# Bishan Singh & Or« v. The State of Puniab, Cr. App. No. 125/1972 decided

- **Citation:** [1974] 1 S.C.R. 528
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1973-08-28
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 189 of 1971
- **Bench:** H. R. Khanna, A. Alagiriswami
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/bishan-singh-or-v-the-state-of-puniab-cr-app-no-125-1972-decided-6000
- **Pages:** 7

## Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, s. 411-Reversal by High C.ourlof verdict
o/ acquittal passed by trial court-Principles to be ob~crved by High Court.
The appellants were tried for murder and causing grievous hurt.
They were
acquitted by the Trial Court. The High Court however, relying on two of the
witnesses produced by the prosecution, convicted them.
In appeal by special
leave to this Court it was contended that in reversing the verdi'ct of acquittal the
High Court had acted outside its jurisdiction under -;. 417 Criminal Procedure
Code and had not observed the principles laid down by this Court.
Dismissing the appeal,
A
B
c
HELD : It is well settled that the High Court in appeal under s. 417 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure has full power to review at large the evidence upon
which the order of acquittal was founded and to reach the conclusion that upon
the evidence the order of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be
pJ"ce<l on that power unless it be found expressly stated in the Code, but in
exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reaching its conclusion
upon fact the High Court should give proper weight and consideration to such
D·
matters as (l) the views of the trial judge as to the credibility of the witnesses;
(2) the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, a presumption cer.
tainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitttd at his trial; (3) the
right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and ( 4) the .slowness of an
appellate court in disturbing) a finding of fact arrived at by a ju,dge who had the
advantage of seeing the witness.
r534E1
Bishan Singh & Or« v. The State of Puniab, Cr. App. No. 125/1972 decided
on August 9, 1973, referred to
E
,
The Judgment of the High Court in the present case did not any way run
counter ta the above principles and called for no interference.

## Text

528
ROOP SINGH AND OTHERS
t.
TIIE STATE OF PUNJAB
August 28, 1973
[H. R. KHANNA AND A. ALAGIRISWAMI, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, s. 411-Reversal by High C.ourlof verdict
o/ acquittal passed by trial court-Principles to be ob~crved by High Court.
The appellants were tried for murder and causing grievous hurt.
They were
acquitted by the Trial Court. The High Court however, relying on two of the
witnesses produced by the prosecution, convicted them.
In appeal by special
leave to this Court it was contended that in reversing the verdi'ct of acquittal the
High Court had acted outside its jurisdiction under -;. 417 Criminal Procedure
Code and had not observed the principles laid down by this Court.
Dismissing the appeal,
A
B
c
HELD : It is well settled that the High Court in appeal under s. 417 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure has full power to review at large the evidence upon
which the order of acquittal was founded and to reach the conclusion that upon
the evidence the order of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be
pJ"ce<l on that power unless it be found expressly stated in the Code, but in
exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reaching its conclusion
upon fact the High Court should give proper weight and consideration to such
D·
matters as (l) the views of the trial judge as to the credibility of the witnesses;
(2) the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, a presumption cer.
tainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitttd at his trial; (3) the
right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and ( 4) the .slowness of an
appellate court in disturbing) a finding of fact arrived at by a ju,dge who had the
advantage of seeing the witness.
r534E1
Bishan Singh & Or« v. The State of Puniab, Cr. App. No. 125/1972 decided
on August 9, 1973, referred to
E
,
The Judgment of the High Court in the present case did not any way run
counter ta the above principles and called for no interference.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 189
of 1971.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and Order dated
February 26, 1971, of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 96 of 1968.
Nuruddin Ahmed and U. P. Singh, for the appellants.
O. P. Sharma, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
KHANNA, J. This is an appeal by special leave by Roop Singh
(30), Paranjan Singh (42), Nirbhai Singh (22), Maghar Singh (56),
Tara Singh (30) and Naib Singh (25) against the judgment of the
Punjab & Haryana High Court. The six appellants were tried along
with Major Singh (14), Inder Singh (50) and Teja Singh (42) in the
court of the Additional Sessions Judge Barna!a on various charges
in connection with an occurrence which resulted in the death of three
persons, Mastan Singh (55), Amar Singh (55) and Mohinder Singh
(26) and injuries to Bachan Singh (PW 9)· Learned Additional
Sessions Judge acquitted all the nine accused. On appeal by the State
f
G
H
,.
A
B
c
D
•
E
F
G
H
ROOP SINGH V, PUNJAB (KHANNA, J.)
529
of Punjab, the High Court convicted the six accused appellants un~er
section 302 read with section 149 and section 326 read with section
149 Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life on the first count and rigorous imprisonment for
a period of three years on the second count. Both the sentences
were ordered to run concurrently.
The State appeal against
the
acquittal of Major Singh, Inder Singh and Teja Singh was dismissed.
The case for the prosecution is that there was a long standing
enmity between the party of the accused and that of the three deceased
persons.
In 1964 Kaka Singh, brother of Roop Singh accused, and
Nagender Singh, father of Major Singh accused and brother of Jnder
Singh accused, \Vere murdered.
Twelve persons, included
Atma
Singh Sarpanch PW, Bachan Singh PW and Mohinder Singh deceased
were prosecuted in the case relating to the murder of Kaka Singh
and Nagender Singh.
Four accused in that case, including Atma
Singh, Bachan and Mohinder Singh were
adquitted,
while
!he
remaining accused were convicted an? sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Another cause of strained relations between the parties
was that Hazura Singh, fatker of Paranjan Singh accused, had been
murdered amout 12 or 13 years ago. Nek Singh, Bachhattar Singh
an<l Bikar Singh, sons of Amar Singh deceased, were convicted by
the trial court in the case relating to the murder of Hazura Singh, but
they were acquitted on ·appeal by the High Court. security proceedings were aloo started by the police against the parties on account of
their strained relations.
Mastan Singh deceased, it is stated had given his land on batai to
Amar Singh deceased. The maize crop from the land was thrashed
on November 7, 1966 at the mill of one Dalip Singh at a short
distance from the abadi of village Kanga,r to which the parties
belonged.
The thrashing work was complete by 3 p.m. At about
5-30 p.m· on that day Amar Singh deceased and his son PW Gurmail
Singh (16) as well as Mastan Singh deceased, his son Mohinder
Singh deceased and nephew PW Bachan Singh ( 45) were present at
the mills, as they were engaged at that time in removing the thrashed
ma!ze. . While these ~sons were busy in weighing and tying
the
llllllze m bundles, the mne accused came there from the direction of
the vilJage abadi.
Roop Singh, Inder Singh and Major Singh were
armed with barchhas, while Teja Singh had a gun.
The remaining
:iccused carried gandasas.
Naib Singh, accused, it may be
stated,
is the son of Teia Singh. As soon as the accused arrived there Roop
Singh shouted that the assailants of
Kaka Singh
and N ~gender
Singh would not be spared. Naib Singh then gave a gandasa blow
on the head of Bachan Singh. The wrong side of the gandasa struck
the head ~f Bachan Singh, whereafter another gandasa blow was given
by Tar.a Smgh accused on the left wrist of Bachan Singh. Naib Singh
then a1D1ed a gandasa blow at Bachan Singh and he was struck by
the lathi portion of that gandasa.
Mastan Singh deseased then ran
towards a well. Mastan Singh had hardly covered a distance of
8 or 9 karams., when Teja Singh, who was holding a gun, came in front
of Mast~n Singh and asked him to stop. Mastan Singh took shelter
530
Sl'PREME COURT REPORTS
[ 19'74], 1 S.C.R:.
behind the raised wall of the well but he was given a barchha blow
in the neck by Roop Singh. Naib Singh, Maghar Singh and Tara Singh
then gave gandasa blows to Mastan Sing]j.
Aft~r Mastan Singh had
fallen down, further injuries were caused to him by Roop Singh,
Tara Singh, Maghar Singh and Naib Singh with lheir respective
weapons. Mastan Singh died at the spot. Mohinder Singh deceased
tried to run towards village Dina but he
was surrounded at
a.
distance of about 18 karams by Nirbhai Singh, Paranjan Singh,
lnder Singh and Major Sing!!. Mohinder Singh was given a gandasa
blow on his head .by Nirbhai Singh whereafter all the above mentioned four accused caused further injuries to Mohinder Singh
with
their respective weapons. Mohinder Singh too died at the sp:it. After
giving blows to Mastan Singh, Tara Singh, Roop Singh, Naib Singh
and Ma,ghar Singh ran after Amar Singh and surrounded him near
the house of one Tara Singh refugee. Tara Singh and Maghar Singh
gave gandasa blows on the head of Amar Singh. A barchha blow was
given in the abdomen of Amar Singh by Roop Singh,. while Naib
Singh gave a gandasa blow on the neck of Amar Singh. Further
injuries were caused to Amar Singh by these four accused and he
too died at the spot. The occurrence, it is stated, was witnessed by
Bahadur Singh (PW 3), Bachan Singh (PW 9), Gurmai! Singh (PW
12) and Atma Singh Sarpanch (PW 15.)· All the nine accused then
\vent in pursuit of Atma Singh Sarpanch who ran inside the village
abadi.
Bachan Singh also ran to the house of Gajjan Singh, while
Gurmail Singh ran to his own house.
Atma Singh Sarpanch could
not, however, be secured py the accused.
Accompanied by Gajjan Singh, Bachan Singh, according to the
prosecution, went through a circuitous route to police station Dialpura, at a distance of two miles from the place of occurrence and
lodged there report P.J. at 7 p.m. Bachan Singh was thereafter sent
to hospital at Bhagta, where his injuries were examined by Dr. Surjit
Singh at 10·410 p.m. Bhagta is at a distance of 7 or 8 mUes from the
police station.
After report about the present occurrence had been
lodged at the police station, _Sub Inspector Jagjit Singh left the police
station and arrived at the place of occurrence at about 8.15 p.m.
The Sub Inspe~tor found the -three dead bodies lying there without
being guarded by any one.
As it was late in the night, the Sub
J nspector could not prepare inquest reports relating to the
dead
bodies.
On the following morning, the Sub Inspector prepared inquest report. Blood-stained earth was taken into possession from the
places where the dead bodies were lying. Post mortem examination
on the dead bodies was performed by Dr. Tejinder Singh at Mand't
Phuf at distance of 14 miles from the place of occurrence on Nov--
ember 9, 1966. The nine accused were thereafter arrested and the
weapons of offenqe w~r~ recovered from th~m.
At the trial Bahadur Singh (PW 3) Bachan Singh (PW 9), Gurmai! Singh (PW 12) and Atma Singh (PW 15) gave eye witness account
of the occurrence and supported the prosecution case._ The accused,
ip their ~tatements under section 342 Code of Criminal Procedure,
A
(
[)
F
G
H
A
c
D
E
F
G
H
ROOP SINGH V. PUNJAB (KHANNA, /.)
531
denied the prosecution allegations about their having participated in
the present occurrence.
According to the accused,
they had been
falsely involved in this case due to enmity.
The trial court did not accept tJ:.' evidence of the eye witnesses.
The evidence about the recovery of the weapons of offence was also
not accepted. The trial court was further of the view that the injuries
which were found on the person of Bachan Singh PW were not received
during the course of the present occurrence. There was also delay, in
the opinion of the trial court, in lodging the first information report
with the police.
The High Court in appeal, on consideration of the evidence, found
that the testimony of Bachan Singh and Gurmail Singh was natural and
probable. The High Court did not place reliance upon the evidence
of Bahadur Singh and Atma Singh as, in the opinion of the High Court,
the reason given by those witnesses for their presence at the scene of
occurrence was not convincing. As regards the injuries on the person
of Bachan Singh, the High Court was of the view that they were received by him during the course of the present occurrence.
The High
Court agreed with the trial court that there was delay in lodging the
first information report, but that circumstance, in the opinion of the
High Court, was not sufficient to discard the evidence of Bachan Singh
and GurmaH Singh. The case against Teja Singh, Inder Singh and
Major Singh, in the opinion of the High Court, was not free from doubt.
The High Court in this context observed that Teja Singh, though armed
with a gun had not used it. Regarding Inder Singh and Major Singh
who were alleged to be armed with barchhas, the High Court observed
that only one stab wound had been found on the bodies of the three
deceased persons and the. same was attributed to Roop Singh. ln the
result, the six appellants were convicted and sentenced as above.
In appeal before us Mr. Nuruddin on behalf of the appellants has
argued that the trial court on consideration of the evidence had come to
the conclusion that the same was not reliable. The. High Court. it is
submitted, should uot have, in the circumstances, interfered with the
judgment of acquittal of the- trial court. As against that, Mr. Sharma
on behalf of the State has contended that there was no cogent ground
for the trial court to reject the evidence of Bachan Singh and Gurmai!
Singh.
The High Court, according to the learned counsel, accepted
the evidence of those two witnesses and interfered with the judgment
of acquittal fpr substantial reasons.
Jt has not been disputed before us that a number of injuries were
cau~ed to Mastan Singh, Amar Singh and Mohind-'r Singh deceased
durmg .the cou!se of the occurrence as a result of which they died.
Dr. Te1mder Smgh, who performed post mortem examination on the
three dead bodies, found nine incised wounds and 14 abrasions on the
body of Mohinder Sinjjh deceased.
There was also a post mortem
wound on the body due probably to eating by some animal. Two of
the incised wounds, one of which was on the lower part of the neck.
and had resulted in the cutting of the muscles, oesophagus and trachea,
and the other on the right side of the abdomen, were individually sufficient to cause death. Mastan Singh had five incised wounds, four con•
tusions and five abrasions. One of the incised wounds, which was on
532
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[ 1974 J I s.c.R.
the right side of the neck and had resulted in the cutting of the third
vertebra and the main vessels of the right side of the neck was indivi·
dually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of n~ture. Amar
Singh had five incised wounds, one stab wound, two lacerated wounds,
~)fle contused wound, three abrasions and an injury which had resulted
m fracture of the left radius and ulna. Two of the injuries of Amar
.Singh, namely, an incised wound which had resulted in the cuttina of
the skull bones completely on the back side of the head and a ~tab
~Ol;i~d with lacer~ted margins on the right side of the abdomen, were
md1V1dually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature
Omantum under the stab wound in the abdomen had also a wound
measuring t x t x t".
'
The nature of the injuries which were found on the bodies of the
three deceased persons leaves no doubt that the assailants intended to
cause their death. According to the case of the prosecution, the injuries
to the. three deceased persons which resulted in their death had been
caused by the appellants.
The appellants are further stated to have
caused injuries to Bachan Singh PW. The appellants have denied these
allegations. The High Court in holding the prosecutioh allegatk>ns in
this respect to be well founded has relied upon the evidence of Bachan
Singh (PW 9) and Gurmail Singh (PW 12). The High Court disagreed
with the learned Additional Sessions Judge who was of the view that
the above mentioned two witnesses were not present at the scene of
occurrence. There were, in our opinion, good and weighty reasons for
the High Court to accept the evidence of Ba~han Singh and Gurmail
Singh and to disayee with the trial court in this respect. According to·
both Bachan Singh and Gurmail Singh, they were present at the mills
of Dalip Singh along with the three deceased persons as they had to
remove thrashed maize. Bachan Singh PW is the nephew of Mastan
Singh deceased and had gone to the mills to assist in the removal of
the maize from the mills premises. Gurmail Singh is the son of Amar
Singh deceased and, as such, had been taken by Amar Singh for the
purpose of thrashing and carriage of the maize. The evidence of Sub
Inspector Jagjit Singh shows that he found two quintals and 35 kg of
maize lying at the place of occurrence when he arrived there. The
said maize was taken by the Sub-Inspector into possession. The evidence of the Sub,Inspector further shows that scale PS, weight measure
of 5 kg PIO, groom Pl I and chajjli Pl2 were also found there and
were taken into possession. These articles, it would seeni, were being
used for the .batai (division) of the maise as Mastan Singh's land had
been cultivated on batai by Amar Singh. It is natural for a father in
rural areas to take his son to a maize thrashing mills if the maize has
to be carried home after being thrashed at the mills. The explanation
given by Bachan Singh and Gurmail Singh regarding their presence at
the scene of occurrence is, in our opinion, convincing and 'there appears to be no cogent ground to disbelieve their evidence in this respect.
The fact that Bachan Singh had injuries on his person, which ate
alleged to have been received during the course of ·the present occurrence, lends further assurance to the testimony of Bachan Singh. We
are not impressed by the suggestion on behalf of the accused appellants
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
•
ROOP SINGH v. PUNJAB (Khanna, J.)
533
A
which seems to have found favour with the trial court that the in
juries on the person of Bachan Singh were sel!·infiicted ?r. se.lf-suITered.
Bachan Singh was found to have the followmg three miunes :
" ( I ) Incised wound (margin clean cut) 2 t" x t" x I" on
the dorsum of left wrist joint cutting the tendons underneath
and: also cutting the head of ulna of left arm. The tendons
B
were extenser tendon of left arm. The head of the ulna was
cutting through and through.
(2) Lacerated wound ('Martin's raggad) It" x t" x t',.
deep on the right side of the head on the posterior side, 4"
from the· right pinea.
(3) Bruise reddish .blue in colour, 3" x l" with interventC
ing area clear on the outer side of the right deltoid region."
Enjury No. 1 after X-ray was declared to be grievous. It is also in
evidence that Bachan Singh had to stay as an indoor patient in the
hospital for 21 or 22 days because of the injuries received by hiin .and
that during that perioo he could not carry on his ordinary avocations
of life.
Tue nature of injuries on the person of Bachan Singh was
such as would not, in our opinion, be normally suffiered by a person
D
with a view to create evidence regarding his presence at the scene of
occnrrence. We may mention in this context that no question was
put to Dr. Surjit Singh on t~e point as to whether the injuries of
Bachan Singh could be self-infiicted or self-suffered.
I.t is also, in
our opinion, highly improbable that after the murder of the three
deceased persons, Bachan Singh instead of going to the police station
would spend time on gettinll grievous and other injuries infticted on
I:
his person With a view to show his presence at the scene of occurrence.
1be fact that Bachan Singh received these injuries on the evening of
the day of occurrence cannot be disputed because Bachan Singh was
found ti:> have those injuries when he was examined at I 0.40 p.m. l>Y
Dr. Surjit Singh at Bhagta at a distance of about 7 or 8 iniles from
police station Dialpura.
F
G
H
It has been argued by Mr. Nuruddin that Bachan Singh and Gurmail
Singh. would run away a!)d, would not remain present near the scene
of occurrence after the assailants commenced their attack. This submission, in our opinion, is not well-founded. Gurmail Singh. is the
son of Amar Singh deceased, while Bachan Singh is the nephew of
Mastan S_ingh a!)d ooysin of Mohinder Singh.
Gurmail Singh and
Bachan Smgh would naturally be interested to know the fate of their
close relatives who w~re being attacked by the
assailants.
There
would be con~equently n.othing surprisi~g in the act of Gurmail Singh
and Bachan Smgh stoppmg at a safe distance and from there looking
~hind and seeing the assault on the three deceased persons. The
High Court on careful secrutiny of the evidence of Bachan Singh and
Gurmail Singh found the same to be natural and probable. We see
no cogent ground to take a different view. The evid~nce of the above
me';!tioned two witnesses has also been found bv the High Court to
be m ~ord with ~e medi~al evidenc~. It may be mentioned !hat
the heigh~ of Molt!nder Smgh, Mastan Singh and Amar Singh were
5 ft.-11 t m., 6 ft- I m. and 5 ft-10 in. respectively. All of them were
534
SUPREME COUR.T REPORTS
[ 1974] 1 S.C.R.
fairly well built. The fact that all the three of them were killed and
.a very large number of injuries were found on their bodies as also
the fact that their fourth companion Bachan Singh too was injuried
shows that the number of assailants was large. We find in the circumstances no valid reason to disbelieve the evidence of Bachan Singh and
Gurmail Singh that all the six appeliants participated in the assault
on the deceased persons as alleged by the prosecution.
Argument has been advanced on behalf of the appellants that the
occurrence took place at a late hour when it had become dark and no
one was in a position to fix the identity of the assailants. There is no
force in the above argument because it is established by the prosecution evidence that the attack was made on the deceased persons when
they were engaged in the removal of the maize. It is not likely that
the deceased persons to whom the maize belonged would not remove
the maize from the mills before it became dark. The fact that the
deceased persons were killed before they could remove the maize !;,hows
that the o~currence took place at a time when it had not become dark.
It is also not very likely that Bachan Singh would have been in a position to go to Bhagta primary health centre at 10'.40 p.m. after lodging
the r~port at the .police station at Dialpura if," in fact. the occurrence
had taken place after night fall. Some time must have also been taken
by Sub Inspector Jagjit Singh in examining the inju.ri~s of Bachan
Singh and prepadng the injury statement P.C. regarding those injuries.
The said injury statement too was sent to Dr. Surjit Singh at Bbagta
when Bachan Singh was sent ·th~re for being examined by the doctor.
As mentioned by us recently in the case of Bishan Singh & Ors.
v. The State of Punjab(!) it is well settled that the High Court in appeal
under s~tion 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has full power
to. review at large the evidence on which the order of acquittal Wlis
founded and to reach the conclusion that upon the evidence the .order
of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be placed upon
that power unless it be found expressly stated in the Code, but in
exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reachir.g. Its
conclusion upon fact the High Court should give woper weight and
consideration to such matters as (I) the vie'lts of the trial judge as to
the redibility of the witnesse~; (2), the presumption· of innocence in
favour of the accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the
fact that he. has been acquitted at his trial; (3) the right of the accused
to the benefit of any doubt; and ( 4) the allowance of an appellate
court in disturb.ing a finding of fact arrived at by a judge who had the
advantage of seeing the witnesses. We have been taken
thr~ugh the
Judgment of the High Court and we find nothing in it which runs
counter to the principles enuncia_ted above. The judgment. of the High
Court, in our opinion, calls for no interference. The appeal consequently fails and is dismissed.
G.C.
Appeal dismissed.
(I). Cr. App. N>. 125/1972 de:ided on 9-8-1973 ..
A
B
c
D
E'
F
G
H