9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Conviction and sentence of death. 2. Charges of murder in furtherance of common intention. 3. Identification of the accused. 4. Recovery of firearms and other evidence. 5. Footprint evidence. 6. Eyewitness testimonies. 7. Absconding of the accused. 8. Criticisms of the prosecution's evidence and witnesses. Detailed Analysis: 1. Conviction and Sentence of Death: The appellants, Pritam Singh Fatehpuri and Pritam Singh Lohara, were convicted and sentenced to death by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, and the sentence was confirmed by the High Court of Punjab at Simla. The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence and upheld the conviction and sentence. 2. Charges of Murder in Furtherance of Common Intention: Both appellants, along with two others who absconded, were charged with committing the murders of Chanan Singh Orara and Sardul Singh by shooting them with firearms on 2-5-1953. The prosecution's story detailed how the accused boarded a lorry, reserved seats, and executed the murders when the lorry neared the village Bohoru. 3. Identification of the Accused: - Pritam Singh Fatehpuri: Identified by Gurdip Singh and Dial Singh in an identification parade held on 29-5-1953. However, the identification evidence was criticized as only two out of sixteen witnesses identified him. - Pritam Singh Lohara: Identified by eleven out of sixteen witnesses in an identification parade held on 17-6-1953. The accused alleged that he was shown to the witnesses before the parade, which was rejected by the courts. 4. Recovery of Firearms and Other Evidence: - Pritam Singh Fatehpuri: A rifle (Ex. P-14) taken from Sardul Singh was recovered from him when he was arrested. The recovery was supported by witnesses Milka Singh and Sohan Singh. - Pritam Singh Lohara: A revolver (Ex. P-56) was recovered based on his disclosure. However, his conviction under the Arms Act was set aside by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot, who found the recovery suspicious. 5. Footprint Evidence: - Pritam Singh Fatehpuri: Footprints found at the crime scene matched the impressions made by shoes recovered from his house. The court observed that the shoes fitted his feet, despite his complaint that they were too tight. - Pritam Singh Lohara: Footprints with a distinctive limp matched his gait. This evidence was corroborated by the impressions made in a sandy patch in the jail. 6. Eyewitness Testimonies: The prosecution presented eyewitnesses, including police constables Thakar Singh and Raj Pal, who were in the lorry. Despite criticisms, the courts found their testimonies credible. The driver of the lorry, Pritam Singh, turned hostile but his initial description in the FIR was considered sufficient to identify the accused. 7. Absconding of the Accused: Both accused absconded after the incident. Pritam Singh Fatehpuri was arrested on the night between 26th and 27th May 1953, and Pritam Singh Lohara was arrested on 9-6-1953. Their absconding was considered a significant incriminating circumstance. 8. Criticisms of the Prosecution's Evidence and Witnesses: - The defense criticized the identification parades, recovery of firearms, and the credibility of witnesses. - The court scrutinized these criticisms but found the evidence sufficient to uphold the convictions. - The High Court and the Supreme Court both dismissed the criticisms, relying on the consistent findings of the lower courts. Conclusion: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence of death for both Pritam Singh Fatehpuri and Pritam Singh Lohara. The evidence, including identification, recovery of firearms, footprint evidence, eyewitness testimonies, and their absconding, was found sufficient to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
|
