Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
BHAG SINGH & ORS. ETC., GURMUKH SINGH AND ANOTHER
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF PUNJAB
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/09/1997
BENCH:
M.M. MUKHERJEE, K.T. THOMAS
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1997
Present:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.K. Mukherjee
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.T. Thomas
U.R. Lalit, and T.S. Arunachalam, Sr. Advs. L.K. Pandey,
Adv. with them for the appellants. in Crl. A.No. 638/95.
K.B. Sinha, Sr. Adv., H.S. Munjral, Vikrant Rana and Ms.
B. Rana, Advs with him for the appellant in Crl. A.No.
402/95 for M/S. S.S. Rana & Co., Advs.
Ajay Bansal, Adv. for R.S. Sodhi, adv. for the Respondents
J U D G E M E N T
The following Judgment of the Court was delivered:
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 402 OF 1995
THOMAS, J.
This is the story of a murder committed as revenge for
another murder. Appellants were involved in the second
murder and they challenged the conviction and sentence
imposed on them by the sessions court and confirmed by the
High court in appeal.
The murdered person in this case was one Bagicha Singh.
There was a dispute over one house building as between the
said Bagicha Singh and one Jagtar Singh which remained alive
for some time. In that dispute, Karnail Singh (father of
accused Nos.1 to 3) gave support to jagtar Singh. In a
Previous incident the said Karnail Singh was murdered and a
criminal case was charge-sheeted against PW-12 Balkar singh,
PW-13 Swaran Singh and PW-14 Hardip Singh and some others.
According to the prosecution version the occurrence in
this case happened on the night of 27-1-1985 at about 8.00
P.M. when deceased Bagicha Singh was going in the company of
PW-12, PW-13 and PW-14 to reach their village. They were
waylaid by eight assailants including the appellants herein
near the yard of one Harbans Singh. Appellant Gurmukh Singh
(A-1) made an exhortation to his companion assailants to
carry out the onslaughts for avenging the murder of his
father Karnail Singh. A-4 Satnam Singh Shot at the deceased
with a gun and A-1 Gurmukh Singh, A-3 Gurbinder Singh and A-
6 Gurbux Singh attacked the deceased with kirpans and A-2
Harjinder Singh with a spear. A-5 Mohinder Singh and A-7
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
Darshan Singh dealt blows on PW-13 Swarn Singh with kirpans
while A-8 Bhag Singh fired a gun shot at him. As the
assailants thought that their mission was accomplished they
all fled from the place with the weapons.
Bagicha Singh died on the spot and PW-13 Swarn Singh
injured was removed to the hospital. First Information was
lodged by PW-14 Hardip Singh. All the accused were arrested
ought not have been relied on. Second is, there was no
reason for the appellants to persist with the revenge for
the murder of Karnail Singh as the murderers were convicted
by the Court. Third is, it was impossible for any person to
recount with meticulous exactitude the various individual
acts done by each assailant and since the witnesses in this
case have testified so, their testimony should have been
rejected on that score alone.
It may be true that PW-12 Balkar Singh, PW-13 Swarn
Singh and PW-14 Hardip Singh must have been simmering with
grouse against the appellants for giving evidence against
them which led to their conviction. Bad Blood would have
existed as between them, But it is a fact that PW-13 Swarn
Singh had also suffered injuries in this occurrence. Hence
it is most unlikely that he would have spared the actual
assailants and falsely implicated these appellants merely
because he is otherwise ill disposed to them.
It is in evidence that despite conviction and sentence
passed on the accused in Karnail Singh Murder case they were
released on bail as per orders of this Court during pendency
of the appeals filed by them. So the fact of conviction
would not have quenched the revenging thirst towards the
murderers of Karnail Singh.
The third point which was forcibly pressed into service
by counsel is that no eye witnesses can be expected to and
some weapons were recovered by the police and completion of
investigation eight persons including the appellants were
challenged. Though the Sessions Court convicted all the
eight accused of offences of murders, attempt to commit
murder an rioting etc. the High Court of Punjab and Haryana
acquitted A-2 Harjinder Singh, A-4 Satnam Singh and A-5
Mohinder Singh. The conviction and sentence passed on the
appellants were, however, confirmed by the High Court and
hence these appeals by special leave.
There is no dispute that PW-13 Swarn Singh was present
at the scene and he also sustained serious injurious
including lacerated and incised wounds on the head. This
fact helps us to agree with the finding of the two courts
that PW-13 Swarn Singh was able to see the assailants who
attacked him and the deceased. He mentioned the names of the
appellants as assailants without doubt. Evidence shows that
it was a moonlit night. The other two eye witnesses PW-12
Balkar Singh and PW-14 Hardip Singh supported the version of
PW-13 Swarn Singh.
Learned counsel for the appellants adopted a three
pronged contention on the above evidence. First is, as the
witnesses were all ill disposed to the appellants by the
fact that they were convicted in the earlier murder case (in
which Karnail Singh died) on the strength of the evidence
given by the appellants, the testimony of those witnesses
peak with precision regarding the respective roles played by
each assailant including the sites of the body where each
blow fell particularly since the occurrence happened during
night time and in that case when the witnesses spoke with
exactitude their testimony become highly incredible.
It is a general handicap attached to all eye witnesses,
if they fail to speak with precision their evidence would be
assailed as vague and evasive, on the contrary if they speak
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
to all events very well and correctly their evidence becomes
vulnerable to be attacked as tutored. Both approaches are
dogmatic and fraught with lack of pragmatism. The testimony
of a witness should be viewed from broad angles. It should
not be weighed in golden scales, but with cogent standards.
In a particular case an eye witness may be able to narrate
the incident with all details without mistake if the
occurrence had made an imprint on the canvass of his mind in
the sequences in which it occurred. He may be a person whose
capacity for absorption and retention of events is stronger
then another person. It should be remembered that what he
witnessed was not something that happens usually but a very
exceptional one so far as he is concerned. If he reproduces
it in the same sequences as it registered in his mind the
testimony cannot be dubbed as artificial on that score
alone.
Here the trial court which had the opportunity to hear
the narration of the incident from those witnesses was
impressed by the truth of the version. It is not fair to say
now that the testimony of those witnesses deserved rejection
for its precision. That apart, they would have spoken in the
court as answers to different questions put to them by the
chief examiner. It depends on the ability of the chief
examiner in eliciting answers from the witness in the
correct order of events. Looking at the evidence from this
angle we are not disposed to castigate the evidence of the
eye witness in this case for speaking to the details
correctly.
We do not find any good ground to interfere with the
conviction and sentence passed on the appellants as
confirmed by the High Court. Accordingly, we dismiss these
appeals.