1981 (1) TMI 249 - SC - Indian Laws

Orders of acquittal - allegation of murder. Held that - Partly allow this appeal by the State, set aside the acquittal of Wassan Singh and Mukhtar Singh accused (respondents) and convict them under Section 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code for the murder of Hazara Singh deceased and sentence each of them to imprisonment for life. We would, however, accord the benefit of doubt to the rest of the accused (respondents) and maintain their acquittal on all the counts. Wasson Singh and Mukhtar Singh shall surrender to their bail-bonds to serve out the sentences inflicted on them.

Issues Involved:
1. Acquittal of the accused by the High Court.
2. Credibility of eyewitnesses Resham Singh (P.W.2) and Bachan Singh (P.W.3).
3. Motive of the accused.
4. Promptness and reliability of the First Information Report (F.I.R.).
5. Investigation by Sub-Inspector Bishamber Lal.
6. Recovery of the rifle and ballistic evidence.
7. Presence and participation of each accused in the murders.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Acquittal of the Accused by the High Court:
The High Court acquitted the accused based on several reasons, including the close relationship of the eyewitnesses to the deceased, lack of established motive for most accused, antecedents of the eyewitnesses, and perceived improbabilities in the prosecution's story.

2. Credibility of Eyewitnesses Resham Singh (P.W.2) and Bachan Singh (P.W.3):
The High Court rejected the testimony of Resham Singh and Bachan Singh due to their close relationship with the deceased, their criminal antecedents, and inconsistencies in their statements. The Supreme Court, however, found that discrepancies in collateral facts were not sufficient to reject their testimony, especially given the prompt lodging of the F.I.R. and the general consistency in their accounts regarding the main incident.

3. Motive of the Accused:
The trial court found that Wasson Singh had a strong motive to murder Hazara Singh due to past enmity. The High Court, however, was not convinced of the motive for the other accused. The Supreme Court agreed with the trial court regarding Wasson Singh's motive and also found sufficient evidence of Mukhtar Singh's motive due to a previous quarrel.

4. Promptness and Reliability of the First Information Report (F.I.R.):
The F.I.R. was lodged by Resham Singh at 4.30 p.m., shortly after the occurrence at 3.30 p.m., and reached the Magistrate by 6.30 p.m. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of this promptitude, which provided valuable corroboration of Resham Singh's testimony and made it reliable.

5. Investigation by Sub-Inspector Bishamber Lal:
The High Court criticized the investigation, particularly the delay in sending the crime cartridges to the ballistic expert and the presence of Joginder Singh near the crime scene. The Supreme Court acknowledged the biased investigation but found that it did not necessarily invalidate the evidence of the recovery of the rifle and the crime cartridges.

6. Recovery of the Rifle and Ballistic Evidence:
The trial court and the Supreme Court found that the rifle recovered from Mukhtar Singh was linked to the crime cartridges found at the scene. Despite the High Court's doubts, the Supreme Court accepted the ballistic expert's report and the circumstances of the rifle's recovery as corroborative evidence against Mukhtar Singh.

7. Presence and Participation of Each Accused in the Murders:
The Supreme Court found sufficient evidence to convict Wasson Singh and Mukhtar Singh for the murder of Hazara Singh based on the eyewitness testimony and corroborative evidence. However, it found the evidence against the other accused insufficient, particularly in the absence of a clear motive and reliable identification during the pursuit.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the acquittal of Wasson Singh and Mukhtar Singh for the murder of Hazara Singh and sentencing them to life imprisonment. The acquittal of the other accused was maintained due to insufficient evidence.

← Previous Next →