{"id":215847,"date":"1995-11-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-11-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995"},"modified":"2017-01-27T23:38:41","modified_gmt":"2017-01-27T18:08:41","slug":"jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995","title":{"rendered":"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1996 AIR  755, \t\t  1996 SCC  (1) 527<\/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:\nJARNAIL SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT23\/11\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\nBENCH:\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\nKIRPAL B.N. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1996 AIR  755\t\t  1996 SCC  (1) 527\n JT 1995 (8)   279\t  1995 SCALE  (6)563\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.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant  along with\tfour others,  including\t his<br \/>\nfather,\t brother  and  nephew,\twas  tried  by\tthe  learned<br \/>\nAdditional Sessions  Judge, Amritsar for rioting, committing<br \/>\nmurders and  attempting to commit murders. The learned Judge<br \/>\nconvicted the  appellant and  his brother  Sukhwinder  Singh<br \/>\nunder Section  302 read\t with Section 34 IPC (on two counts)<br \/>\nand sentenced  each of\tthem to suffer imprisonment for life<br \/>\nand to\tpay a  fine of\tRs. 2,000\/-  in default,  to  suffer<br \/>\nrigorous imprisonment  for one\tyear, while  acquitting\t the<br \/>\nother three.  In appeal,  preferred by the two convicts, the<br \/>\nHigh Court  affirmed the  conviction  and  sentence  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant but  acquitted Sukhwinder Singh. Hence this appeal<br \/>\nby the appellant after obtaining special leave.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The prosecution  case in  brief is\t that on October 27,<br \/>\n1979 at\t or about  9 A.M.  the acquitted  accused Sukhwinder<br \/>\nSingh was  preparing a\tpath to\t his behak  (farm house)  by<br \/>\ndismantling the\t water course  of Sukhdev  Singh (one of the<br \/>\ntwo deceased)  and his\tbrothers running through their lands<br \/>\nwhile  Gurmej\tSingh  (since\tacquitted),  father  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant and  Sukhwinder Singh,  was standing\tnearby. This<br \/>\nwas objected  to by Sukhdev Singh, his brothers Surjit Singh<br \/>\n(the other  deceased), Dhanwant\t Singh (PW  4)\tand  Manohar<br \/>\nSingh (PW  6) which  led to  an exchange  of hot  words\t and<br \/>\nabuses between\tthe parties.  Thereafter  Gurmej  Singh\t and<br \/>\nSukhwinder Singh  left for  their behak and the two deceased<br \/>\nand their  brothers for their village Khatra Khurt. On their<br \/>\nway to\tthe village  when the  latter group  had reached the<br \/>\njanj ghar  (place for  marriage parties)  the  five  accused<br \/>\nalong with  one Joginder  Singh (since\tabsconding) accosted<br \/>\nthem. Except  Gurmej Singh,  who was unarmed, all had rifles<br \/>\nin their  hands. Gurmej\t Singh raised  a lalkara saying that<br \/>\nthey should  be taught\ta  lesson  for\tstopping  them\tfrom<br \/>\npreparing the  path to\ttheir behak whereupon Joginder Singh<br \/>\nfired from his rifle hitting Surjit Singh on his chest. Then<br \/>\nthe appellant  fired from his rifle hitting Sukhdev Singh on<br \/>\nhis back.  Sukhwinder Singh  also fired from his rifle which<br \/>\nhit Sukhdev  Singh on  his left\t shoulder. On being so fired<br \/>\nat, both  of them fell down on the ground. The other accused<br \/>\npersons also  fired from  their rifles\taiming\tat  Dhanwant<br \/>\nSingh and  Manohar Singh  but their  shorts hit the walls of<br \/>\nthe nearby  house of  Ajit Singh. Thereafter all the accused<br \/>\npersons fled away.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The witnesses  then  took\tinjured\t Sukhdev  Singh\t and<br \/>\nSurjit Singh  to their\thouse nearby  but by  then they\t had<br \/>\nsuccumbed to  their injuries.  Dhanwant Singh  then went  to<br \/>\nMajithia police\t station  and  lodged  a  First\t Information<br \/>\nReport. S.I.  Janak Raj\t (P.W.12) registered  a case on that<br \/>\nreport and  left for  village Khatra Khurt. He first went to<br \/>\nthe house of the deceased and after holding inquest upon the<br \/>\ndead bodies  sent them\tfor post-mortem examination. He then<br \/>\nwent to\t the place  of\toccurrence  and\t seized\t some  blood<br \/>\nstained earth  and also\t some pellets  found embedded on the<br \/>\nwalls of  the house  of Ajit  Singh. After  receipt  of\t the<br \/>\nreport of  the post  mortem examination held on the two dead<br \/>\nbodies by  Dr. Harish  Chander Vaid (PW 5) and on completion<br \/>\nof investigation  S.I. Janak  Raj submitted charge sheet and<br \/>\nin due\tcourse the  case  was  committed  to  the  Court  of<br \/>\nSession.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The accused  persons pleaded  not guilty to the charges<br \/>\nlevelled against  them and  contended  that  they  had\tbeen<br \/>\nfalsely implicated.\n<\/p>\n<p>     To prove its case prosecution examined twelve witnesses<br \/>\nof whom\t Dhanwant Singh\t (PW 4) and Manohar Singh (PW6), the<br \/>\ntwo brothers  of the deceased, figured as eye witnesses; and<br \/>\nin their  defence the accused persons examined five witness,<br \/>\nincluding Swaran  Singh (DW  5) who  also  claimed  to\thave<br \/>\nwitnessed the occurrence.\n<\/p>\n<p>     From the  judgments of  the  learned  Courts  below  it<br \/>\nappears that  the trial Court found the evidence of PW 4 and<br \/>\nPW 6  suspect as  against accused Harpal Singh and Jaswinder<br \/>\nSingh on  the ground  that as they were not residents of the<br \/>\nvillage to which the deceased and the other accused belonged<br \/>\nit was\tunlikely that  they would be present at the material<br \/>\ntime with  rifles in  their hands, much less, participate in<br \/>\nthe murders  which arose  out of a dispute between those two<br \/>\nfamilies over dismantling of a water course. In dealing with<br \/>\nthe  case  of  accused\tGurmej\tSingh,\tthe  father  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant, the\ttrial Court  observed  that  the  allegation<br \/>\nagainst him  was only  of raising a lalkara and it would not<br \/>\nbe safe\t to convict  him on such accusation alone. The trial<br \/>\nCourt, however,\t held that the evidence of the above two eye<br \/>\nwitnesses was  reliable as  against the\t appellant  and\t his<br \/>\nbrother\t Sukhwinder   Singh  and  that\ttheir  evidence\t was<br \/>\nstrengthened by\t that of Swaran Singh (DW 5). The High Court<br \/>\nconcurred with\tall the findings of the trial Court but gave<br \/>\nthe benefit of doubt to Sukhwinder Singh as Swaran Singh (DW\n<\/p>\n<p>5) did\tnot mention  him as  one of the persons who fired at<br \/>\nthe deceased.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Mr.  Lalit,  the  learned\tcounsel\t appearing  for\t the<br \/>\nappellant submitted  that both\tthe trial Court and the High<br \/>\nCourt,\thaving\t found\tthe  evidence  of  PW  4  and  PW  6<br \/>\nunacceptable as\t against the  other accused  persons, should<br \/>\nnot have  relied upon  the self same evidence to convict the<br \/>\nappellant. We  are not impressed by this contention for, the<br \/>\ntrial Court  recorded the  order of  acquittal in respect of<br \/>\nthree of  the accused  persons by giving them the benefit of<br \/>\ndoubt and  not on a finding that the evidence of the two eye<br \/>\nwitnesses examined  by the prosecution was totally false and<br \/>\nabsolutely unreliable.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It was  next contended  by Mr.  Lalit that\t neither the<br \/>\ntrial Court nor the High Court was justified in relying upon<br \/>\nthe evidence  of the defence witness Swaran Singh (D.W.5) to<br \/>\nrecord the  conviction against\tthe appellant.\tAccording to<br \/>\nMr. Lalit,  the prosecution  having failed to prove its case<br \/>\nagainst the  appellant through\tits  eye-witnesses,  namely,<br \/>\nP.W.4 and  P.W.6 could\tnot claim  its success solely on the<br \/>\nbasis of  the evidence of D.W.5, more so, when he figured as<br \/>\na witness  not on  behalf of  the appellant but on behalf of<br \/>\nsome of\t the other  accused persons. We might have persuaded<br \/>\nourselves to  accept the  above contention  of Mr. Lalit, if<br \/>\nthe learned  Courts below had, after discarding the evidence<br \/>\nof P.W.4  and P.W.6 altogether, based their findings against<br \/>\nthe appellant  solely relying upon the ocular version of the<br \/>\nincident given\tout by\tD.W.5, who was examined on behalf of<br \/>\ntwo of the other accused persons to prove that they were not<br \/>\nparty to  the murders  but admitted, in cross-examination by<br \/>\nthe learned  Public Prosecutor, that the appellant had fired<br \/>\nat the deceased, for in criminal cases the burden of proving<br \/>\nthe guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts always<br \/>\nrests on  the prosecution  and, therefore,  if it  fails  to<br \/>\nadduce satisfactory  and reliable evidence to discharge that<br \/>\nburden it  cannot fall back upon the evidence adduced by the<br \/>\naccused persons in support of their defence to rest its case<br \/>\nsolely thereupon. In the instant case, however, we find that<br \/>\nthe learned  Courts below  made use of the evidence of D.W.5<br \/>\nonly for  lending assurance to the conclusions already drawn<br \/>\nby the learned Courts on the basis of the evidence of P.Ws 4<br \/>\nand  6.\t  Such\ta   course  is\t legally  and\tlegitimately<br \/>\npermissible, for  D.W.5 was subjected to cross-examination &#8211;<br \/>\nand  in\t fact  cross-examined  &#8211;  at  the  instance  of\t the<br \/>\nappellants  after   being  cross   examined  by\t the  Public<br \/>\nProsecutor. That the appellant could not elicit any answe in<br \/>\nhis favour  thereby would  not alter the position as regards<br \/>\nthe admissibility. relevancy or worth of the evidence of the<br \/>\nabove witness.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It was  lastly contended  by Mr. Lalit that even if the<br \/>\nprosecution case  was accepted in its entirety the appellant<br \/>\ncould not  be, consequent  upon the  acquittal of Sukhwinder<br \/>\nSingh by  the High  Court, convicted  under Section  302 IPC<br \/>\nsimpliciter as\tneither the  death of Sukhdev Singh nor that<br \/>\nof Surjit Singh could be attributable to the injuries caused<br \/>\nby him.\t To appreciate\tthis contention of Mr. Lalit it will<br \/>\nbe necessary  to refer\tto the\trelevant evidence on record,<br \/>\nparticularly, that  of Dr.  Harish Chand Vaid (PW 5) who had<br \/>\nconducted the  post-mortem examination.\t As has been already<br \/>\nnoticed, according  to the  prosecution\t case,\tas  detailed<br \/>\nthrough PW 4 and PW 6, Surjit Singh was fired at only by the<br \/>\nabsconding accused  Joginder Singh  resulting in  his death.<br \/>\nThe appellant,\ttherefore, cannot  at all be liable for that<br \/>\nmurder. So  far as Sukhdev Singh is concerned, P.W.4 &amp; P.W.6<br \/>\ntestified that the appellant shot at his back and Sukhwinder<br \/>\nSingh at  his shoulder. From Dr. Vaid (PW 5), we get that he<br \/>\nfound the following injuries on the person of Sukhdev Singh:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     1.\t  A lacerated  wound on\t top and back<br \/>\n     of left  shoulder measuring  2 1\/2 cm. x<br \/>\n     1\/4 cm.  The margins were ecchymosed and<br \/>\n     inverted..\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     2.\t  A lacerted  wound 1 1\/4 cm. x 1 cm.<br \/>\n     on back and right side of the upper half<br \/>\n     of chest  placed 7 cm. from midline. The<br \/>\n     margins were inverted and ecchymosed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     3.\t  A lacerted  would 3 1\/2 cm. x 1 1\/2<br \/>\n     cm,. on  back and\tright side  of\tupper<br \/>\n     half of  chest placed  2  cm.  inner  to<br \/>\n     injury No.2.  It was  obliquely  placed.<br \/>\n     The margins were inverted.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     Dr.  Vaid\t stated\t that\tinjury\tNo.  2\tand  3\twere<br \/>\ncommunicating with  each other;\t while injury  No. 2 was the<br \/>\nwound of  entry injury No. 3 was the wound of exit. Dr. Vaid<br \/>\nfurther stated\tthat on\t dissection of\tinjury No.1 he found<br \/>\nthat bullet  after fracturing  the acromion and left scapula<br \/>\nentered the  upper lobe\t of left lung, which was ruptured at<br \/>\nthree places.  He opined  that death  was due  to shock\t and<br \/>\nhaemorrhage  as\t a  result  of\tinjury\tto  the\t left  lung,<br \/>\naccompanied with fracture. In the context of the evidence of<br \/>\nP.Ws. 4\t and 6\tthat the  appellant had fired on the back of<br \/>\nthe deceased  Sukhdev Singh,  the appellant can therfore, be<br \/>\nsaid to have caused injuries No.2 and 3 and the other injury<br \/>\nwhich, according  to the doctor was fatal, was caused by the<br \/>\nshot fired  by Sukhwinder  Singh. Since, however, Sukhwinder<br \/>\nSingh  stands  acquitted,  Section  34\tIPC  would  have  no<br \/>\napplication whatsoever and the appellant will be liable only<br \/>\nfor his\t act, namely, causing injuries No.2 and 3, which was<br \/>\nthe result  of one  shot, and,\tby themselves, did not cause<br \/>\nthe death  of Sukhwinder  Singh. Resultantly,  the appellant<br \/>\ncannot be  convicted for  the offence under Section 302 IPC,<br \/>\nbut as\the had\tfired at  Sukhdev Singh with rifle he cannot<br \/>\nescape his  conviction for the attempt to commit his murder.<br \/>\nThe  last  contention  of  Mr.\tLalit,\ttherefore,  must  be<br \/>\naccepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>     On the  conclusions as  above, we\tallow this appeal in<br \/>\npart, set aside the conviction and sentence recorded against<br \/>\nthe appellant  under Section  302 IPC  and  instead  thereof<br \/>\nconvict him  under Section  307 IPC;  and  for\tthe  altered<br \/>\nconviction sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for<br \/>\nten years. The appellant, who is on bail, will now surrender<br \/>\nto his bail bond to serve out the above sentence. The appeal<br \/>\nis thus partly allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995 Equivalent citations: 1996 AIR 755, 1996 SCC (1) 527 Author: M M.K. Bench: Mukherjee M.K. (J) PETITIONER: JARNAIL SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB DATE OF JUDGMENT23\/11\/1995 BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) KIRPAL B.N. (J) CITATION: 1996 AIR [&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-215847","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 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\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-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=\"1995-11-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-27T18:08:41+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=\"10 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-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-11-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-27T18:08:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995\"},\"wordCount\":1880,\"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\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995\",\"name\":\"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-11-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-27T18:08:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 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:\\\/\\\/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 State Of Punjab on 23 November, 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\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-11-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-27T18:08:41+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995","datePublished":"1995-11-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-27T18:08:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995"},"wordCount":1880,"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\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995","name":"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-11-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-27T18:08:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jarnail-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-23-november-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jarnail Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 November, 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:\/\/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\/215847","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=215847"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/215847\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=215847"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=215847"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=215847"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}