-2004, filed by the father of the deceased,
is concerned, keeping in view the old age of the petitioner, who is the father
of the deceased, the accused-respondents No. 1 to 3 are directed to pay
Rs. 50,000/- each as compensation amount to the petitioner.
Final Order
53. The result of the above discussion, is that, this Court does not
find any merit in the appeals preferred by the appellants, and, is constrained
to dismiss them. Consequently, all the criminal appeals (supra) are
dismissed. The impugned verdict of conviction, as becomes recorded upon
the convicts-appellants, by the learned convicting Court, is maintained, and,
affirmed. Moreover, the consequent thereto order of sentence is also
29 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001481-DB
CRA-D-49-DB-2004 (O&M) -30-
CRA-D-165-DB-2004 (O&M)
CRA-D-169-DB-2004 (O&M) &
CRR-1406-2004
affirmed. If the convicts-appellants are on bail, thereupon, the sentence as
imposed upon them, be ensured to be forthwith executed by the learned trial
Judge concerned, through his drawing committal warrants. The case
property be dealt with, in accordance with law, but after the expiry of the
period of limitation for the filing of an appeal.
54. CRR-1406-2004 stands disposed of in the above terms.
55. Records be sent down forthwith.
56. The miscellaneous application(s), if any, is/are also disposed of.
(SURESHWAR THAKUR)
JUDGE
(SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
JUDGE
January 07, 2025
Gurpreet
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
30 of 30
::: Downloaded on – 09-01-2025 22:21:28 :::