Supreme Court Of India Date –Feb 24, 1981

State of Haryana        Petitioner

                       Vs 

Sher Singh & Others      Respondent

Case Details : 

This appeal by special leave by the State of Haryana State is  against the judgment and order of  Punjab and Haryana High Court overturning the sentence and sentence given by Session Judge, Karnal. Defendants Balkar Singh and Dalel Singh are the sons of Defendant Sher Singh. The trial judge found all  three guilty under Section 302/34 of the Penal Code and sentenced Sher Singh  and the other two to life in prison to death. Following Judge Sessions’ detention order confirming the death sentence against Sher Singh and being appealed by the Defendants, the Supreme Court overturned the  conviction and sentence and acquitted Defendant.

Facts : 

On October 17, 1973 at around 12:00 am, ,Widow of Danna (deceased), Mrs. Narman submitted the First Information Report to ASI Ram Sarup (PW 12) in Pai Village. Her key allegations in the First Information Report were that a day earlier, Defendant Sher Singh and her two  half-brothers,  Danna, her husband, and Hukmi, caused family split between them and they began to live separately. That day,  October 17, at about 6 a.m., her husband, Danna, along with her brothers Hukmi and defendant Sher Singh went to their bagichi near the house  to milk the cattle. She followed them  to get milk. Defendant Sher Singh,  along with her sons Balkar, Dalel, Keni, Prem and Parwana, surrounded her husband and her husband’s younger brother, Hukmi, in the yard. Sher Singh holds a gandasi in his hand, Dalel holds a lathi  with an iron blade, the other three hold a lathi in his hand. Sher Singh deals a gandasi blow to the head of her husband, Danna, who immediately falls to the ground. Dalel then deals an iron lathi blow to Hukmi’s head, who also falls to the ground. The other defendants then thrashed people as they fell. The respondent, Sher Singh, dealt her husband another gandasi blow. She added in the First Information Report that Ms Danni, Defendant Sher Singh’s sister, was  also witnessed the incident as they were with her . They screamed at the sight of the attacks, then they were ordered, in agony, to sit down in the corner of the yard. Out of fear, they accepted. It was later added that the defendants dragged the  bodies into a nearby pile of cow dung. Sher Singh poured kerosene over the cakes and Dalel lit the fire with a match. As a result, both bodies were charred.

PW 12 sent the First Information Report ( FIR) to the police station where the incident was registered. After investigating, the police filed an indictment and arrested the accused. In the end, the defendants were charged under article 302/34 of the Penal Code and tried by the Audience Court.

ISSUES :

1.   Whether Danna and Hukmi were murdered .
2.  Whether their  bodies were burned by the respondents, as alleged by the prosecution. The prosecution is based on the following  evidence:
3. motive for murder;
4. direct evidence of the alleged witnesses, PWs 3 and 4;
5. the alleged out-of-court confessions of defendant Sher Singh before PW 10; And
6. the withdrawal of  articles accusing the claims alleged to have been made by the defendants.

(i) Reason

ARGUMENTS:

The defendants pleaded not guilty. According to them, the three brothers shared a house, were disruptive and had no culture until the day of the event.

Respondent Sher Singh : 

Sher Singh defended himself by responding that his two sons, Balkar and Dalel, and  deceased brothers, Hukmi and Danna , used to sleep in  bagichi at night to look after their cattle tied up. there. On October 16, 1973, during the day he and his two deceased brothers went to the field, in the evening he went to the field where the cotton was ripe and he stayed there to  watch  the cotton until the next morning. This field was about a mile and a half from their bagichi. About 1.5 hours after sunrise on October 17, 1973, he returned to  bagichi where he found a pile of cow dung cakes in the burning bagichi compound. The police then arrested him.

Respondent Dalel:

Defendant Dalel’s defense was that, two days before the event, he went to his maternal uncle, Lalji, in Narwana to borrow a tractor. He returned home around the afternoon of October 17, 1973. He found a burning pile of cow dung and police inside the bagichi, where he was arrested there by the police.

Respondent Balkar :

Defendant Balkar argued that he was a  9th grader and that on October 16, 1973, he went to school to watch sports. He spent the next night in the village of Diwali, where his sister was married. He returned home on October 17, 1973 and when he reached  bagichi he found a burning cow dung pile and he got arrested there by the police. Thus, the defense of all  respondents is an alibi.

When the defendant pleads for an  alibi, he is responsible for proving it under Section 103 of the Evidence Act which states:

“103. The burden of proving a particular fact rests with the person who wants the court to believe that the fact exists, unless the law provides that the proof of the fact belongs to a particular person.

OBSERVED:

The High Court  rejected all evidence on the grounds that (a)  they were close relatives of the two deceased; (b)  PW 3 did not mention in the FIR that she  informed everyone in the village before leaving for the police station; (c) that it is “very unlikely and unnatural” for PW 3 to travel to the scene of the event from her home when she was first pregnant; (d) that she is not accompanied by anyone to the police station; e) no villagers visited the scene of the event; and (f) that she and PW 4 did not  attempt to save the two deceased, their husband and brother respectively. In the end, the Supreme Court concluded that “it is highly likely that Smt Narman and Danni were not present at the scene and did not witness the event”.

The erudite Supreme Court  also commented that  PW 4 Danni’s presence at the scene of the event was “unnatural because if she were there she would have physically interfered for the love of her life. It has been observed  that they are asked to shut up and sit down in the face of murderous grief. We cannot forget that Danni is also an unarmed villager and the first human instinct  is  self-preservation. In our opinion,  it is not uncommon for her not to try, because she cannot, to save  two dead people from murder.

JUDGMENT:

In addition, investigators seized an empty kerosene container located at the scene of the event. The box smelled of kerosene  and  was seized under  Ex. PJ  was corroborated by PW 11. There is also another circumstance that tends to support the defendant’s complicity  in the offence. This is the respondent’s behavior. The two dead were murdered, by anyone, who were relatives of the respondents. If the murder was committed by someone else, as  the Supreme Court assumed, then they would not have been silent. Of course, they claimed to defend that they had run away from home  and returned to the site of the October 17, 1973 event, which we found  to be untrue. This act of the accused is guilty.

HOLD:

As a result of the above discussions, we find that, in agreement with the learned judge of the sessions, that the guilt of the respondents  established by the prosecution is beyond  reasonable doubt. . Accordingly, we allow to appeal, cancel the judgment and acquittal order  of the High Court and convict the defendants under article 302/34 of the Penal Code.

But considering the fact that the Learned Session Judge issued the Sentence and Sentencing Order as early as July 27, 1974, and the Supreme Court issued the Order of Parole as early as April 2, 1975, we were unable to visit the defendant. Sher Singh with the heaviest punishment prescribed by law for murder. We sentenced all defendants to life imprisonment. We are informed that Defendants Balkar Singh and Dalel Singh are out on bail. Their bond is canceled. They will turn themselves in immediately to serve  their sentence.