# PALA SINGH & ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB A1!gust 23, 1972

- **Citation:** [1973] 1 S.C.R. 964
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1973
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. B 197 of 1969
- **Bench:** J.M. Shelat, I. D. Dua, H. R. Khanna
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/pala-singh-anr-v-state-of-punjab-a1-gust-23-1972-5749
- **Pages:** 9

## Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure s. 417-Appeal in High Court against
acquittal by trial court-High Court's pawer to
reverse
judgment of
.ac~uittal-Practice and procedure.
Code of Criminal Procedure s. 157~Delay in sending occurrence report
to 1nagistrate-Whether whole investigation to be regarded as
A
B
tainted.
C
Constitution of India 1950, Art. 136-Interference by Supreme Court
when justified.
The appellants along with some other accused were tried for murder
under s. 302 I.P.C. and connected offences. They were acquitted by the
Sessions Judge.
The High Court reversing the judgment of acquittal
convicted the appellants.
In appeal before this Court under article 136
of the Constitution it was contended that in . appraising the evidence the
High Court had not followed the principles laid down by this Court in
Sanwant Singh and other cases.
·
Dismissing tho apl'.eal,
(
HELD : (i} The contention that because the judgment of the trial
court prima facie seemed reasonable there was no scope for
reassessment of the evidence by the High Court was unacceptable.
The Court
of appeal has full power under the statute to go into the entire evidence
and all the relevant circumstances of the case for coming to its own conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the ::ccused bearing in mind the
initial presumption of the innocence of the accused person and the ·fact
that he was acquitted by the trial court. The High Court in the present
case did not commit any error in the appraisal of the evidence on the
record and in arriving at its own conclusion as to the guilt of the appellants. 'Ibe criticism about the insertion of s. 120B in the site plan might
raise a slight upjcion but in view of the trustwortbine!s of the prose-'
cution evidence fed in the case that could not in any way justify any
grave susp;cion of the prosecution story. It could not be said that the
High Court had not followed the principles laid down in Sanwant Singh's
case nor were its conclusions so erroneous as to justify interference by
this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution. [971-F-H; 972A-B]
Sa11want Singh v. State of Rajasthan, [1961] 3 S.C.R. 120, Rambfiapa/a Reddy v. S'late of A.P., A.LR. 1971 S.C. 46 and Bansidhal' M~hanty
v. Store of Orissa, A.I.R. 1955 S.C. 585, considered and ~pplied.
(ii) Section 157 Cr. P.C. requires an occurrence report to be sent
forthwith by the police officer concerned to a magistrate empowered to
take congnizance of the offence.· Thfa is really designed
to keep
th.e
magistrate informed of the investigation of such cognizable offence so as
to be able to control th!' investigation and if necessary to give appropriate direction under s. 159. But wlten it was found in the present case
that the F.l.R. was actually recorded without delay and the investigation
started on the basis of the F.I.R. and thero wos no other infirmity brought
D
E
F
G
H
i
A
PALA SINGH v. PUNJAB (Dua, J,)
965
to the Court's notiC'c, then, however,. in1proper or objectionable the delayed receipt of the report by the mag.c•ute concerned it could not by itself
justify the conclusion that th~ invostigation was tainted and the prosecution insupportable. It was not the appellants' case that they had been
prejudicial by this delay. (970 C-E]

## Text

964
PALA SINGH & ANR.
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB
A1!gust 23, 1972
[J.M. SHELAT, I. D. DUA AND H. R. KHANNA, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure s. 417-Appeal in High Court against
acquittal by trial court-High Court's pawer to
reverse
judgment of
.ac~uittal-Practice and procedure.
Code of Criminal Procedure s. 157~Delay in sending occurrence report
to 1nagistrate-Whether whole investigation to be regarded as
A
B
tainted.
C
Constitution of India 1950, Art. 136-Interference by Supreme Court
when justified.
The appellants along with some other accused were tried for murder
under s. 302 I.P.C. and connected offences. They were acquitted by the
Sessions Judge.
The High Court reversing the judgment of acquittal
convicted the appellants.
In appeal before this Court under article 136
of the Constitution it was contended that in . appraising the evidence the
High Court had not followed the principles laid down by this Court in
Sanwant Singh and other cases.
·
Dismissing tho apl'.eal,
(
HELD : (i} The contention that because the judgment of the trial
court prima facie seemed reasonable there was no scope for
reassessment of the evidence by the High Court was unacceptable.
The Court
of appeal has full power under the statute to go into the entire evidence
and all the relevant circumstances of the case for coming to its own conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the ::ccused bearing in mind the
initial presumption of the innocence of the accused person and the ·fact
that he was acquitted by the trial court. The High Court in the present
case did not commit any error in the appraisal of the evidence on the
record and in arriving at its own conclusion as to the guilt of the appellants. 'Ibe criticism about the insertion of s. 120B in the site plan might
raise a slight upjcion but in view of the trustwortbine!s of the prose-'
cution evidence fed in the case that could not in any way justify any
grave susp;cion of the prosecution story. It could not be said that the
High Court had not followed the principles laid down in Sanwant Singh's
case nor were its conclusions so erroneous as to justify interference by
this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution. [971-F-H; 972A-B]
Sa11want Singh v. State of Rajasthan, [1961] 3 S.C.R. 120, Rambfiapa/a Reddy v. S'late of A.P., A.LR. 1971 S.C. 46 and Bansidhal' M~hanty
v. Store of Orissa, A.I.R. 1955 S.C. 585, considered and ~pplied.
(ii) Section 157 Cr. P.C. requires an occurrence report to be sent
forthwith by the police officer concerned to a magistrate empowered to
take congnizance of the offence.· Thfa is really designed
to keep
th.e
magistrate informed of the investigation of such cognizable offence so as
to be able to control th!' investigation and if necessary to give appropriate direction under s. 159. But wlten it was found in the present case
that the F.l.R. was actually recorded without delay and the investigation
started on the basis of the F.I.R. and thero wos no other infirmity brought
D
E
F
G
H
i
A
PALA SINGH v. PUNJAB (Dua, J,)
965
to the Court's notiC'c, then, however,. in1proper or objectionable the delayed receipt of the report by the mag.c•ute concerned it could not by itself
justify the conclusion that th~ invostigation was tainted and the prosecution insupportable. It was not the appellants' case that they had been
prejudicial by this delay. (970 C-E]
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.
B
197 of 1969.
c
D
E
F
G
H
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated
May 15, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 385 of 1967.
R. L. Kohli, R. C. Kohli and J. C. Ta]war, for the appellants.
Harbans Singh and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondents.
The Judgment of the Coun was delivered by
Dua, J.
This appeal by special leave under Art. 136 of the
Constitution of India is directed against the judgment dated May
16; 1969 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowing in
part the State appeal from 1 he order of Shri Kartar Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, J ullundur, acquitting the five accused charged
under ss. 302, 302/34, 120B and 302/309, I.P.C. and convicting
on appeal Trilok Singh and Pala Singh, appellants, the former under
s. 302, I.P.C. and the latter under s. 302 read with s. 34, l.P.C.
They were both sentenced to imprisonment for life.
The facts giving rise to this appeal briefly stated are that Atma
Singh, resident of Basti Danish Mandan, Jullundur City had purchased a plot of land measuring 58 kanals and 10 marlas in the
aforesaid Basti in the year 1959 for a snm of abou~ Rs. 16,000
fr9111 the Government at a public auction. This piece of land was
at that time being cultivated by Hazara Singh, one of the fivo coaccused in· the trial court and his associates. As they were dis·
inclined to give up possession Atma Singh appointed Ram Singh
(P. W. 14) and Sham Singh (Deceased) as his attorneys to represent
him in the litigation concerning the said land. These two attbmeys
obtained possession of the plot with the help of the police
and
through lhe intervention of the revenue authorities in June, 1963.
A few days later Hazara Singh and 7 or 8 others persons including
Trilok Singh son of Surain Singh, accnsed no .. 1 ancl Trilok Singh
son of Inder Singh, accusej no. 5, threatened the two attorneys
with death unless they dissociated themselves with the litigation
relating to this land. Sham Singh, deceased, thereupon applied to
the City Inspector of Police complaining against this threat as a
rewlt of which Hazara Singh and Trilok Singh son of Inder Singh
were proceeded against under s. 107, Cr. P.C. The two attorneys,
it appears, wanted to plough the land in question but were afraid
of the accused persons. They approached the Superintendent of
96 6
SUPREMJ\' COURT REPORTS
[1973] 1 S.C.R.
Police for help which was made.\lvailable to them against payment
of the prescribed fee. The lancl"in question was actually ploughed
by the attorneys in the presence of the police on June 26, 1963
when Hazara Singh, Trilok Singh son of Inder Singh and Harnam
Singh, father of Pala Singh, came there armed with lathis but were
apprehende<j. The police stayed on the land in question for about
S or 6 clays. On August 9, 1963 the crop standing on the said
land was found damaged~, At the insta·nce of Ram Singh (P.W.
14) the police prosecuted Hazara Singh, his brother Tara Singh.
his employee Channan and Trilok Singh son of Inder Singh, all of
whom were found guilty and convicted.
In November, 1963
Hazara Singh, Harnam Singh, Bulkar Singh (brother ()f Pala Singh)
and other persons were prosecu1ed for ploughing the said land but
were acquited. On December 15, 1963_ Hazai;a Singh and 17 or
18 other persons attached Sham Singh, deceased, and Ram Singh
(P.W. 14). The police proceeded against Hazara Singh, his wife
Piar Kaur and his brother Mahal Singh, wife cf Tara Singh, brother
of Hazara Singh and Mangal Singh, brother ()f Trilok Singh son
of Surain Singh under s. 107, Cr. P .C. During the pendency of
.these proceedings Sham Singh, deceased, and Ram Singh (P.W. 14).
were attached by six persons including Hazara Singh, the two
Trilok Singhs (Trilok Singh son of Surain Singh, accused no. 1
appellant no. 2 in this Court and Trilok Singh son of Inder Singh
accused no. 5 in the trial court) Channan Singh, Harnam Singh
and Nangal Singh who were conl'nitted to the sessions court to
stand their trial for an offence under s. 307, I.P.C. and other
offences.
Sham, dee.eased, and Ram Singh (P .W. 14) were to
appear as prosecution witnesses in that case which was adjourned
to June 3 1966 because of the absence of Trilok Singh, appellarrt.
On May 2~. 1966 at about 7.30 a. m. Laxman Singh (P.W.2)
was coming from his coal depot in Basti Danishmandan, to his
residential house situated in a lane in which Sham Singh, de~eased,
also resided. The deceased was at that time going ahead of Laxman
Singh and Narinder Singh, brother of the deceased was following
Laxman Singh about 3 or 4 yards behind.
When Sham Singh
reached near the shop of Babu Ram, barber, Tirlok Singh. appellant, and Dhira (accused no. 2 in the trial court) each armed with
a kirpan and Pala Singh, accused, and Trilok Singh son of Inder
Singh armed with a Lathi each, appeared at the spot. Trilo_k Singh
son of Inder Singh shouted tha:t the enemy had come and should
be murdered. Dhira aimed a kripan blow at the head of Sham
Singh, deceased, who caught hold of the kirpan but the same was
pUlled away by Dhira. Pall\ Singh there upon gave a lath; below
on the head of the· deceased as a resuh of which he feli on the
ground face downwards. This was followed by three or four kirpa11
blows by the appellant Trilok Singh on the back of the next of the
deceased. The occurrence was witnessed by Gokal Chand (P.W.
3) who practises in A yurvedic system of medicine and has a
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
PALA SINGH v. PUNJAB (Dua, I.)
967
A
shop nearby and Trilochan Singh (P.W. 9) a tractor driver who
happened to pass that way to attend to his duties as such.
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
The learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted all the accllSed persons holding tliat the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Kashrniri
Lal, who had investigated the offence had not performed his duties·
in a fair and straight forward manner and that the prosecution
evidence was not trustworthy so as to bring home. the offence to
the accused beyond the possibility of a reasonable doubt. The
trial cotlrt expressed the view that the first informa'tion report had
been recorded after great dtlay and after there had been consultation with the interested persons. The special report had also not
reached the duty magistrate till after the expiry of 8 or 9 hours
though the duty magistrate lives in the same town. The inquest
reJX..t prepared by A.S.l. Kashim{ri Lal had also been tempered
with inasmuch as there were interpolations in the statements of
at least two witnesses recorded therein. Gokal Chand (P.W.3)
was also disbelieved by the trial couit and so was Trilochan Singh
IP. W. 9). The recovery of blood-stained sword at the instance of
Trilok Sin.gh, appellant, was also discarded •s unreliable. The site
plan prepared by A.S.I. Kashmiri Lal was also held to have been
prepared riot, as it purpoted 'to be, before 9.45 a.m. but long thereafter wh.~n he had decided to implicate Hazara Singh also as
a
party to the conspiracy under s. 120B, I.P.C. As observed earlier,
all the accused were acquitted by 'the learned Additional Sessions
Judge.
On appeal by the State the High Court considered the entire
evidence in great detail and examined all 'lhe material circumstances which had weighed with the trial court in disbelieving the
pro<..t"...cution story, and in disagreement with the trial court, came
10 the conclusion that the prosecution had fully proved the case
a.~ainst the two appellants in this Court.
Shri R. L. Kohli, the learned counsel for the appellants. took
us through the relevant evidence and the judgments of the lwo
courts below.
The principal argument passed hy him in support
of this appelll was that the learned Additional Sessions .TudJ!e had
on a conside,ation of the entire evidence come to a conclusion
which is reasonable and had, the basis of tha't conclusion held that
the prosecution witnesses were not reliable and ~hat the accused
were. therefore, entitled to acquittal. The High Court, according
10 this submission, was not justified in reappraising the evidence
for itself and in disagreeing with the reasoning of the trail court
for convicting the appellants on appeal against acquittal.
We would first deal with tb~ argument that the first information
report was recorded after a fong delay, that the inquest report
was tampered with by A.S.I. Kashmiri Lal, and that the special
report was not sent to the duty magistrate with the promptitude
%8
SL'.' ,,LME COURT REl'OR TS
(1973) l S.C.R.
expected under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
P.W. 13, S.I.
Pritam Lal has deposed that on May 23, 1966 when he was posted
as Sub-Inspector, Police Station, Kotwal Jullundur he
received
ruqa from A.S.I. Kashmiri Lal on the basis of which Ex. PD/l
was rec.orded by him. He thereupon went to the spot in Basti Danishmandan and reached there at 10 a.m. Dead body of Sham Singh
had by that •time already been despatched by AS.I. Kashmiri Lal
This witness then took over the investigation from. Kashmiri Lal.
There was no cross-examination worth the name of this v.itne!s
suggesting that he had not 'told the truth in court. The F.I.R. purports to have been recorded at 9.5 a.m. on May 23, 1966. The
time of occurrence is srnted to be 7-30 a,m. on that very day
and thP- distance between the place ot occurrence and the Police
Station is abou't 2t miles. If S.I. Pritam Lal reached the place of
occurrence at 10 a.m. as deposed by him, which statement is not
shaken by any cross-examination then, plainly the F.I.R. cannot
be considereJ to have been lodged after undue delay. Nor can it
be said that the d.~ad body of the deceased was despatched from
the place of occurrence after undue delay Kashmiri Lal, A.SJ.
appeared as P.W. 21.
According to his testimony on May 23,
1966 when he was posted as AS.I. in charge of police post no. 5,
police station; J·~llunder City at about 7.40 a.m. he was present at
bus stand at Bas ti Gujan when Laxman Singh (P.W.3) appeared
before him and made statement Ex. PD/1 which was forwarded
by the witness with his endorsement to the police station Jullundur
City for registration of the case at about 8.30 a.m. Kashmiri Lal
~;ccompanied Luxman Singh to the spot in Main Bazar Basti
Danishmandan reaching there at about 8.40 a.m.
Ti:~ dead body
of Sl>1m Singh was lying near the shop of Babu Ram and
Narinder Singh, Gokul Chand and several :ither persons were present there. He prepared the inquest report Ex. PC and recorded
the statements of Narinder Singh and Gokal Chand and !ent the
dead body with the inquest report to the Mortuary for pO!tmortem at about 9.45 a.m. through constable Takhat Singh. In
cross-examination it was elicited from him that he had prepared
a site plan Ex. PH/ 1 when the dead body was still there meaning
thereby that he had prepared the site plan before 9.45 a.m. The
deceased was at that time wearing only a banian and a chaddar.
The suggestion that it was he who had recorded the F.I.R. and
that he had prepared the site plan in the afternoon in consultation
with Luxman Singh, Narinder Singh and Ram Singh (P.W!) in
the presence of InspectGr Janak Raj was denied by him. The
inquest report Ex. P /C was subjected to strong criticism by Shri
Kohli on three counts. In the first instance it was urged that the
statements of Narinder Singh and Gokal Chand which were
attached to the inquest report originally referred to two
injuric~
caused by Trilok Singh, appellant, with his sword, but later the
A
B
c
D
E
,
..
G
H
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
PALA SINGH v. PUNJAB (Dua, J.)
969
digit 4 in one and the word four in the other were added in those
statements so as to make them read as if two or four injuries were
inflicted by Trilok Singh by his sword. According to Shri Kohli"s
suggestion the medical examination disclosed th:it. there were five
injuries on the person of the deceased. From this 1t was sought to
be concluded that the inquest report was tampered with by A.S.I.
Kashmiri Lal so that the number of injuries mentioned therein may
not differ from the number suggested by the medical evidence.
The second criticism related to the insertion in the site plan of
s. l 20B which only relates to Hazara Singh, whose name had not
been mentioned by ·anyone up to that stage. From the insertion
of s .. 120B in the site plan it was inferred that Kashmiri Lal had
some enmity with Hazara Singh and that he had, therefore,
already made up his mind to falsely rope Hazara Singh in. On this
line of reasoning it was suggested that the investigation carried
out by Kashmiri Lal was far from honest, faithful and fair. It was
contended that when cross-examined Kashmiri Lal admitted that
he had inserted the offence under s, l 20B in the site plan at the
same time, when the offence under s. 302/34, LP .C., was mentioned. The denial by this witness that he had recorded the first
information report and prepared the site plan late in the evening
in consultation with Laxman Singh, Narinder Singh and Ram
Singh, P.Ws. argued Shri Kohli, was not correct. In our opinion
the criticism levelled by Shri Kohli does not justify the rejection
of the F.1.R. or of the site plan ar:d the inquest report, as suggested by Shri Kohli. It is noteworthy that 1in Laxman Singh's
information to P.W. 21 there is a clear reference to Hazara Singh's
grievance and his interest in the land in dispute. It cannot, therefore, be said that in the site plan mention of Hazara and of an
offence under s. 120B, being a later interpolation, is a suspicious
circumstance suggesting unfairness of the investigation.
P.W. 21, when asked, denied that
he had made
interpolations by adding figure 4 in the statement of N arinder Singh
and word four in the statement of Gokal Chand. Now as Mated
by P.W. 13, whom we see no reason to aisbelieve,
that
the
inquest report was sent along with the dead body then that
report was prepared with due dispatch and sent in due course
without any delay. It was not improperly retained for any sinister purpose of finalising it after consulting other prosecution witnesses. It was suggested by Shri Kohli that after the post-mortem
examination, inquest report was handed over
to
the police
officers and they must have made the necessary insertions in the
two S!tatements so as to make them conform to ihe medical report.
If that was the object, when. one would have expected the ~t'.lte
ments to convey that there were five injuries and not merely two
or four.
However, assuming
without holding,
that in the
970
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(1973] 1 S.C.R.
inquest report the figure 4 and word four wer.e added afterwards,
in our view, 1this by itself does not detract from
the. general
trustworthiness of the inquest report nor does it render the investigation suspicious so as to be fatal to the prosecution.
Shri Kohli strongly criticised the fact that the
occurrence
report contempla;ted bys. 157, Cr.P.C. was sent to th.e magistrate
concerned very late. Indeed, this challenge, like the argument
of interpolation and belated despatch of the inquest report, was
developed for the purpose of showin:g that the investigation was
not· just, fair and forthright and, therefore, the prosecution case
must be looked at with great suspicion. This argument is
also
unacceptable.
No doubt, the report reached the magistrate at
about 6 p.m. Section 157, Cr. P.C. requires such report to be
sent forthwith by the police officer concerned to a magistrate empowered to take cognisance of such offence.
This is really
designed to keep the magistrate informed of the investigation of
such cognizable offence so as to be at'.e to control the investigation and if necessary to give appropriate direction under s. 159.
But when we find in this case that the F.I.R. was actually recorded without delay and the investigation started on the basis of
that F.I.R. and ther~ is no other infirmity brought to o, r notice,
then, however improper or objectionable the
delayed
receipt
of the report by the magistrate concerned it cannot
b1 i.tself
justify the conclusion tltat the investigation was tainted ai.d the
prosecution insu;:iportable. It is not the appellants case that they
have been p•ejudiccd by this delay.
Shri Kohli took us through the evidence of the eye witnesses
and pointed out certain minor discrepancies. But his main contention was based on the argument that the judgment of
the
trial court was reasonable and it was open to a court to come
to the conclusion to which it came. The High Court was, therefore, not justified in reversing the judgment of acquittal into one
of conviction.
In support of his submission he relied on three
decisions of this Court. :
·
J. Sanwat Singh v. State of Rajasthan(1).
2. Ramabhupa/a Reddy v. State of A.P.(').
3. Bansidhar Mohanty v. State of Orissa(').
In the latest decision of this Court in Ramabhupala Reddy (supra)
it has been observed that the controversy in regard to ithe scope
(I) [1961] 3 S.C.R. 120. (2) A.LR. 1971 S.C. 460. (l) A.T.R. 1955 S.C. 585.
A
B
c
D
F
G
H
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
PALA SINGH v. PUNJAB (Dua, J.)
971
of an appeal against an order of acquittal has been settled by this
Court in Sanwant Singh (supra) in which the legal position was
summarised thus :
"1. An appellate Coutt has full powers to review
the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is
founded;
2. the principles laid down in Sheo Swarup's case
(61 I.A. 398) afforded a correct gui\:ie for tr·,
appellate court's approach to a case disposing
of such an appeal;
3. the different phraseology used in the
judgments
of this court such as :
(a) 'substantial and compelling reasons';
(b) 'good and sufficiently cogent reasons';
( c) 'strong reasons' are not intended to curtail
the. .undoubted power of an appellate court
in an appeal against acquittal to review the
entire evidence and to come to ~ts own conciusion, but in doing so it should not only
consider every mauter on record having a
bearing on the questions of fact and the reasons given by the court below in support of
its order of acquittal but should express the
reasons in its judgment which led it to hold
that the acquittal was not justified."
This, in our view, correctly summarises the legal position as
finally settled by this Court. The submission urged by Shri Kohli,
therefore, that merely because the judgment of the trial court
prima facie seems reasonable there is no scope for reassessment
of the evidence by the appellate court is unacceptable. The court
of appeal has full power undet' the statute to go into the entire
evidence and all the relevan't circumstances of the case for coming
to its own conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the accused
bearing in' mind the initial presumption of the innocence of an
accused person and the fact that he was acquitted by the trial
court. We do not think that the High Court committed any error
in the appraisal of !the evidence on the record and in arriving at
its own conclusion as to 'tt.e guilt of the appellants. The criticism
about the insertion of s. 120B in the plan Ex PH/I, in our view,
may raise slight suspecion but in view of
the
tru~tworthiness
of the prosecution evidence led in the case we do not think that
in any way justifies any grave suspicion of the prosecution story.
Besides. 1the case is now before us under Art. 136 of the Constitution. We allowed Shri Kohli not only to state the case broadly
972
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1973] 1 S.C.R.
and to take us through the judgments of 1the two courts below
but also to take us through such evidence as he considered proper
for persuading us to hold that the High Court had not followed
the principals laid down in Sanwant Singh's case (supra) or that
its conclusions were otherwise so erroneous as to justify interference by this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution. We are
not persuaded· to hold that there is any· ground for differing with
the ·conclusion of the High Court.
The result, therefore, is that this appeal must fail and is dismissed.
G.C.
Appeal dismissed.
A
B