{"id":154559,"date":"2009-02-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009"},"modified":"2016-07-18T22:07:23","modified_gmt":"2016-07-18T16:37:23","slug":"gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009<\/div>\n
                        Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                   1\n\n\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n                        Case No. : Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007\n                        Date of Decision : February 10, 2009\n\n\n            Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa                    ....   Appellant\n                        Vs.\n            The State of Punjab                      ....   Respondent<\/pre>\n
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHTAB SINGH GILL<\/p>\n
            HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL<\/p>\n
                        *     *   *<\/p>\n
Present :   Mr. Parveen Bhadu, Advocate
\n            for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
            Mr. S. S. Gill, Addl. A. G., Punjab.\n<\/p>\n
                        *     *   *\n\nL. N. MITTAL, J. :\n\n<\/pre>\n
            Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa has preferred this appeal to impugn
\njudgment and order dated 07.06.2006 of learned Sessions Judge, Bathinda,
\nwhereby the appellant stands convicted under Sections 302 and 450 of the
\nIndian Penal Code (in short – IPC) and sentenced as under :-\n<\/p>\n
            Under Section 302 IPC Life imprisonment and to pay a fine
\n                                      of Rs.2,000\/- and in default of
\n                                      payment of fine to further undergo
\n                                      rigorous imprisonment for a period
\n                                      of one year.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                          Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
            Under Section 450 IPC Since the            punishment   has   been
\n                                      awarded under the major offence
\n                                      under Section 302 of the Indian
\n                                      Penal Code, so no separate sentence
\n                                      has been awarded under Section 450
\n                                      of the IPC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Appellant’s mother and co-accused Gurmeet Kaur, however,
\nstands acquitted by the Sessions Judge.\n<\/p>\n
            Prosecution case in brief is as under :-\n<\/p>\n
            On 18.03.2003, complainant Balbir Singh, resident of Village
\nBhai Rupa, was sleeping in his house. He and his wife Balwinder Kaur
\n(since deceased) were sleeping in the courtyard with their younger daughter.
\nTheir other three daughters including Veerpal Kaur aged 16-17 years and
\ntheir only son Chamkaur Singh aged 15-16 years were sleeping in the room.
\nElectric bulb was lighting in the courtyard. At about 11:00 P.M., appellant-
\nGurdeep Singh @ Deepa, son of Gurmeet Kaur sister of the deceased
\nBalwinder Kaur, came there armed with a sword. Due to commotion, the
\ncomplainant and his wife woke up.         The appellant said that they were
\nfeeling ashamed and humiliated because bad character persons had been
\nvisiting the house of the complainant. Saying so, the appellant inflicted
\nsword blow to Balwinder Kaur, who raised her right hand to save herself
\nand the blow landed on the fingers. The appellant inflicted second sword
\nblow thrust-wise on the neck of Balwinder Kaur. The sword pierced her
\nneck on left side. Meanwhile, Veerpal Kaur and Chamkaur Singh also came
\nout in the courtyard. The appellant tried to slip away, but was caught by the
\ncomplainant. However, the appellant managed to free himself and escaped
\nwith the sword, but sheath of the sword fell down in the complainant’s
\nhouse. Balwinder Kaur died at the spot. Motive was that the appellant felt
\nthat mischievous elements visited the house of the complainant bringing a
\n                           Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
bad name. The complainant went to report the matter to the police. On the
\nway, near bridge of minor canal in the area of Village Dialpura, police party
\nheaded by SI Harinder Singh, Station House Officer of Police Station
\nDialpura, met the complainant, who made statement Ex.P-L to Harinder
\nSingh, who made his own endorsement Ex.P-L\/1 on it and sent it to Police
\nStation, where on its basis, formal FIR Ex.P-L\/2 was recorded. The police
\nparty went to the spot with the complainant, who made supplementary
\nstatement Ex.P-C that appellant’s mother Gurmeet Kaur also accompanied
\nthe appellant to the house of the complainant and exhorted the appellant to
\nsettle the matter once for all by eliminating the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
             Dead body of Balwinder Kaur was lying on a cot. SI Harinder
\nSingh prepared inquest report Ex.P-D and sent the dead body for autopsy
\nwith application Ex.P-E. A pillow and a gadda (mattress) stained with
\nblood lying on the cot were seized vide memo Ex.P-K. Sheath of sword
\nfound at the spot was also seized vide memo Ex.P-J. Statements of
\nwitnesses including Veerpal Kaur and Chamkaur Singh were recorded.
\nRough site plan Ex.P-M was prepared.\n<\/p>\n
             Dr. Gurmit Kaur conducted post-mortem examination on the
\ndead body and found following injuries :-\n<\/p>\n
             1.           There was incised wound on left side of neck
\n                          located one inch below mastoid process        and
\n                          extending upto angle of mandible. The tail of the
\n                          wound was present on angle of mandible. The size
\n                          of the wound was 11 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm. Clotted
\n                          blood was present and the underlying structure
\n                          was cut. The margins on wound were sharp and
\n                          wound was elliptical in shape.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             2.           Incised wound with sharp margins located 5 cm
\n                          below the first wound and running parallel to it.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                             Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
                            Size of wound was 3 cm x .5 cm and it was skin
\n                            deep. Clotted blood was present.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             3.             Incised wound with sharp margin present on the
\n                            dorsam and base of all fore-fingers of right hand.
\n                            The size of wound 8 cm x .5 cm x .5 cm. Clotted
\n                            blood was present. The wound on right ring finger
\n                            was 1 cm deep and its margins were lacerated.
\n                            The proximal phalanx of right ring finger was
\n                            fractured.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             Cause of death was opined to be shock and haemorrhage.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Injury no.1 was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. All
\nthe injuries were ante mortem. Sealed parcel of clothes of the deceased
\ngiven by the doctor was seized by the police vide memo Ex.P-N. The
\nappellant was arrested on 26.03.2003.             The appellant, after making
\ndisclosure statement (Ex.P-G), got recovered a sword vide memo Ex.P-I in
\nthe presence of Nirmal Singh and ASI Malkiat Singh. Sketch (Ex.P-H) of
\nthe sword was also prepared.\n<\/p>\n
             On completion of investigation, the appellant was sent for trial,
\nwhereas Gurmeet Kaur was placed in Column No.2, who was also later on
\nsummoned as accused on prosecution application under Section 319 of the
\nCode of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).\n<\/p>\n
             Charge under Section 302 IPC against Gurdeep Singh and
\nunder Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC against Gurmeet Kaur and
\nunder Section 450 IPC against both of them was framed. They pleaded not
\nguilty and claimed trial.\n<\/p>\n
             In support of its case, the prosecution examined eight
\nwitnesses. HC Gurcharan Singh (PW-1) tendered his affidavit Ex.P-A in
\nevidence being formal witness.           He had taken the dead body for post-
\nmortem examination. Dr. Gurmit Kaur (PW-2) stated about post-mortem
\n                           Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
examination of the deceased. ASI Malkiat Singh (PW-3) stated that the
\nappellant, after making disclosure statement, got recovered a sword stained
\nwith blood. Veerpal Kaur (PW-4) and complainant Balbir Singh (PW-5)
\nbroadly stated according to the prosecution version that the appellant killed
\nBalwinder Kaur by inflicting sword blows.       SI Harinder Singh (PW-6)
\nstated about investigation of the case conducted by him. Constable Baljit
\nSingh (PW-7) and HC Karamjit Singh (PW-8) tendered their affidavits
\nbeing formal witnesses to affirm that the case property was not tampered
\nwith. Chamkaur Singh – PW was given up as unnecessary.\n<\/p>\n
             The appellant in his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
\ndenied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the
\nprosecution evidence and claimed to be innocent.        He alleged that the
\ncomplainant had borrowed Rs.5,000\/- from him and he demanded back the
\namount and for this reason, he has been falsely implicated. He also stated
\nthat he was not present at the time of alleged occurrence and Balwinder
\nKaur was murdered by the complainant Balbir Singh in connivance with his
\ndaughter Veerpal Kaur.\n<\/p>\n
             In defence, the accused examined Kikkar Singh (DW-1), who
\nstated that on 19.03.2003, at about 08:00 A.M., he visited the house of
\nShamsher Singh, where both the accused Gurmeet Kaur and Gurdeep Singh
\nmet him. It was in Village Phulewala.\n<\/p>\n
             We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the
\ncase file with their assistance.\n<\/p>\n
             The prosecution has led impeccable evidence to bring home the
\ncharge against the appellant. The occurrence took place at about 11:00 P.M.
\non 18.03.2003 at the house of complainant Balbir Singh. Consequently,
\nBalbir Singh and his daughter Veerpal Kaur are natural witnesses. The
\ndeceased was wife of the complainant. The complainant reported the matter
\nto the police immediately without any delay. His statement, along with
\n                           Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                       6<\/span><\/p>\n
police endorsement, concluded at 01:30 A.M. i.e. during the night itself and
\nregistration of FIR commenced at 01:45 A.M. and concluded at 02:45 A.M.
\nSpecial report reached the Magistrate at 07:30 A.M. The matter was thus
\nreported to the police very promptly and even special report reached the
\nMagistrate without any delay. Detailed manner of occurrence has been
\nnarrated in the FIR and the appellant was also named therein as the sole
\nculprit. The FIR is thus a very valuable piece of evidence. Balbir Singh
\ncomplainant and Veerpal Kaur both eye-witnesses have fully supported the
\nprosecution case in the witness-box. They have categorically deposed that
\nthe appellant came to their house and caused injuries with sword to
\nBalwinder Kaur, who resultantly died. The appellant is son of sister of the
\ndeceased and on account of this close relationship, he was not likely to be
\nfalsely implicated in the case. In fact, he was the sole accused named in the
\nFIR, although later on, his mother Gurmeet Kaur was also named, who
\nstands acquitted by the trial court. Balbir Singh and Veerpal Kaur are
\nnatural eye-witnesses of the occurrence, which took place at their house at
\n11:00 P.M., where they were sleeping along with the deceased.              Their
\nstatements are also corroborated by the medical evidence. Even sheath of
\nthe sword, used by the appellant to inflict injuries to the deceased, fell at the
\nspot and was seized from there by the police. Blood stained sword was also
\ngot recovered by the appellant after making disclosure statement.            The
\nwitnesses have also stated about motive for the occurrence. Statements of
\nboth the eye-witnesses could not be impeached in their cross-examination.
\nTheir statements, therefore, inspire confidence and the prosecution evidence
\nis sufficient to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.\n<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the appellant contended that motive for the
\noccurrence is not proved and if undesirable elements visited the house of the
\ndeceased, her own son and daughter or husband and his brother Nirmal
\nSingh would have opposed the same. The contention cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n
                           Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                     7<\/span><\/p>\n
The appellant is also a close relative of the deceased being son of her sister.
\nThe appellant is also resident of the same village and therefore, appellant
\nfelt humiliated on account of aforesaid conduct of the deceased. Moreover,
\nmotive pales into insignificance, when there are eye-witnesses of the
\noccurrence.\n<\/p>\n
              Learned counsel for the appellant next contended that there is a
\nPolice Post in Village Bhai Rupa itself and it is not explained why the
\ncomplainant, instead of reporting the matter in the Police Post in the village
\nitself, proceeded towards Police Station.       However, no such specific
\nquestion was put to the complainant in his cross-examination as to why he
\npreferred to proceed to the Police Station instead of reporting the matter to
\nthe police in the Police Post of village itself. In any case, the FIR was
\nlodged very promptly and therefore, the aforesaid contention cannot be
\naccepted.\n<\/p>\n
              Learned counsel for the appellant next argued that the
\ncomplainant did not suffer      any injury in the occurrence, although he
\nallegedly grappled with the appellant. Reason for the same is not far to seek
\nbecause the complainant tried to catch the appellant and therefore, the
\nappellant was interested in getting himself released from the grip of the
\ncomplainant and to escape and was not interested in causing injuries to
\nhim, having already achieved his objective of killing the complainant’s wife.
\nThe appellant succeeded in his mission and escaped and fled away.
\nHowever, sheath of sword of the appellant was left at the spot on account of
\ngrappling.\n<\/p>\n
              Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that no blood
\nstained earth was lifted by the police from the spot. This argument has no
\nbearing because it is not even the case of the appellant that the deceased was
\nnot killed at the place alleged by the prosecution. The appellant’s plea was
\nthat the deceased was killed by the complainant and his daughter, but there
\n                          Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                     8<\/span><\/p>\n
is no material on record to substantiate this plea. Moreover, it has come in
\nevidence that the blood had not fallen on the ground, probably because
\npillow and mattress soaked the blood.        The blood stained pillow and
\nmattress were seized by the police.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the appellant also contended that Nirmal
\nSingh – PW, brother of the complainant, was given up. However, Nirmal
\nSingh was not a material witness because he was not eye-witness of the
\noccurrence. He was witness of disclosure statement and recovery of sword
\nat the instance of the appellant, but the same has been proved by ASI
\nMalkiat Singh (PW-3) and SI Harinder Singh (PW-6).            Nirmal Singh,
\ntherefore, was rightly given up by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the appellant next argued that Chamkaur
\nSingh – PW, son of the deceased, has also been given up and it probablizes
\nthe defence version that the complainant and Veerpal Kaur murdered the
\ndeceased. The argument is without any substance. Both Veerpal Kaur and
\nBalbir Singh have stepped into the witness-box. They are eye-witnesses of
\nthe occurrence and they have deposed against the appellant as per
\nprosecution version. Consequently, it would have been futile to examine
\nChamkaur Singh as well relating to the same fact.         Evidence is to be
\nweighed and not counted. It is the quality and not the quantity of the
\nevidence that matters. It is not imperative for the prosecution to examine all
\nwitnesses of the same fact. No particular number of witnesses is necessary
\nto prove a fact, as provided by Section 134 of the Evidence Act. Non-
\nexamination of Chamkaur Singh does not give rise to any adverse inference
\nagainst the prosecution case, when two other eye-witnesses have been
\nexamined.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the appellant also contended that the
\nappellant, who was alone, could have easily been over-powered by the
\ncomplainant and his son Chamkaur Singh and daughter Veerpal Kaur. The
\n                          Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                  9<\/span><\/p>\n
argument cannot be accepted because the complainant did try to over-power
\nthe appellant but he succeeded in escaping. The appellant was armed with a
\nsword and had already killed Balwinder Kaur. In these circumstances,
\nVeerpal Kaur and Chamkaur Singh might not have dared to intervene or
\nmight not have got opportunity to intervene.\n<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that there is
\ncontradiction in the statements of HC Gurcharan Singh (PW-1), Veerpal
\nKaur (PW-4),       Balbir Singh (PW-5) and SI Harinder Singh (PW-6)
\nregarding the number of persons, who had gathered at the spot. However,
\nsuch contradiction regarding trivial and insignificant fact cannot be given
\nany importance in a murder case. The fact as to how many persons gathered
\nafter the occurrence is hardly of any significance. Learned counsel for the
\nappellant submitted that no independent witness has been examined
\nalthough many persons gathered at the spot. The submission is devoid of
\nmerit because those persons gathered after the occurrence and had not
\nwitnessed the occurrence. It may be highlighted that the occurrence took
\nplace at 11:00 P.M. in a village and obviously, people were asleep when the
\noccurrence took place and they were attracted to the spot when alarm was
\nraised. No independent witness had witnessed the occurrence and therefore,
\nno such witness could be examined.\n<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the appellant also contended that it is
\nimprobable that the appellant was roaming freely after having committed
\nthe murder, so as to be arrested by the police. The argument has no force
\nbecause the appellant was arrested a week after the occurrence, although SI
\nHarinder Singh has stated that he had been searching for the appellant
\nearlier as well.\n<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the appellant lastly submitted that no
\ncomplaint was previously made against the appellant regarding any
\nundesirable activity or any threat extended by him to the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
                          Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007                   10<\/span><\/p>\n
However, it is not the prosecution case that the appellant is a vagabond or a
\nhabitual criminal or had earlier threatened the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
            From the discussion aforesaid, it emerges that the prosecution
\nevidence is cogent and credible and sufficient to establish the guilt of the
\nappellant beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal is thus without any merit
\nand is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
            The appellant, if on bail, shall surrender to his bail bonds or
\nshall be arrested to undergo the remaining sentence.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n                                                    ( L. N. MITTAL )\n                                                          JUDGE\n\n\n\nFebruary 10, 2009                             ( MEHTAB SINGH GILL )\nmonika                                                JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Appeal No. 513-DB of 2007 Date of Decision : February 10, 2009 Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa …. Appellant […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-154559","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nGurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 - 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\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-18T16:37:23+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-18T16:37:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2700,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-18T16:37:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 - 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\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-18T16:37:23+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-18T16:37:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009"},"wordCount":2700,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009","name":"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-18T16:37:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gurdeep-singh-deepa-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa vs The State Of Punjab on 10 February, 2009"}]},{"@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\/154559","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=154559"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/154559\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=154559"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=154559"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=154559"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}