{"id":176291,"date":"2008-07-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008"},"modified":"2018-04-18T13:03:16","modified_gmt":"2018-04-18T07:33:16","slug":"jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008<\/div>\n
Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                  1\n\n           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                           CHANDIGARH\n\n                                            Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997\n                                            Date of Decision : July 23, 2008\n\n\nJarnail Singh S\/o Mukhtiar Singh,                      ....Appellant\nresident of Village Khatran,\nP.S. Dehlon, District Ludhiana.\n\n\n                                 Versus\n\nThe State of Punjab                                    ....Respondent\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER\n\n            1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to\n            see the judgment?\n            2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?\n            3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?\n\n\nPresent:    None for the appellant.\n            Mr. S.S.Bhullar, DAG, Punjab,\n            for the respondent.\n\nSHAM SUNDER, J.\n<\/pre>\n
            This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction, and the<\/p>\n
order of sentence dated 8.2.1997, rendered by the Court of Sessions Judge,<\/p>\n
Sangrur, vide which it convicted the accused\/appellant, for the offence,<\/p>\n
punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances<\/p>\n
Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’ only) and sentenced him to undergo<\/p>\n
rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years, and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac,<\/p>\n
and in default of payment of the same, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for<\/p>\n
another period of one year, for having been found in possession of four bags,<\/p>\n
each containing 35 Kgs. poppy-husk, without any permit or licence.<\/p>\n
2.          The facts, in brief, are that, on 10.7.1993, Hans Raj, ASI, alongwith<\/p>\n
other police officials, was going towards village Saraud for patrol duty, and
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
detection of suspects, and when the police party, reached a little ahead of Brick<\/p>\n
Kiln, leading to mandial, the accused was seen standing, on filled bags, in a<\/p>\n
corner, inside the boundary wall of Daropti Bhawan. On seeing the police<\/p>\n
party, coming in a vehicle, he sat down, on the bags. He was apprehended, on<\/p>\n
suspicion, while sitting on four bags, containing poppy-husk. The search of the<\/p>\n
bags, was conducted, in accordance with the provisions of law, as a result<\/p>\n
whereof, each bag was found containing 35 Kgs. Poppy-husk. Two samples of<\/p>\n
250 grams, were separated from each bag, and the remaining poppy-husk, was<\/p>\n
put into the same bags. The samples, and the bags, containing poppy-husk,<\/p>\n
were converted into parcels, duly sealed with the seals, and taken into<\/p>\n
possession. Ruqa was sent to the Police Station, on the basis whereof, formal<\/p>\n
FIR was registered. The accused was arrested. The statements of the witnesses,<\/p>\n
were recorded.      After the completion of investigation, the accused was<\/p>\n
challaned.\n<\/p>\n
3.           On appearance, in the Court, the copies of documents, relied upon by<\/p>\n
the prosecution, were supplied to the accused. Charge under Section 15 of the<\/p>\n
Act, was framed against him, to which he pleaded not guilty, and claimed<\/p>\n
judicial trial.\n<\/p>\n
4.           The prosecution, in support of its case, examined Ranjit Singh, SI<\/p>\n
(PW-1), Jaswant Singh, Constable, (PW-2), Pavitar Singh, HC, (PW-3),<\/p>\n
Gurdeep Singh, ASI (PW-4), and Hans Raj, ASI (PW-5).                Thereafter, the<\/p>\n
Public Prosecutor for the State, closed the prosecution evidence.<\/p>\n
5.           The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., was<\/p>\n
recorded, and he was put all the incriminating circumstances, appearing against<\/p>\n
him, in the prosecution evidence. He pleaded false implication. It was stated by<\/p>\n
him, that no poppy-husk was recovered from him. It was further stated by him,<\/p>\n
that on the evening of 9.7.1993, Hans Raj, ASI, was going on cycle, in plain<\/p>\n
clothes, and he hit the cycle, against him (accused). It was further stated by
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                               3<\/span><\/p>\n
him, that he raised protest, on account of this reason, as a result whereof,<\/p>\n
exchange of hot words took place. It was further stated by him, that thereafter<\/p>\n
he was taken to the Police Station, and the recovery of poppy-husk, was planted<\/p>\n
against him. He, however, did not lead any evidence, in his defence.<\/p>\n
6.        After hearing the Public Prosecutor for the State, the Counsel for the<\/p>\n
accused, and, on going through the evidence, on record, the trial Court,<\/p>\n
convicted and sentenced the accused, as stated hereinbefore.<\/p>\n
7.        Feeling aggrieved, against the judgment of conviction, and the order<\/p>\n
of sentence, rendered by the trial Court, the instant appeal, was filed by the<\/p>\n
accused\/appellant.\n<\/p>\n
8.        Due notice, that the appeal was fixed for regular hearing, on the<\/p>\n
board of this Bench, was issued to the Counsel for the appellant, who had filed<\/p>\n
vakalatnama.    Mr. Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate, who was representing the<\/p>\n
appellant, appeared in the Court, and stated that the appellant took away the<\/p>\n
brief from him. There was no other vakalatnama of any other Counsel, on<\/p>\n
behalf of the appellant, on the file.     Under these circumstances, it is to<\/p>\n
determined, as to whether, the Court can decide the appeal, in the absence of the<\/p>\n
appellant, and his Counsel. In Dharmpal Vs. State of U.P. 2008 (1) Law<\/p>\n
Herald (SC) 225, in similar circumstances, when the appeal against the<\/p>\n
judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence, for the offence punishable<\/p>\n
under Section 302 IPC, was fixed for regular hearing, before the Allahabad<\/p>\n
High Court, neither the appellant, nor his Counsel put in appearance. In these<\/p>\n
circumstances, the appeal was decided by the High Court, after perusing the<\/p>\n
records, on merits. It was held by the Apex Court, that the High Court, in such<\/p>\n
an event, could look into the records, and the other material placed thereon,<\/p>\n
including the judgment of the trial Court, and thereafter decide the appeal on<\/p>\n
merits, which would be due compliance of the provisions of Sections 385 and<\/p>\n
386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in disposing of criminal appeals.
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
However, it was further held, in the said authority, that the Appellate Court,<\/p>\n
cannot dismiss the appeal, in default. Similar, principle of law was laid down,<\/p>\n
in Bani Singh Vs. State of U.P. 1996 (4) SCC 720. Relying upon the principle<\/p>\n
of law, laid down, in these authorities, this appeal is being decided on merits.<\/p>\n
9.         I have heard the learned Counsel for the respondent, and carefully<\/p>\n
perused the records, evidence, and the impugned judgment.<\/p>\n
10.        One of the grounds, taken up in the memorandum of appeal, was to<\/p>\n
the effect, that no independent witness, was joined, though the alleged recovery<\/p>\n
was effected, in the morning. It was further stated, in the grounds of appeal,<\/p>\n
that even no effort was made to join, an independent witness, at the time of the<\/p>\n
alleged recovery, and, as such, the case of the prosecution became doubtful. It<\/p>\n
may be stated here, that it was a chance recovery. The police party was going,<\/p>\n
in connection with patrol duty, and checking of suspects, when per chance, it<\/p>\n
saw the accused, standing on the bags, containing poppy-husk, who on seeing<\/p>\n
the police party, sat thereon, inside the boundary wall of Daropti Bhawan.<\/p>\n
There is no evidence, on the record, that any independent witness, was present,<\/p>\n
at the time of apprehension of the accused, search of the bags, and recovery of<\/p>\n
poppy-husk therefrom. Had there been any secret information, against the<\/p>\n
accused, non-joining of an independent person, would have been considered to<\/p>\n
be a circumstance, going against the prosecution. Had any independent witness<\/p>\n
been joined, after the recovery, his evidence would have been of no relevance,<\/p>\n
as he could not be said to be a witness to the search and seizure. It was, under<\/p>\n
these circumstances, that independent witness could not be joined. It is settled<\/p>\n
principle of law, that the evidence of the official witnesses, cannot be distrusted<\/p>\n
and disbelieved, merely on account of their official status. Their evidence is as<\/p>\n
good, as that of any other independent witness. In the face of the evidence of<\/p>\n
the official witnesses only, the Court is required to scrutinize the same, carefully<\/p>\n
and cautiously. After careful and cautious scrutiny, if the Court comes to the
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
conclusion, that the same does not suffer from any serious infirmity, the same<\/p>\n
can be believed. The evidence of the official witnesses, in the instant case, has<\/p>\n
been subjected to indepth scrutiny, and nothing came to the fore, which may go<\/p>\n
to discredit the same. In Akmal Ahmed Vs. State of Delhi, 1999(2) RCC 297<\/p>\n
(S.C.), it was held that, it is now well-settled that the evidence of search or<\/p>\n
seizure, made by the police will not become vitiated, solely for the reason that<\/p>\n
the same was not supported by an independent witness. In State of NCT of<\/p>\n
Delhi Vs. Sunil (2000)I S.C.C. 748, it was held as under:-\n<\/p>\n
              “It is an archaic notion that actions of the Police officer, should<\/p>\n
              be approached with initial distrust. It is time now to start placing<\/p>\n
              at least initial trust on the actions and the documents made by the<\/p>\n
              Police. At any rate, the Court cannot start with the presumption<\/p>\n
              that the police records are untrustworthy. As a proposition of<\/p>\n
              law, the presumption should be the other way round. The official<\/p>\n
              acts of the Police have been regularly performed is a wise<\/p>\n
              principle   of   presumption    and   recognized    even   by   the<\/p>\n
              Legislature.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
11.        In Appa Bai and another Vs. State of Gujrat, AIR 1988 S.C. 696, it<\/p>\n
was held that the prosecution story cannot be thrown out, on the ground, that an<\/p>\n
independent witness had not been examined, by the prosecution. It was further<\/p>\n
held, in the said authority, that the civilized people, are generally insensitive,<\/p>\n
when a crime is committed, even in their presence, and they withdraw from the<\/p>\n
victims’ side, and from the side of the vigilant. They keep themselves away<\/p>\n
from the Courts, unless it is inevitable. Moreover, they think the crime like a<\/p>\n
civil dispute, between two individuals, and do not involve themselves, in it.<\/p>\n
The principle of law, laid down, in the aforesaid authorities, is fully applicable<\/p>\n
to the facts of the present case. In these circumstances, mere non-joining of an<\/p>\n
independent witness, when the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, has been
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
held to be cogent, convincing, creditworthy, and reliable, and there was no<\/p>\n
reason, on their part to falsely implicate the accused, no doubt, is cast on the<\/p>\n
prosecution story. This ground, therefore, does not hold good.<\/p>\n
12.           The next ground, taken up in the memorandum of appeal, was to the<\/p>\n
effect, that the affidavits tendered by the prosecution witnesses, being faulty,<\/p>\n
could not be taken into consideration, but the trial Court was wrong in doing so,<\/p>\n
as a result whereof, miscarriage of justice occasioned. Ex.PC, is the affidavit of<\/p>\n
Pavitar Singh, HC, whereas, Ex.PB, is the affidavit of             Jaswant Singh,<\/p>\n
Constable. Both the affidavits have been carefully perused. There does not<\/p>\n
appear to be any infirmity therein. The depondents of these affidavits were read<\/p>\n
over and explained the contents thereof, by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,<\/p>\n
Malerkotla. They were identified by the Asstt. District Attorney, Malerkotla. A<\/p>\n
certificate was given by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Malerkotla, that after<\/p>\n
perfectly understanding the contents of the affidavits, the deponents appended<\/p>\n
their signatures, in his presence. Thereafter, the Judicial Magistrate, attested the<\/p>\n
affidavits. Under these circumstances, it could not be said that the trial Court<\/p>\n
was wrong, in taking into considration, these affidavits. This ground, therefore,<\/p>\n
does not hold good.\n<\/p>\n
13.           The next ground, taken up in the memorandum of appeal, was to the<\/p>\n
effect that     the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the Act, were not<\/p>\n
complied with, as a result whereof, the trial, conviction, and sentence, stood<\/p>\n
vitiated. In this case, the recovery was not effected from the personal search of<\/p>\n
the accused, but from the bags, on which he was found sitting. It may be stated<\/p>\n
here, that the provisions of Section 50 of the Act, were not applicable, in the<\/p>\n
instant case, as the search was not effected, from the person of the accused, but<\/p>\n
from the bags. Had the recovery been effected from the person of the accused,<\/p>\n
then the provisions of Section 50 of the Act, would have been attracted to the<\/p>\n
instant case. In State of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh, 1999(6) S.C.C. 172, a
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
Constitution Bench of the Apex Court, settled beyond doubt, that the language<\/p>\n
of Section 50, was implicitly clear that the search had to be, in relation to a<\/p>\n
person, and not in relation to the premises, vehicles, or articles. Similar view<\/p>\n
was taken in Smt. Krishna Kanwar Thakuraeen Vs. State of Rajasthan, JT<\/p>\n
2004(1) S.C. 597. In these circumstances, it can be said that the consistent, and<\/p>\n
particularly the view of the larger Bench of the Supreme Court, appears to be<\/p>\n
that the search, must relate to the person, and not vehicles, other luggage and<\/p>\n
articles, and then alone the provisions of Section 50 would be attracted. Since,<\/p>\n
in view of the principle of law, laid down, in the aforesaid authorities, the<\/p>\n
provisions of Section 50 were not applicable, to search, in the instant case, the<\/p>\n
trial Court was right in recording conviction and awarding sentence, to the<\/p>\n
accused. This ground, therefore, does not hold good.\n<\/p>\n
14.        The next ground taken up, in the memorandum of appeal, was to the<\/p>\n
effect, that the provisions of Section 55 of the Act, were not complied with. It<\/p>\n
may be stated here, that the provisions of Section 55 of the Act, are directory in<\/p>\n
nature. However, in the instant case, the Investigating Officer, took care to<\/p>\n
comply with the provisions of Section 55 of the Act.          Rajinder Singh, SI<\/p>\n
(PW-1), was the SHO of P.S. Malerkotla, at the relevant time. He in clear-cut<\/p>\n
terms stated that Hans Raj, ASI, produced before him, the case property, the<\/p>\n
accused, and the witnesses, on 10.7.1993. He further stated that, he verified the<\/p>\n
investigation, and satisfied himself. He further stated that he put his own seal,<\/p>\n
on the case property, and got the same deposited with Pavitar Singh, MHC, with<\/p>\n
seals intact. There was, therefore, due compliance of the provisions of Section<\/p>\n
55 of the Act. This ground, therefore, does not hold good.\n<\/p>\n
15.        The next ground taken up, in the memorandum of appeal, was to the<\/p>\n
effect that the provisions of Section 57 of the Act, were not complied with. It<\/p>\n
may be stated here, that the provisions of Section 57 of the Act, are directory, in<\/p>\n
nature. Mere non-compliance thereof, does not ipso-facto vitiate the conviction,
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                 8<\/span><\/p>\n
and sentence. There is nothing, on the record, to indicate that, on account of<\/p>\n
non-strict compliance of the provisions of Section 57 of the Act, any prejudice<\/p>\n
was caused to the accused. There was substantial compliance of the provisions<\/p>\n
of Section 57 of the Act, as the ruqa was sent from the place of recovery,<\/p>\n
wherein all the details, with regard to search and seizure were mentioned. The<\/p>\n
object of Section 57 of the Act, is to inform the Officer Superior, within the<\/p>\n
shortest possible time, so that he may be apprised of, the proceedings conducted<\/p>\n
by a junior police official, in order to avoid criticism of the public, against the<\/p>\n
high-handedness of the police, and to avert chances of false implication of the<\/p>\n
accused. In the instant case, when the case property was produced before the<\/p>\n
SHO, and even the ruqa was sent from the spot, containing the complete<\/p>\n
information, with regard to the search and seizure, there was substantial<\/p>\n
compliance of the said provision. Non-sending of a separate special report, by<\/p>\n
the Investigating Officer, to his Officer Superior, did not, in any way, affect the<\/p>\n
merits of the case. This ground, therefore, does not hold good.<\/p>\n
16.        The next ground taken up, in the memorandum of appeal, was to the<\/p>\n
effect, that the sample parcels were taken out of the Malkhana, by Pavitar<\/p>\n
Singh, HC, on 19.7.1993, and the same were handed over to Jaswant Singh,<\/p>\n
Constable, who took the same to the office of the Chemical Examiner, on<\/p>\n
20.7.1993. The said parcels, were returned by the Chemical Examiner, with<\/p>\n
some objections, and the same were again sent on 26.7.1993. It was stated, in<\/p>\n
the grounds of appeal, that this fact was sufficient to create doubt, on the<\/p>\n
prosecution story, as the chances of tampering with the sample parcels, could<\/p>\n
not be ruled out. It may be stated here, that the case property, and the sample<\/p>\n
parcels were produced before the SHO, on the same day, who verified the<\/p>\n
investigation, as also the case property, and, thereafter, affixed his own seal.<\/p>\n
Thereafter, it was deposited with the MHC, with seals intact. The affidavits,<\/p>\n
referred to above of the formal witnesses, clearly go to prove that none-
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                   9<\/span><\/p>\n
tampered with the samples, until the same reached the office of the Chemical<\/p>\n
Examiner. To cap it all, there is report Ex.PH, of the Chemical Examiner,<\/p>\n
which is admissible under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C. in toto. According to this<\/p>\n
report, the seals on the exhibits were intact, on arrival, till the time the analysis<\/p>\n
thereof, was started, and agreed with the specimen seals sent. It is further<\/p>\n
evident from this report, that the exhibits remained in safe custody, after the<\/p>\n
receipt thereof, in the office of the Chemical Examiner. This report of the<\/p>\n
Chemical Examiner, was not challenged by the accused.                  Under these<\/p>\n
circumstances, there was no possibility of tampering with the sample parcels,<\/p>\n
until the same reached the office of the Chemical Examiner.             The Court,<\/p>\n
therefore, could not act merely on conjectures and surmises, that there was<\/p>\n
possibility of tampering with the samples, only on account of the reason, that on<\/p>\n
one occassion, the same were returned with certain objections, by the Chemical<\/p>\n
Examiner. Since, there was no tampering with the samples, until the same<\/p>\n
reached the office of the Chemical Examiner, the link evidence was complete.<\/p>\n
This ground, therefore, being without merit, must fail, and the same stands<\/p>\n
rejected.\n<\/p>\n
17.         The next ground, taken up in the memorandum of appeal, was to the<\/p>\n
effect, that the prosecution miserably failed to prove conscious possession of<\/p>\n
the accused, in relation to the bags, containing poppy-husk.            As per the<\/p>\n
prosecution story, which was proved, on the basis of cogent, convincing,<\/p>\n
reliable, and trustworthy evidence, in the first instance, the accused was seen<\/p>\n
standing, on the bags, containing poppy-husk. On noticing the police party, he<\/p>\n
sat down, on the bags, so as to conceal his presence, and avoid his detection.<\/p>\n
However, the police party entertained suspicion, on account of the said activity<\/p>\n
of the accused, and apprehended him, while he was sitting on the bags. In<\/p>\n
which capacity the accused was sitting, on the bags, was for him to explain.<\/p>\n
The accused was, thus, in physical possession of, and in control over the bags,
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                10<\/span><\/p>\n
containing poppy-husk. Since, the possession of the accused, in relation of the<\/p>\n
poppy-husk was proved, statutory presumption under Sections 35 and 54 of the<\/p>\n
Act, operated against him, that he was in conscious possession thereof. It was<\/p>\n
for the accused, to rebut the statutory presumption, operating against him. The<\/p>\n
accused did not take up the plea, that he was merely sitting on the bags, but the<\/p>\n
same did not belong to him. He also did not take up the plea, that the bags<\/p>\n
belonged to somebody else, but he had been deputed to keep watch over the<\/p>\n
same. He also did not take up the plea, that he became fearful, on noticing the<\/p>\n
police party, and with a view to conceal his presence, sat on the bags, but he did<\/p>\n
not know, as to whom the same belonged. He only took up the plea that he was<\/p>\n
falsely implicated.    The accused, however, failed to rebut the statutory<\/p>\n
presumption aforesaid. In Megh Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2003) 8 SCC 266,<\/p>\n
on 22.2.1993, three persons were found sitting on the gunny bags, containing<\/p>\n
poppy husk. The appellant was arrested, while the other two fled. 25 bags<\/p>\n
containing poppy husk, were found, at the spot, which were seized.            The<\/p>\n
appellant was convicted and sentenced by the trial Court, and the appeal filed by<\/p>\n
him, was also dismissed by the High Court. The Apex Court, upheld the<\/p>\n
conviction and sentence of the appellant, observing that he was in conscious<\/p>\n
possession. The word ‘conscious’ means awareness about a particular fact. It is<\/p>\n
the state of mind, which is deliberate or intended. It was further held that<\/p>\n
possession, in a given case, need not be physical possession, but can be<\/p>\n
constructive, having power and control over the article, while the person whom<\/p>\n
physical possession is given holds it subject to that power or control. It,<\/p>\n
therefore, could not be said that the accused was not aware of the bags,<\/p>\n
containing poppy-husk. It was not a small quantity of poppy-husk. Keeping in<\/p>\n
view the principle of law, laid down, in the aforesaid case, the provisions of<\/p>\n
Sections 35 and 54 of the Act, and the evidence produced, on record, the trial<\/p>\n
Court, in my opinion, was right in coming to the conclusion, that the accused
\n Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997                                                11<\/span><\/p>\n
was in conscious possession of bags, containing poppy-husk. This ground,<\/p>\n
therefore, does not hold good.\n<\/p>\n
18.        No other ground to assail the judgment of the trial Court, was taken<\/p>\n
up, in the memorandum of appeal.\n<\/p>\n
19.        In view of the above discussion, it is held that the judgment of<\/p>\n
conviction, and the order of sentence, rendered by the trial Court, are based on<\/p>\n
the correct appreciation of evidence, and law, on the point. The same do not<\/p>\n
warrant any interference, and are liable to be upheld.\n<\/p>\n
20.        For the reasons recorded, hereinbefore, the appeal is dismissed. The<\/p>\n
judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence dated 8.2.1997, are upheld. If<\/p>\n
the appellant is on bail, his bail bonds shall stand cancelled. The Chief Judicial<\/p>\n
Magistrate, Sangrur, shall take necessary steps to comply with the judgment,<\/p>\n
with due promptitude, keeping in view the applicability, of the provisions of<\/p>\n
Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and submit the compliance<\/p>\n
report, within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of the certified<\/p>\n
copy of the judgment.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
July 23, 2008                                            (SHAM SUNDER)\nVimal                                                        JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No.121-SB of 1997 Date of Decision : July 23, 2008 Jarnail Singh S\/o Mukhtiar Singh, ….Appellant resident of Village Khatran, P.S. Dehlon, District […]<\/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-176291","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 - 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\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-18T07:33:16+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=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-18T07:33:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":3514,\"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\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\",\"name\":\"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-18T07:33:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 - 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\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-18T07:33:16+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":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-18T07:33:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008"},"wordCount":3514,"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\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008","name":"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-18T07:33:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jarnail Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 23 July, 2008"}]},{"@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\/176291","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=176291"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176291\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=176291"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=176291"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=176291"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}