{"id":12764,"date":"1972-08-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1972-08-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972"},"modified":"2017-08-17T00:37:45","modified_gmt":"2017-08-16T19:07:45","slug":"pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972","title":{"rendered":"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1972 AIR 2679, \t\t 1973 SCR (1) 964<\/div>\n
Author: I Dua<\/div>\n
Bench: Dua, I.D.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nPALA SINGH & ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT23\/08\/1972\n\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nSHELAT, J.M.\nKHANNA, HANS RAJ\n\nCITATION:\n 1972 AIR 2679\t\t  1973 SCR  (1) 964\n 1972 SCC  (2) 640\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1973 SC2187\t (8)\n R\t    1976 SC2304\t (9)\n R\t    1985 SC 131\t (13)\n RF\t    1992 SC2155\t (2)\n\n\nACT:\nCode  of  Criminal  Procedure s. 417-Appeal  in\t High  Court\nagainst\t acquittal  by trial court--High  Court's  power  to\nreverse judgment of acquittal-Practice and procedure.\nCode   of  Criminal  Procedure\ts.  157-Delay\tin   sending\noccurrence report to magistrate-Whether whole  investigation\nto be regarded as tainted.\nConstitution of India 1950, Art. 136-Interference by Supreme\nCourt when justified.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe appellants along with some other accused were tried\t for\nmurder\tunder  s. 302 I.P.C. and connected  offences.\tThey\nwere  acquitted\t by  the Sessions  Judge.   The\t High  Court\nreversing   the\t  judgment  of\t acquittal   convicted\t the\nappellants.   In appeal before this Court under article\t 136\nof  the Constitution it was contended that in apprising\t the\nevidence the High Court had not followed the principles laid\ndown by this-Court in Sanwant Singh and other cases.\nDismissing the appeal,\nHELD  : (i) The contention that because the judgment of\t the\ntrial court prima facie seemed reasonable there was no scope\nfor  reassessment  of  the evidence by the  High  Court\t was\nunacceptable.  The Court of appeal has full power under\t the\nstatute to go into the entire evidence and all the  relevant\ncircumstances  of the case for coming to its own  conclusion\nabout the guilt or innocence of the accused bearing in\tmind\nthe  initial  presumption of the innocence  of\tthe  accused\nperson\tand  the  fact that he was acquitted  by  the  trial\ncourt.\t The High Court in the present case did\t not  commit\nany error in the appraisal of the evidence on the record and\nin  arriving  at its own conclusion as to the guilt  of\t the\nappellants.  The criticism about the insertion of s. 120B in\nthe site plan might raise a slight suspicion but in view  of\nthe  trustworthiness of the prosecution evidence led in\t the\ncase  that could not in any way justify any grave  suspicion\nof  the\t prosecution story.  It could not be said  that\t the\nHigh  Court  had not followed the principles  laid  down  in\nSanwant\t Singh's case nor were its conclusions so  erroneous\nas  to justify interference by this Court under Art. 136  of\nthe Constitution. [971-F-H; 972A-B]\nSanwant\t Singh v. State of Rajasthan, [1961] 3\tS.C.R.\t120,\nRambhapala  Reddy v. State of A.P., A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 46\t and\nBansidhar Mohanty V.\t State\tof Orissa, A.I.R.<\/a> 1955\tS.C.\n585, considered and applied.\n(ii) Section 157 Cr.  P.C. requires an occurrence report  to\nbe  sent  forthwith  by the police officer  concerned  to  a\nmagistrate  empowered  to take congnizance of  the  offence.\nThis  is really designed to keep the magistrate informed  of\nthe  investigation  of such cognizable offence so as  to  be\nable  to control the investigation and if necessary to\tgive\nappropriate  direction under s. 159.  But when it was  found\nin  the present case that the F.I.R. was  actually  recorded\nwithout delay and the investigation started on the basis  of\nthe F.I.R. and there- was no other infirmity brought\n965\nto   the   Court's  notice,  then,  however,   improper\t  or\nobjectionable  the  delayed  receipt of the  report  by\t the\nmagistrate  concerned  it could not by\titself\tjustify\t the\nconclusion  that  the  investigation  was  tainted  and\t the\nprosecution insupportable.  It was not the appellants'\tcase\nthat they had been prejudicial by this delay. [970 C-E]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 197 of
\n1969.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal\tby special leave from the judgment and\torder  dated
\nMay 15, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandi-
\ngarh in Criminal Appeal No. 385 of 1967.\n<\/p>\n
R.  L.\tKohli,\tR.  C.\tKohli and  J.  C.  Talwar,  for\t the
\nappellants.\n<\/p>\n
Harbans Singh and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondents.
\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nDua,  J. This appeal by special leave under Art. 136 of\t the
\nConstitution of India is directed against the judgment dated
\nMay  16,  1969\tof  the High Court  of\tPunjab\tand  Haryana
\nallowing  in  part the State appeal from the order  of\tShri
\nKartar\t Singh,\t  Additional  Sessions\t Judge,\t  Jullundur,
\nacquitting the five accused, charged under ss. 302,  302\/34,
\n120B  and  302\/309, I.P.C. and convicting on  appeal  Trilok
\nSingh  and Pala Singh, appellants,the former under  s.\t302,
\nI.P.C.\tand the latter under S. 302 read with S. 34,  I.P.C;
\nThey were both sentenced to imprisonment for life.
\nThe facts giving rise to this appeal briefly stated are that
\nAtma Singh, resident of Basti Danish Mandan, Jullundur\tCity
\nhad  purchased\ta plot of land measuring 58  kanals  and  10
\nmarlas in the aforesaid Basti in the year 1959 for a sum  of
\nabout  Rs. 16,000 from the Government at a, public  auction.
\nThis  piece  of land was at that time  being  cultivated  by
\nHazara\tSingh, one of the five coaccused in the trial  court
\nand  his  associates.  As they were disinclined to  give  up
\npossession  Atma  Singh appointed Ram Singh (P. W.  14)\t and
\nSham  Singh (Deceased) as his attorneys to represent him  in
\nthe   litigation  concerning  the  said\t land.\t These\t two
\nattorneys  obtained possession of the plot with the help  of
\nthe  police  and  through the intervention  of\tthe  revenue
\nauthorities  in June, 1963.  A few days later  Hazara  Singh
\nand  7\tor 8 others persons including Trilok Singh  son.  of
\nSurain\tSingh, accused no., I and Trilok Singh son of  Inder
\nSingh,\taccused\t no. 5, threatened the\ttwo  attorneys\twith
\ndeath unless they dissociated themselves with the litigation
\nrelating  to  this land.  Sham\tSingh,\tdeceased,  thereupon
\napplied, to the City Inspector of Police complaining against
\nthis  threat  as a result of which Hazara Singh\t and  Trilok
\nSingh  son  of Inder Singh were proceeded against  under  s.
\n107,  Cr.   P.C. The two attorneys, it\tappears,  wanted  to
\nplough\tthe land in question but were afraid of the  accused
\npersons.  They approached the Superintendent of
\n966<\/span>
\nPolice\tfor  help which was made available to  them  against
\npayment\t of  the prescribed fee.  The land in  question\t was
\nactually  ploughed by the attorneys in the presence  of\t the
\npolice on June 26, 1963 when Hazara Singh, Trilok Singh\t son
\nof Inder Singh and Harnam Singh, father of Pala Singh,\tcame
\nthere  armed with lathes but were apprehended.\t The  police
\nstayed\ton the land in question for about 5 or 6  days.\t  On
\nAugust\t9, 1963 the crop standing on the said and was  found
\ndamaged.  At the instance of Ram Singh (P.W. 14) the  police
\nprosecuted  Hazara  Singh,  his\t brother  Tara\tSingh,\t his
\nemployee Channan and Trilok Singh son of Inder Singh, all of
\nwhom  were  found guilty and convicted.\t In  November,\t1963
\nHazara\tSingh, Harnam Singh, Bulkar Singh (‘brother of\tPala
\nSingh)\tand other persons were prosecuted for ploughing\t the
\nsaid  land but: were acquited.\tOn December 15, 1963  Hazara
\nSingh  and  17\tor 18 other  persons  attached\tSham  Singh,
\ndeceased,  and\tRam Singh (P.W. 14).  The  police  proceeded
\nagainst\t Hazara\t Singh, his wife Piar Kaur and\this  brother
\nMahal Singh, wife of Tara Singh, brother of Hazara Singh and
\nMangal\tSingh, brother of Trilok Singh son of  Surain  Singh
\nunder  s.  107,\t Cr.   P.C. During  the\t pendency  of  these
\nproceedings  Sham Singh, deceased, and Ram Singh  (P.W.\t 14)
\nwere attached by six persons including Hazara Singh, the two
\nTrilok\tSingh’s (Trilok Singh son of Surain  Singh,  accused
\nno. 1 appellant no. 2 in this Court and Trilok Singh son  of
\nInder Singh accused no. 5 in the trial court) Channan Singh,
\nHarnam\tSingh  and Nangal Singh who were  committed  to\t the
\nsessions court to stand their trial for an offence under  s.
\n307,  I.P.C.  and other offences.  Sham, deceased,  and\t Ram
\nSingh  (P.W. 14) were to appear as prosecution witnesses  in
\nthat case which was adjourned to June 3 1966 because of\t the
\nabsence\t of  Trilok Singh, appellant.  On May  23,  1966  at
\nabout  7.30 a. m. Laxman Singh (P.W.2) was coming  from\t his
\ncoal  depot in Basti Danishmandan, to his residential  house
\nsituated  in  a\t lane in which Sham  Singh,  deceased,\talso
\nresided.   The\tdeceased  was at that time  going  ahead  of
\nLaxman Singh and Narinder Singh, brother of the deceased was
\nfollowing Laxman Singh about 3 or 4 yards behind.  When Sham
\nSingh  reached\tnear the shop of Babu Rain,  barber,  Tirlok
\nSingh,\tappellant,  and Dhira (accused no. 2  in  the  trial
\ncourt) each armed with a kirpan and Pala Singh, accused, and
\nTrilok\tSingh son of Inder Singh  armed with a\tLathi  each,
\nappeared  at  the  spot.  Trilok Singh son  of\tInder  Singh
\nshouted\t that  the enemy had come and  should  be  murdered.
\nDhira  aimed  a\t kripan\t blow at the  head  of\tSham  Singh,
\ndeceased,  who\tcaught hold of the kirpan but the  same\t was
\npulled\taway by Dhira.\tPala Singh there upon gave  a  lathi
\nbelow  on the head of the deceased as a result of  which  he
\nfell  on  the ground face downwards.  This was\tfollowed  by
\nthree or four kirpan blows by the appellant Trilok Singh  on
\nthe  back of the next of the deceased.\tThe  occurrence\t was
\nwitnessed by Gokal Chand (P.W.3) who practises in  Ayurvedic
\nsystem of medicine and has  a
\n967<\/span>
\nshop  nearby and Trilochan Singh (P.W. 9) a  tractor  driver
\nwho  happened  to pass that way to attend to his  duties  as
\nsuch,
\nThe learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted all the\t ac-
\ncused  persons\tholding that  the  Assistant  Sub-Inspector,
\nKashmiri  Lal,\twho  had investigated the  offence  had\t not
\nperformed  his duties in a fair and straight forward  manner
\nand that the prosecution evidence was not trustworthy so  as
\nto  bring  home\t the  offence  to  the\taccused\t beyond\t the
\npossibility   of  a  reasonable\t doubt.\t  The  trial   court
\nexpressed  the\tview that the first information\t report\t had
\nbeen  recorded\tafter great delay and after there  had\tbeen
\nconsultation  with  the interested  persons,.\tThe  special
\nreport had also not reached the duty magistrate- till  after
\nthe expiry of 8 or 9 hours though the duty magistrate  lives
\nin  the\t same town.  The inquest report prepared  by  A.S.I.
\nKashimiri Lal had also been tempered with inasmuch as  there
\nwere  interpolations  in  the statements  of  at  least\t two
\nwitnesses  recorded therein.  Gokal Chand (P.W.3)  was\talso
\ndisbelieved  by the trial court and so was  Trilochan  Singh
\n(P.W.  9).   The  recovery of  blood-stained  sword  at\t the
\ninstance  of Trilok Singh, appellant, was also discarded  as
\nunreliable.   The site plan prepared by A.S.I. Kashmiri\t Lal
\nwas  also held to have been prepared not, as it purposed  to
\nbe, before 9.45 a.m. but long thereafter when he had decided
\nto implicate Hazara Singh also as a party to the  conspiracy
\nunder  s. 120B, I.P.C. As observed earlier, all the  accused
\nwere acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
\nOn appeal by the State the High Court considered  the entire
\nevidence  in  great  detail and examined  all  the  material
\ncircumstances  which  had weighed with the  trial  court  in
\ndisbelieving the prosecution story, and in disagreement with
\nthe trial court, cameto\t  the\tconclusion   that    the
\nprosecution had fully proved the case\t  against  the\t two
\nappellants in this Court.\n<\/p>\n
Shri  R. L. Kohli, the learned counsel for  the\t appellants,
\ntook  us through the relevant evidence and the judgments  of
\nthe two\t  courts below. The principal argument passed by him
\nin support     of  this\t appeal was  that  the\tlearned
\nAdditional Sessions Judge had on a consideration of the
\nentire evidence come to a conclusion which is  reasonable
\nand  had,  the\tbasis  of  that\t conclusion  held  that\t the
\nprosecution witnesses were not reliable and that the accused
\nwere,  therefore,  entitled to acquittal.  The\tHigh  Court,
\naccording   to\tthis  submission,  was\tnot   justified\t  in
\nreappraising the evidence     for    itself   and    in
\ndisagreeing  with  the\treasoning of  the  trail  court\t for
\nconvicting the appellants on appeal against acquittal.
\nWe  would  first  deal\twith the  argument  that  the  first
\ninformation report was recorded after a long delay, that the
\ninquest report was tampered with by A.S.I. Kashmiri Lal, and
\nthat the special report was not sent to the duty  magistrate
\nwith the promptitude
\n968<\/span>
\nexpected  under\t the Code of Criminal Procedure.   P.W.\t 13,
\nS.I.Pritam Lal has deposed that on May 23, 1966 when he\t was
\nposted as Sub-Inspector, Police Station, Kotwal Jullundur he
\nreceived  ruqa from Kashmiri Lal on the basis of  which\t Ex.
\nPD\/1 was recorded by him.  He thereupon went to the spot  in
\nBasti Danishmandan and reached there at 10 a.m. Dead body of
\nSham  Singh  had by that ‘time already\tbeen  despatched  by
\nA.S.I.\tKashmiri  Lal  This  witness  then  took  over\t the
\ninvestigation  from  Kashmiri  Lal.   There  was  no  cross-
\nexamination  worth the name of this witness suggesting\tthat
\nhe had not told the truth in court.  The F.I.R. purports  to
\nhave been recorded at 9.5 a.m. on May 23, 1966.\t The time of
\noccurrence  is stated to be 7-30 a.m. on that very  day\t and
\nthe distance between the place of occurrence and the  Police
\nStation\t is about 24 miles.  If S.I. Pritam Lal reached\t the
\nplace  of  occurrence at 10 a.m. as deposed  by\t him,  which
\nstatement  is  not  shaken  by\tany  cross-examination\tthen
\nplainly the F.I.R. cannot be considered to have been  lodged
\nafter  undue delay.  Nor can it be said that the do-ad\tbody
\nof the deceased was despatched from the place of  occurrence
\nafter  undue delay.  Kashmiri Lal, A.S.I. appeared  as\tP.W.\n<\/p>\n
21.  According to his testimony on May 23, 1966 when he\t was
\nposted\tas  A.S.I. in charge of police post  no.  5,  police
\nstation, Jullunder City at about 7.40 a.m. he was present at
\nbus stand at Basti Gujan when Laxman Singh (P.W.3)  appeared
\nbefore him and made statement Ex.  PD\/I which was  forwarded
\nby  the witness with his endorsement to the  police  station
\nJullundur  City for registration of the case at\t about\t8.30
\na.m.  Kashmiri Lal accompanied Luxman Singh to the  spot  in
\nMain  Bazar Basti Danishmandan reaching there at about\t8.40
\na.m. The dead body of Sham Singh was lying near the shop  of
\nBabu  Ram and Narinder Singh, Gokul Chand and several  other
\npersons were present there.  He prepared the inquest  report
\nEx.   PC and recorded the statements of Narinder  Singh\t and
\nGokal  Chand and sent the dead body with the inquest  report
\nto  the Mortuary for postmortem at about 9.45  a.m.  through
\nconstable   Takhat  Singh.   In\t cross-examination  it\t was
\nelicited from him that he had prepared a site plan Ex.\tPH\/1
\nwhen  the dead body was still there meaning thereby that  he
\nhad prepared the site plan before 9.45 a.m. The deceased was
\nat  that  time\twearing only a banian and  a  chaddar.\t The
\nsuggestion  that it was he who had recorded the\t F.I.R.\t and
\nthat  he  had  prepared the site plan in  the  afternoon  in
\nconsultation with Luxman Singh, Narinder Singh and Ram Singh
\n(P.Ws) in the presence of Inspector Janak Raj was denied  by
\nhim.   The inquest report Ex.  P\/C was subjected  to  strong
\ncriticism  by  Shri  Kohli on three counts.   In  the  first
\ninstance it was urged that the statements of Narinder  Singh
\nand  Gokal Chand which were attached to the  inquest  report
\noriginally referred to two injuries caused by Trilok  Singh,
\nappellant, with his sword, but later the
\n969<\/span>
\ndigit 4 in one and the word four in the other were added  in
\nthose  statements so as to make them read as if two or\tfour
\ninjuries  were\tinflicted  by Trilok  Singh  by\t his  sword.
\nAccording to Shri Kohli’s suggestion the medical examination
\ndisclosed that there were five injuries on the person of the
\ndeceased.  From this it was sought to be concluded that\t the
\ninquest\t report was tampered with by A.S.I. Kashmiri Lal  so
\nthat the number of injuries mentioned therein may not differ
\nfrom  the  number suggested by the  medical  evidence.\t The
\nsecond\tcriticism related to the insertion in the site\tplan
\nof  S. 120B which only relates to Hazara Singh,\t whose\tname
\nhad not been mentioned by anyone up to that stage.  From the
\ninsertion  of S. 120B in the site plan it was inferred\tthat
\nKashmiri  Lal had some enmity with Hazara Singh and that  he
\nhad,  therefore,  already made up his mind to  falsely\trope
\nHazara\tSingh  in.   On\t this  line  of.  reasoning  it\t was
\nsuggested that the investigation carried out by Kashmiri Lal
\nwas  far from honest, faithful and fair.  It  was  contended
\nthat  when cross-examined Kashmiri Lal admitted that he\t had
\ninserted  the offence under S. 120B in the site plan at\t the
\nsame  time,  when the offence under s. 302\/34,\tI.P.C.,\t was
\nmentioned.  The denial by this witness that he had  recorded
\nthe first information report and prepared the site plan late
\nin  the evening in consultation with Laxman Singh,  Narinder
\nSingh  and  Ram\t Singh, P.Ws. argued  Shri  Kohli,  was\t not
\ncorrect.   In  our opinion the criticism  levelled  by\tShri
\nKohli does not justify the rejection of the F.I.R. or of the
\nsite  plan  and\t the inquest report, as\t suggested  by\tShri
\nKohli.\tIt is noteworthy that in Laxman Singh’s\t information
\nto  P.W.  21 there is a clear reference\t to  Hazara  Singh’s
\ngrievance  and\this  interest in the land  in  dispute.\t  It
\ncannot, therefore, be said that in the site plan mention  of
\nHazara\tand  of\t an offence under s.  120B,  being  a  later
\ninterpolation,\tis  a  suspicious  circumstance\t  suggesting
\nunfairness of the investigation.\n<\/p>\n
P.W. 21, when asked, denied that he had made  interpolations
\nby  adding figure 4 in the statement of Narinder  Singh\t and
\nword four in the statement of Gokal Chand.  Now as stated by
\nP.W.  13,  whom\t we see no reason to  disbelieve,  that\t the
\ninquest\t report was sent along with the dead body then\tthat
\nreport was prepared with due dispatch and sent in due course
\nwithout\t any delay.  It was not improperly retained for\t any
\nsinister  purpose  of finalising it after  consulting  other
\nprosecution witnesses.\tIt was suggested by Shri Kohli\tthat
\nafter the post-mortem examination, inquest report was handed
\nover  to  the police officers and they must  have  made\t the
\nnecessary  insertions  in the two statements so as  to\tmake
\nthem conform to the medical report.  If that was the object,
\nwhen, one would have, expected the statements to convey that
\nthere  were  five  injuries  and not  merely  two  or  four.
\nHowever, assuming without holding, that in the
\n970<\/span>
\ninquest\t report\t the  figure  4 and  word  four\t were  added
\nafterwards,  in\t our view, this by itself does\tnot  detract
\nfrom  the general trustworthiness of the inquest report\t nor
\ndoes  it  render the investigation suspicious so  as  to  be
\nfatal to the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
Shri Kohli strongly criticised the fact that the  occurrence
\nreport\tcontemplated  by  S. 157, Cr.P.C. was  sent  to\t the
\nmagistrate  concerned  very late.  Indeed,  this  challenge,
\nlike  the argument of interpolation and belated despatch  of
\nthe inquest report, was developed for the purpose of showing
\nthat  the  investigation was not just, fair  and  forthright
\nand, therefore, the prosecution case must be looked at\twith
\ngreat  suspicion.  This argument is also  unacceptable.\t  No
\ndoubt,\tthe  report reached the magistrate at about  6\tp.m.
\nSection\t 157,  Cr.   P.C. requires such report\tto  be\tsent
\nforthwith  by the police officer concerned to  a  magistrate
\nempowered  to  take  cognisance of such\t offence.   This  is
\nreally\tdesigned  to  keep the magistrate  informed  of\t the
\ninvestigation of such cognizable offence so as to be able to
\ncontrol\t  the  investigation  and  if  necessary   to\tgive
\nappropriate  direction\tunder s. 159.  But when we  find  in
\nthis  case  that the F.I.R. was\t actually  recorded  without
\ndelay  and  the investigation started on the basis  of\tthat
\nF.I.R.\tand  there  is no other\t infirmity  brought  to\t our
\nnotice, then, however improper or objectionable the  delayed
\nreceipt of the report by the magistrate concerned it  cannot
\nby itself justify the conclusion that the investigation\t was
\ntainted\t and the prosecution insupportable.  It is  not\t the
\nappellants  case  that\tthey have been\tprejudiced  by\tthis
\ndelay.\n<\/p>\n
Shri  Kohli  took  us  through\tthe  evidence  of  the-\t eye
\nwitnesses and pointed out certain minor discrepancies.\t But
\nhis  main  contention  was based on the\t argument  that\t the
\njudgment  of the trial court was reasonable and it was\topen
\nto a court to come to the conclusion to which it came.\t The
\nHigh  Court was, therefore, not justified in  reversing\t the
\njudgment of acquittal into one of conviction.  In support of
\nhis submission he relied on three decisions of this Court\n<\/p>\n
\t      1.    Sanwat Singh v. State of Rajasthan<\/a>(1).\n<\/p>\n
\t      2. Ramabhupala Reddy v. State of A  p. (2).\n<\/p>\n
\t      3. Bansidhar Mohanty v. State of Orissa<\/a>(3).
\nIn  the latest decision of this Court in  Ramabhupala  Reddy
\n(supra) it has been observed that the controversy in  regard
\nto the scope
\n(1)  [1961] 3 S.C.R. 120.\n<\/p>\n
(2) A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 460.\n<\/p>\n
(3) A.I.R. 1955 S.C. 585.\n<\/p>\n
971<\/span><\/p>\n
of an appeal against an order of acquittal has been  settled
\nby  this Court in Sanwant Singh (supra) in which  the  legal
\nposition was summarised thus :\n<\/p>\n
\t       “1.  An\tappellate Court has full  powers  to
\n\t      review  the evidence upon which the  order  of
\n\t      acquittal is founded;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       2.   the\t  principles  laid  down   in\tSheo
\n\t      Swarup’s case (61 I.A. 398) afforded a correct
\n\t      guide for the appellate court’s approach to  a
\n\t      case disposing of such an appeal;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       3.   the\t different phraseology used  in\t the
\n\t      judgments of this court such as :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       (a)  ‘substantial and compelling reasons’;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       (b)  good and sufficiently cogent reasons’;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t       (c)’strong  reasons’  are  not  intended\t  to
\n\t      curtail  the undoubted power of  an  appellate
\n\t      court in an appeal against acquittal to review
\n\t      the  entire  evidence and to come to  its\t own
\n\t      conclusion, but in doing so it should not only
\n\t      consider\tevery  matter  on  record  having  a
\n\t      bearing on the questions of fact and the\trea-
\n\t      sons  given by the court below in\t support  of
\n\t      its order of acquittal but should express\t the
\n\t      reasons  in its judgment which led it to\thold
\n\t      that the acquittal was not justified.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This,  in our view, correctly summarises the legal  position
\nas  finally settled by this Court.  The submission urged  by
\nShri Kohli, therefore,, that merely because the judgment  of
\nthe  trial court prima\tfacie seems reasonable there  is  no
\nscope  for  reassessment of the evidence  by  the  appellate
\ncourt  is unacceptable.\t The court of appeal has full  power
\nunder the statute to go into the entire evidence and all the
\nrelevant  circumstances\t of the case for coming to  its\t own
\nconclusion  about  the\tguilt or innocence  of\tthe  accused
\nbearing in mind the initial presumption of the innocence  of
\nan accused person and the fact that he was acquitted by\t the
\ntrial\t  court.   We  do  not think  that  the\t High  Court
\ncommitted any error in the appraisal of the evidence on\t the
\nrecord and in arriving at its own conclusion as to the guilt
\nof the appellants.  The criticism about the insertion of  S.
\n120B  in  the plan Ex PH\/1, in our view,  may  raise  slight
\nsuspecion  but\tin  view  of  the  trustworthiness  of\t the
\nprosecution  evidence led in the case we do not\t think\tthat
\nin any way justifies any grave suspicion of the\t prosecution
\nstory.\n<\/p>\n
Besides,  the  case is now before us under Art. 136  of\t the
\nConstitution.\tWe allowed Shri Kohli not only to state\t the
\ncase broadly
\n972<\/span>
\nand to take us through the judgments of the two courts below
\nbut  also to take us through such evidence as he  considered
\nproper for persuading us to hold that the High Court had not
\nfollowed  the principals laid down in Sanwant  Singh’s\tcase
\n(supra) or that its conclusions were otherwise so  erroneous
\nas  to justify interference by this Court under Art. 136  of
\nthe  Constitution.  We are not persuaded to hold that  there
\nis any ground for differing with the conclusion of the\tHigh
\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n
The result, therefore, is that this appeal must fail and  is
\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n
G.C.\t\t\t\t  Appeal dismissed.\n973<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 Equivalent citations: 1972 AIR 2679, 1973 SCR (1) 964 Author: I Dua Bench: Dua, I.D. PETITIONER: PALA SINGH & ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB DATE OF JUDGMENT23\/08\/1972 BENCH: DUA, I.D. BENCH: DUA, I.D. SHELAT, J.M. KHANNA, HANS RAJ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12764","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nPala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1972-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-16T19:07:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972\",\"datePublished\":\"1972-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-16T19:07:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\"},\"wordCount\":3400,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\",\"name\":\"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1972-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-16T19:07:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1972-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-16T19:07:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972","datePublished":"1972-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-16T19:07:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972"},"wordCount":3400,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972","name":"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1972-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-16T19:07:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-singh-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-august-1972#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pala Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 23 August, 1972"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12764","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12764"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12764\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12764"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12764"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12764"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}