{"id":148331,"date":"1995-08-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-08-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995"},"modified":"2017-12-04T15:42:57","modified_gmt":"2017-12-04T10:12:57","slug":"gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995","title":{"rendered":"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 2468, \t\t  1995 SCC  Supl.  (3) 451<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M M.K.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Mukherjee M.K. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nGURDIAL SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT21\/08\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\nBENCH:\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\nNANAVATI G.T. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1995 AIR 2468\t\t  1995 SCC  Supl.  (3) 451\n JT 1995 (6)   140\t  1995 SCALE  (4)837\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t      J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nM.K. MUKHERJEE. J<br \/>\n     Darshan Singh,  Mukhtiar Singh  and Gurdial  Singh, the<br \/>\nappellant herein,  were tried  by the  Judge, Special Court,<br \/>\nFerozepore for\tcommitting the\tmurder of  one Ram  pal with<br \/>\nfire-arms in  furtherance of  their  common  intention.\t The<br \/>\nlearned Judge acquitted Darshan Singh and Mukhtiar Singh but<br \/>\nconvicted the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. and 25 Arms<br \/>\nAct. and  sentenced him\t to suffer imprisonment for life for<br \/>\nthe first  conviction and  rigorous imprisonment  for  1.1\/2<br \/>\nyears for  the other,  with a  direction that  the sentences<br \/>\nwould run concurrently. Hence this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>     According to  the prosecution case the deceased and his<br \/>\nfather Amrit  Lal (P.W.3)  used to  run\t a  kirana  shop  in<br \/>\nvillage Machhi Bugra. On June 2, 1984, at or about 6.30 P.M.<br \/>\nwhen Ram  pal had  come out of the shop to down its shutters<br \/>\nthe three  accused came there on a scooter driven by Darshan<br \/>\nSingh. The  appellant and  Mukhtiar Singh then got down from<br \/>\nthe scooter  and shot at Ram Pal with the fire-arms, each of<br \/>\nthem was  carrying, resulting  in his  instantaneous  death.<br \/>\nThereafter all\tof them ran away on the scooter. Finding his<br \/>\nson dead,  Amrit lal rushed to the police station to lodge a<br \/>\nreport.\n<\/p>\n<p>     S.I. Joginder  Singh (P.W.4)  recorded the\t F.I.R.\t and<br \/>\nafter making  arrangements to send the special report to the<br \/>\nIlaka Magistrate left for the spot accompanied by Amrit Lal.<br \/>\nReaching there he held inquest upon the dead body of Ram Pal<br \/>\nwhich was lying in the lane in front of the shop and sent it<br \/>\nfor postmortem\texamination. He\t then inspected the spot and<br \/>\ncollected some\tblood stained  earth,  six  empties  of\t two<br \/>\ndifferent bores\t and made  separate sealed  parcels for\t the<br \/>\nsame. After  completing the investigation at the spot. p.w.4<br \/>\nwent in\t search of  the accused\t persons  and  succeeded  in<br \/>\napprehending the  appellant on\tthat very  night.  From\t his<br \/>\npossession he  seized a\t 12 bore  gun and  25 cartridges and<br \/>\nsealed them.  He sent all the seized articles to the experts<br \/>\nfor their  opinions and\t on receipt  of\t their\treports\t and<br \/>\ncompletion of investigation submitted charge-sheet.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The accused  persons pleaded  not guilty to the charges<br \/>\nlevelled against  them and  contended that they were falsely<br \/>\nimplicated. To\tprove its  case the  prosecution relied upon<br \/>\nthe ocular version of the incident as given out by P.W.3 and<br \/>\nother evidence\tadduced in  support thereof.  No witness was<br \/>\nhowever\t examined on behalf of the accused persons.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In recording  the\timpugned  order\t of  conviction\t and<br \/>\nsentence against  the appellant the learned Judge found that<br \/>\nthe evidence  of  P.W.3\t stood\tamply  corroborated  by\t the<br \/>\nrecovery of  two empty\tcartridges from\t the  spot  and\t the<br \/>\nreport of  the Ballistic  Expert which showed that those two<br \/>\ncartridges had\tbeen fired  from the  gun which was with the<br \/>\nappellant at  the time\tof his\tarrest and was seized. As no<br \/>\nsuch corroborative  evidence was available in respect of the<br \/>\nother two accused the learned Judge did not feel inclined to<br \/>\nrely solely  upon the  evidence of  P.W.3 to  convict  them.<br \/>\nAccordingly he gave them the benefit of reasonable doubt.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Having carefully  gone through the evidence of P.W.3 in<br \/>\nthe light  of other  evidence appearing on record it appears<br \/>\nto us  that the\t finding  of  the  learned  Judge  that\t the<br \/>\nappellant shot\tat the\tdeceased with a gun causing injuries<br \/>\non his person is unassailable. Considering the fact that the<br \/>\nincident took place in front of the shop of P.W.3 he was the<br \/>\nmost natural and likely witness. His evidence, which was not<br \/>\nin any\tway shaken  in cross-examination, gets ample support<br \/>\nfrom the  evidence of  Dr. Jaspal  Singh  (P.W.1)  who\theld<br \/>\npostmortem examination\ton the\tdead body and found, besides<br \/>\nother injuries,\t two lacerted punctured wounds corresponding<br \/>\nwith each  other which\taccording to  him could be caused by<br \/>\ngun. if fired from a close range. The next piece of evidence<br \/>\nwhich corroborates  PW 3  is the  FIR which  was lodged with<br \/>\npromptitude, we\t next get,  from the evidence of P.W.4. that<br \/>\nin that\t very night, at or about 2.30 A.M. the appellant was<br \/>\narrested and  a 12 bore gun and 25 cartridges were recovered<br \/>\nfrom him.  The report  of the  Director of  Forensic Science<br \/>\nLaboratory (Ex.P.17)  proves that the empties recovered from<br \/>\nthe spot  by pw\t 4 had\tbeen fired  from his  gun. The other<br \/>\npiece of  circumstantial evidence, which also to some extent<br \/>\ncorroborates the  case of  the prosecution,  is furnished by<br \/>\nthe fact  that the  earth that\twas seized  by PW 4 from the<br \/>\nspot was  found by  the Chemical  Examiner to  contain human<br \/>\nblood.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The next  question that  falls for our determination is<br \/>\nwhether on  the above findings the trial Judge was justified<br \/>\nin  convicting\t the  appellant\t  under\t Section   302\t IPC<br \/>\nsimpliciter, after  having acquitted  the other\t two accused<br \/>\nwho along  with the appellant were being tried under Section<br \/>\n302 IPC\t with the  aid of Section 34 IPC. This aspect of the<br \/>\nmatter assumes\timportance for\tPW 1  found four injuries on<br \/>\nthe person  of the  deceased which  according  to  him\twere<br \/>\ncaused by  two types  of  fire-arms  and  were\tcollectively<br \/>\nsufficient in  the ordinary course of nature to cause death.<br \/>\nHe, however,  did not  state that the two injuries caused by<br \/>\nthe gun which are atributable to the appellant&#8217;s firing were<br \/>\nsufficient to  cause death in the ordinary course of nature.<br \/>\nIn other  words, in view of the opinion of the doctor it can<br \/>\nnot be\tconclusively inferred  that the death of Ram Pal was<br \/>\ncaused by  the injuries\t inflicted by the appellant alone so<br \/>\nas to make him liable under Section 302 IPC simpliciter.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The above\tfinding of  ours, necessarily, begs also the<br \/>\nquestion  whether  the\tappellant  can\tbe  convicted  under<br \/>\nSection\t 302   IPC  with   the\taid   of  Section   34\tIPC,<br \/>\nnotwithstanding the acquittal of the other two accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>     <a href=\"\/doc\/449061\/\">In Maina  Singh vs. State of Rajasthan<\/a> (1976) 2 SCC 827<br \/>\na question  arose as  to whether  an accused who faced trial<br \/>\nwith four  others on charges under Section 302 IPC read with<br \/>\nSection 149  IPC could\tbe convicted  under Section  302 IPC<br \/>\nread with  Section 34  IPC if the other four were acquitted.<br \/>\nIn deciding the question this Court considered earlier cases<br \/>\nwhich dealt with similar question and held:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;As has  been stated,  the charge in the<br \/>\n     present case  related to  the commission<br \/>\n     of the  offence of\t unlawful assembly by<br \/>\n     the appellant along with the other named<br \/>\n     four  coaccused,\tand  with   no\tother<br \/>\n     person. The  trial in  fact went on that<br \/>\n     basis  throughout.\t There\twas  also  no<br \/>\n     direct  or\t circumstantial\t evidence  to<br \/>\n     show that\tthe offence  was committed by<br \/>\n     the  appellant   along  with  any\tother<br \/>\n     unnamed person.  So when  the other four<br \/>\n     coaccused have been given the benefit of<br \/>\n     doubt and\thave been acquitted, it would<br \/>\n     not be permissible to take the view that<br \/>\n     there must\t have been  some other person<br \/>\n     along with\t the appellant Maina Singh in<br \/>\n     causing the injuries to the deceased. It<br \/>\n     was as  such not  permissible to  invoke<br \/>\n     Section 149  or Section  34  IPC.\tMaina<br \/>\n     Singh would  accordingly be  responsible<br \/>\n     for the  offence, if any, which could be<br \/>\n     shown to  have  been  committed  by  him<br \/>\n     without regard  to the  participation of<br \/>\n     others.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     In Harshad Singh vs. State of Gujarat 1977 Criminal Law<br \/>\nJournal 352,  a three Judge Bench of this Court observed, in<br \/>\nnegativing a  submission of the appellant therein that since<br \/>\nthree out  of the  four accused\t had secured  acquittal\t the<br \/>\ninvocation of Section 34 IPC was impermissible, as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;The flaw in this submission is obvious.<br \/>\n     The Courts\t have given  the  benefit  of<br \/>\n     doubt of identity but have not held that<br \/>\n     there was\tonly  one  assailant  in  the<br \/>\n     criminal  attack.\t The  proposition  is<br \/>\n     plain that\t even if  some out of several<br \/>\n     accused   are    acquitted\t   but\t  the<br \/>\n     participation presence of a plurality of<br \/>\n     assailants\t is   proved,  the   conjoint<br \/>\n     culpability    for\t   the\t  crime\t   is<br \/>\n     inescapable. Not  that the story of more<br \/>\n     than  one\tperson\thaving\tattacked  the<br \/>\n     victim is\tfalse, but  that the identity<br \/>\n     of the  absolved accused  is not  firmly<br \/>\n     fixed    as    criminal\tparticipants.<br \/>\n     Therefore, it follows that such of them,<br \/>\n     even if  the number  dwindled to one, as<br \/>\n     are  shown\t by  sure  evidence  to\t have<br \/>\n     knifed  the   deceased,  deserve  to  be<br \/>\n     convicted for the principal offence read<br \/>\n     with the constructive provision.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>\t\t\t  (emphasis supplied)<br \/>\n     When a  similar question again came up consideration in<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1005201\/\">Piara Singh vs. State of Punjab<\/a> (1980) 2 SCC 401 this Court,<br \/>\nquoted with approval Maina Singh&#8217;s case (supra) and applying<br \/>\nthe principle  laid down  therein in  the facts\t of the case<br \/>\npresented before it observed as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     The position as it stands on the face of<br \/>\n     the prosecution  case as  disclosed   in<br \/>\n     the Court\tis that\t only five  named and<br \/>\n     known  persons   including\t Piara\tSingh<br \/>\n     participated in the murderous assault on<br \/>\n     the deceased  of which  four  have\t been<br \/>\n     acquitted\twhich\twould  lead   to  the<br \/>\n     natural presumption  that the other four<br \/>\n     accused persons were not there. In these<br \/>\n     circumstances, therefore, the conclusion<br \/>\n     is inescapable  that Piara\t Singh\talone<br \/>\n     cannot be\tconvicted under\t Section  302<br \/>\n     with  the\t aid  of   Section  34.\t  The<br \/>\n     appellant, Piara  Singh  would  only  be<br \/>\n     liable for\t the individual\t act which he<br \/>\n     may have  committed in  respect  of  the<br \/>\n     assault on the deceased.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     Judged in\tthe context  of the  principles of  law laid<br \/>\ndown in\t the cases  referred  to  above\t the  conclusion  is<br \/>\ninevitable that\t the appellant before us cannot be convicted<br \/>\nunder Section  302 IPC, even with the aid of Section 34 IPC,<br \/>\nas the\tprosecution laid  evidence to  prove that  only\t the<br \/>\nthree arraigned persons, were responsible for the murder and<br \/>\nthe acquittal  is  not\tbased  on  the\tground\tof  mistaken<br \/>\nidentity. The  appellant would\ttherefore be  liable for his<br \/>\nindividual act\tonly. which  unmistakably makes out, in view<br \/>\nof the\tweapon used by him and the nature of injuries caused<br \/>\nan offence  under Section 326 IPC. Since the gun used by the<br \/>\nappellant was an unlicensed one his conviction under Section<br \/>\n25 of the Arms Act has got to be upheld also.\n<\/p>\n<p>     For  the\tforegoing  discussion\twe  set\t  aside\t the<br \/>\nconviction of  the  appellant  under  Section  302  IPC\t and<br \/>\nconvict him under Section 326 IPC. Considering the fact that<br \/>\nsince the  offence as  committed more  than  11\t years\thave<br \/>\nelapsed, we sentence him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for<br \/>\nseven years  for the  above conviction.\t The conviction\t and<br \/>\nsentence imposed  upon him  under Section 25 of the Arms Act<br \/>\nare maintained.\t Both the  sentences will  run concurrently,<br \/>\nThe appellant,\twho is\ton bail\t will, now  surrender to his<br \/>\nbail bond to serve out the sentence now imposed upon him.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 2468, 1995 SCC Supl. (3) 451 Author: M M.K. Bench: Mukherjee M.K. (J) PETITIONER: GURDIAL SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB DATE OF JUDGMENT21\/08\/1995 BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) NANAVATI G.T. (J) CITATION: 1995 [&hellip;]<\/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-148331","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1995-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-04T10:12:57+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-04T10:12:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\"},\"wordCount\":1778,\"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\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\",\"name\":\"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-04T10:12:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-04T10:12:57+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995","datePublished":"1995-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-04T10:12:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995"},"wordCount":1778,"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\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995","name":"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-04T10:12:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdial-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-21-august-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gurdial Singh vs State Of Punjab on 21 August, 1995"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/148331","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=148331"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/148331\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=148331"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=148331"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=148331"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}