{"id":223711,"date":"2009-02-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009"},"modified":"2016-04-23T03:00:32","modified_gmt":"2016-04-22T21:30:32","slug":"pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009<\/div>\n
Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                             -1-\n\n      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                   AT CHANDIGARH\n                          ****\n                                     Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998\n                                      Date of Decision:03.02.2009\n\nPala Ram\n                                                        .....Appellant\n            Vs.\n\nState of Punjab\n                                                        .....Respondent\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL\n\nPresent:-   Mr. Samir Rathore, Advocate for Mr. Sumeet Goel,\n            Advocate for the appellant.\n\n            Mr. T.S. Salana, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.\n                          ****\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
HARBANS LAL, J.\n<\/p>\n
            This appeal is directed against the judgment\/ order of sentence<\/p>\n
dated 10.3.1998 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur<\/p>\n
whereby he convicted and sentenced the accused Pala Ram to undergo<\/p>\n
rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000\/- or in<\/p>\n
default of the same to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months<\/p>\n
under Section 376 of IPC and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000\/- or in default<\/p>\n
thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months under<\/p>\n
Section 450 of IPC with a further direction that the substantive sentences<\/p>\n
shall run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n
            Shorn of all unnecessary details, the prosecution case is that on<\/p>\n
6.6.1996 at about 7:00 P.M., the prosecutrix (name is not being indicated in<\/p>\n
the judgment to prevent social victimisation of the victim in view of
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                             -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
Premiya alias Prem Parkash v. State of Rajasthan, 2008(4) Recent<\/p>\n
Criminal Reports (Criminal) 539 (SC)) was all alone present in her house.<\/p>\n
She had bolted the door from inside and was arranging the wheat-chaff,<\/p>\n
when her father was away to his personal work and her sister-in-law,<\/p>\n
brother and mother had gone to attend the marriage at Amarpura. Her two<\/p>\n
other brothers Prem and Jai Pal had gone for doing labour work in Village<\/p>\n
Amarpura. The accused Pala Ram by scaling over the wall entered in the<\/p>\n
room and removed her salwar and started committing rape forcibly on her.<\/p>\n
She raised alarm.     Meanwhile, her brother Beelu PW came there. He<\/p>\n
knocked at the door, the bolt of which being loose got opened. He saw the<\/p>\n
accused committing rape on her. On catching sight of his, the accused made<\/p>\n
an endeavour to flee from the spot. Beelu by picking up a spade gave two<\/p>\n
blows, as a result of which, the accused sustained injuries and he ran away<\/p>\n
from the scene of crime. Her father Chandu Ram came later on in the<\/p>\n
house. She narrated the entire occurrence to her father, who took her to<\/p>\n
Fazilka Hospital, where she was medico legally examined. On 7.6.1996 at<\/p>\n
12:45 P.M. The ruqa was sent to the Police Station, City Fazilka. On receipt<\/p>\n
of the ruqa as well as medico legal examination report, ASI Sucha Singh<\/p>\n
went to the aforesaid hospital and recorded the statement of the prosecutrix.<\/p>\n
On the basis of the same, the case was registered. The said ASI visited the<\/p>\n
spot, prepared the rough site plan showing the place of occurrence and<\/p>\n
arrested the accused. On completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was<\/p>\n
laid in the Court of learned Illaqa Magistrate. He committed case to the<\/p>\n
Court of Session for trial of the accused.\n<\/p>\n
             On commitment, the accused was charged under Section 450<\/p>\n
and 376 of IPC to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial. To bring
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                             -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
home guilt against the accused, the prosecution has examined the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix PW1, Beelu PW2, Dr. Sarita PW3, Dr. Ajay Narang PW4, Head<\/p>\n
Constable Angrej Raj PW5, Sukhdev Singh Draftsman PW6, Darbara Singh<\/p>\n
SI PW7, ASI Sucha Singh Investigator PW8 and closed its evidence by<\/p>\n
giving up Dr. M.L. Madan being unnecessary.\n<\/p>\n
            When examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused<\/p>\n
denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution<\/p>\n
evidence against him and pleaded that “I am innnocent. Beelu Ram had a<\/p>\n
fight with me and he caused me injuries in the fight at about 6:30 P.M and I<\/p>\n
was already admitted in the hospital and later on, this case was planted upon<\/p>\n
me, when I was in the hospital.”      He did not adduce any evidence in<\/p>\n
defence. After hearing the learned Public Prosecutor for the State, the<\/p>\n
learned defence counsel and examining the evidence on record, the learned<\/p>\n
trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as noticed at the outset.<\/p>\n
Feeling aggrieved with his conviction\/ sentence, he has preferred this<\/p>\n
appeal.\n<\/p>\n
            I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides<\/p>\n
perusing the record with due care and circumspection.\n<\/p>\n
            Argued, the learned counsel for the appellant that there was an<\/p>\n
inordinate unexplained delay of 17\/18 hours in lodging of the First<\/p>\n
Information Report in this case as the occurrence allegedly took place on<\/p>\n
6.6.1996 at 7:00 P.M whereas this report was lodged on 7.6.1996 at about<\/p>\n
12:45 P.M. This delay smacks of concoction and fabrication of the version<\/p>\n
by the prosecution. The learned trial Court has not taken this fact into<\/p>\n
consideration. There was no signs of any external violence or injuries on<\/p>\n
any part of the prosecutrix as divulged by her medico legal examination
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                               -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
conducted by PW Dr. Sarita.       This Doctor had also recommended her<\/p>\n
radiological examination for determination of her age, but as is borne out<\/p>\n
from the record, no steps were taken in this direction for the reasons best<\/p>\n
known to the prosecution.     The accused- appellant, who had sustained<\/p>\n
injuries had got himself admitted in the same hospital at about 7:30 P.M on<\/p>\n
the date of alleged occurrence, yet he was not arrested on that day. He was<\/p>\n
hauled up only on 13.6.1996 which is obviously after a lapse of about 7<\/p>\n
days which further cast a cloak of suspicion on the prosecution version.<\/p>\n
The prosecutrix herself had lodged a complaint against her brother Beelu<\/p>\n
PW in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class at Fazilka. As per<\/p>\n
this complaint, the accused – appellant had not committed the alleged act<\/p>\n
with the prosecutrix and she had mentioned his name in her statement<\/p>\n
before the police only under coercion and at the instance and pressure of her<\/p>\n
brother PW Beelu, who had held out a threat to put an end to her life, if she<\/p>\n
refused to make statement in the Court against the accused. Her statement<\/p>\n
was also recorded by the aforementioned learned Magistrate, wherein again<\/p>\n
she reiterated the above facts. Thus, it is discernible from the prosecution<\/p>\n
evidence that it is incompatible and unconvincing. As such, no implicit<\/p>\n
reliance should be placed thereon.\n<\/p>\n
            To tide over these submissions, Mr. T.S. Salana, Deputy<\/p>\n
Advocate General, Punjab on behalf of the State maintained that the<\/p>\n
evidence tendered by the prosecutrix as well as her brother Beelu PW and<\/p>\n
eye witness being consistent and intrinsically trustworthy, warrants no<\/p>\n
interference in the impugned judgment. This contention merits rejection for<\/p>\n
the discussion to follow hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
            PW3 Dr. Sarita has stated in the following terms:
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                           -5-<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                “On 7.6.1996 at 12.45 P.M., I medico legally examined<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          —–(referring to the prosecutrix) daughter of Chandu Ram 15<\/p>\n
          or 16 years of age, resident of Khui Khera, brought to me by the<\/p>\n
          police and found the followings:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                —–(prosecutrix) was moderately built and nourished,<\/p>\n
          well oriented and was wearing a printed salwar and kameez,<\/p>\n
          with a weight of 40 Kgs and height of 5′, having 14 teeth in<\/p>\n
          upper jaw and 15 teeth in the lower jaw. Pulse was 72 PM and<\/p>\n
          B.P was 110\/70 MM of Hg.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                On examination, there was no sign of external violence<\/p>\n
          on any part of the body. The secondary sexual characteristics<\/p>\n
          were developed. Pubic and axillary hair was present. Breast<\/p>\n
          developed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                On per-vagina examination – pubic hair present, labia<\/p>\n
          majora and minora well developed. Hymen was torn and the<\/p>\n
          tear of the hymen was an old one. Vagina admitted two fingers<\/p>\n
          easily, uterus was ante-verted and ante-flexed, small size<\/p>\n
          mobile forensic clear. No bleeding was present.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                I took two vaginal swabs and sent the same to the<\/p>\n
          Chemical Examiner for confirmation of spermatozoa. Clothes<\/p>\n
          i.e salwar and kameez of the patient were also sent to the<\/p>\n
          Chemical Examiner for confirmation of spermatozoa. I also<\/p>\n
          advised x-rays for confirmation of age.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                I handed over to the police, the box with five seals<\/p>\n
          containing two vaginal swabs, a packet with nine seals<\/p>\n
          containing the clothes of the patient, an envelope with seven
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                            -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
           seals containing sample of the seal, covering letter, MLR and<\/p>\n
           the police papers and one another copy of the MLR.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                 Ex.P3 is the correct carbon copy of the medico legal<\/p>\n
           report, original of which I have brought today in the court. She<\/p>\n
           was medico legally examined on police request Ex.P4, which<\/p>\n
           bears my endorsement Ex.P4\/1. (At this stage a sealed parcel<\/p>\n
           has been opened and salwar MO-4 and shirt MO-5 have come<\/p>\n
           out of it). These are the same clothes, which I had removed<\/p>\n
           from the person of the prosecutrix.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           XXXn<\/p>\n
                 The prosecutrix arrived in the hospital at 12.30 PM on<\/p>\n
           7.6.1996. She was brought by ASI Sucha Singh. I did not find<\/p>\n
           any teeth bite injury on any part of the body of the prosecutrix.<\/p>\n
           The possibility of the prosecutrix being accustomed to habitual<\/p>\n
           intercourse cannot be ruled out. I had not received the report of<\/p>\n
           Ossification test.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           It is in the cross-examination of the prosecutrix PW1 that “the<\/p>\n
accused caught hold of me and threw me on the ground with force. I<\/p>\n
received injury on my back. I was wearing green bangles at that time.<\/p>\n
Some bangles were broken and I also received some scratches on my arms.<\/p>\n
The accused gave me the bite on my cheek. He also gave teeth bite on my<\/p>\n
breast and also torn my shirt. But I had not given any teeth bite to the<\/p>\n
accused. The accused kept me in his grip for one hour. During this one<\/p>\n
hour, I was making a struggle and I received injuries on my back and arms<\/p>\n
and on the legs.” On a combined reading of this ocular account as well as<\/p>\n
the medical evidence trickled from the mouth of Dr. Sarita (sic.), it
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                                -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
transpires that palpably, there is divergence rather sharp contradiction<\/p>\n
between the two. Dr. Sarita has stated in candid and categoric terms that on<\/p>\n
examination, there was no sign of external violence on any part of the body,<\/p>\n
whereas on evaluating the above referred evidence of the prosecutrix, she<\/p>\n
had sustained injuries on her back, arms and legs. She was got medico<\/p>\n
legally examined not on the date of alleged occurrence, rather on the next<\/p>\n
day i.e. after 17 to 18 hours. The complainant party has not apportioned any<\/p>\n
reason for not taking the prosecutrix to the hospital for her medical<\/p>\n
examination soon after the occurrence. There is no dispute or quarrel with<\/p>\n
the proposition that if there is variance between the medical and ocular<\/p>\n
evidence, the latter has to be accepted, provided it stands the test of judicial<\/p>\n
scrutiny in the crucible of probabilities. But here in this case, the medical<\/p>\n
evidence cannot be brushed aside. If she had sustained injuries on the<\/p>\n
stated parts of her body, in all human probabilities; to prevent further loss of<\/p>\n
blood, she would have been rushed immediately to the hospital. As<\/p>\n
emanates from Dr. Sarita’s evidence, the vagina admitted two fingers easily.<\/p>\n
Under the stress of cross-examination, she has deposed that “the possibility<\/p>\n
of the prosecutrix being accustomed to habitual intercourse cannot be ruled<\/p>\n
out. ” This evidence speaks volumes of the prosecutrix being habitual to<\/p>\n
sexual intercourse. As is borne out from Dr. Sarita’s testimony, two vaginal<\/p>\n
swabs, salwar and kamiz of the prosecutrix were sent to the Chemical<\/p>\n
Examiner for confirmation of spermatozoa.          The Chemical Examiner’s<\/p>\n
report has not been tendered in evidence by the prosecution. The record of<\/p>\n
the trial Court does not reveal any reason worth mention for withholding the<\/p>\n
same. In the absence thereof, it is very difficult to say that on the vaginal<\/p>\n
swabs, salwar and kamiz of the prosecutrix, the spermatozoa were found
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                               -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
present.   The reason for holding back such report may be that no<\/p>\n
spermatozoa was found on these articles. An adverse inference has to be<\/p>\n
drawn against the prosecution that such report had gone against it. It is in<\/p>\n
the evidence of Dr. Sarita that “she had advised X-Ray for confirmation of<\/p>\n
age of the prosecutrix.” At the fag end of her cross-examination, she has<\/p>\n
testified that “I had not received the report of ossification test.” On the day<\/p>\n
of her examination as a witness in the Court, the prosecutrix gave her age 16<\/p>\n
years. So, is the age given by Dr. Sarita in her evidence. Dr. Ajay Narang<\/p>\n
PW4 had medico legally examined the accused on 7.6.1996 at 12:45 P.M.,<\/p>\n
i.e., on the next day of the occurrence. It is in his evidence that “Smeghma<\/p>\n
was not present.” Absence thereof on the accused’s person coupled with<\/p>\n
non-tendering of the Chemical Examiner’s report gives an inkling that even<\/p>\n
symptomatic proof of rape was not there. Annexure P.1 is the copy of the<\/p>\n
complaint purportedly lodged by the prosecutrix against her own brother<\/p>\n
Beelu Ram PW under Sections 504\/323\/506 of IPC in the Court of learned<\/p>\n
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Fazilka.      As its contents proceed, on<\/p>\n
7.6.1996, Pala Ram (referring to the present accused- appellant) had not<\/p>\n
committed rape with me (referring to the prosecutrix).           It is further<\/p>\n
mentioned in this complaint that there used to be a dispute in the<\/p>\n
complainant’s house that she should depose against Pala Ram, but the<\/p>\n
complainant used to refuse by saying that she would not lay any innocent<\/p>\n
man to suffer. Towards the end of her cross-examination, the prosecutrix<\/p>\n
has stated that “The accused had got thumb impressions on blank paper and<\/p>\n
those papers may have been used for the statement. I am not ready to give<\/p>\n
my thumb impression for comparison in this case.” But to the utter dismay<\/p>\n
of the prosecution, the occasion at which her thumb impressions were
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                                -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
obtained by the accused has been left in the womb of mystery. Where was<\/p>\n
such occasion for the accused has not been unfolded. In Annexure P.2 also<\/p>\n
it has been stated that “on 7.6.1996 I (referring to the prosecutrix) on<\/p>\n
Beelu’s asking had registered an FIR against Pala Ram that he had raped me<\/p>\n
but Pala Ram had not raped me.” This statement having been recorded<\/p>\n
before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Fazilka cannot be ignored easily.<\/p>\n
If the prosecutrix had not suffered this statement in the aforesaid Court, the<\/p>\n
complainant party would have taken this matter to its logical conclusion by<\/p>\n
way of inquiry.       There being no plausible reason to discard this<\/p>\n
documentary evidence, it has to be relied upon. The same further deals a<\/p>\n
coup-de-grace or strike a death knell to the prosecution edifice.<\/p>\n
             Dr. Ajay Narang PW4 has deposed in his cross-examination<\/p>\n
that the “Patient (referring to the accused- appellant) was admitted in Civil<\/p>\n
Hospital, Fazilka at the time of his medico-legal examination.” One thing is<\/p>\n
clear that the accused lay already admitted. It is apt to be borne in mind that<\/p>\n
the rival theory of defence set up by the accused is that as a matter of fact he<\/p>\n
had received injuries at the hands of Beelu PW, brother of the prosecutrix<\/p>\n
and was lying admitted in the hospital at the time of alleged occurrence.<\/p>\n
The sum and substance of the evidence given by Beelu PW is that on seeing<\/p>\n
the accused committing rape on his sister, he picked up the rusted spade and<\/p>\n
gave one or two blows with the same on the accused. It is in his cross-<\/p>\n
examination that “the community men of the accused were also attracted to<\/p>\n
the spot with dangs to beat me. They were 6-7 in number.” If the accused-<\/p>\n
appellant had committed rape, his community men would have not come to<\/p>\n
his rescue. Their coming to the spot rather probablises that the accused-<\/p>\n
appellant was assaulted by Beelu Ram PW and to wreak vengeance, they
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                               -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
came over there duly armed with dangs. The medico legal examination<\/p>\n
report of the accused though not exhibited is available on the record. As per<\/p>\n
the same, Pala Ram accused had arrived in the hospital on 6.6.1996 at 7:30<\/p>\n
P.M and he was medico legally examined at 7:40 P.M. As many as, three<\/p>\n
injuries were found on his person. One lacerated wound was observed in<\/p>\n
the middle of his scalp. The other lacerated wound was also observed at the<\/p>\n
saggital line. The third one i.e. lacerated wound was found on the front of<\/p>\n
his forehead. The bleeding was present in all the injuries. Obviously, all<\/p>\n
these three injuries were found on the vital parts of his body. May be that,<\/p>\n
the fight occurred between the accused- appellant and Beelu PW2. In order<\/p>\n
to exert pressure upon the accused- appellant, the latter got planted a false<\/p>\n
case of rape by using his sister as a tool who was already habitual to sexual<\/p>\n
intercourse, particularly, when the taking place of rape has not been<\/p>\n
established by evidence.\n<\/p>\n
             As alleged by the prosecutrix, the occurrence took place on<\/p>\n
6.6.1996 at about 7:00 P.M. It is in her cross-examination that “the accused<\/p>\n
kept me in his grip for one hour.” If the accused kept her for one hour in the<\/p>\n
grip of his loins, in that eventuality, by no stretch of speculation, he would<\/p>\n
have reached the hospital at 7:30 P.M. There being injuries on his head,<\/p>\n
with a spade, he would have not been able to reach the hospital hurriedly.<\/p>\n
To add further to it, the alleged occurrence took place in the evening time.<\/p>\n
Normally speaking, the parents or other members of the family of a young<\/p>\n
girl do not leave her all alone at such hours.\n<\/p>\n
             It is in the corss-examination of ASI Sucha Singh PW8<\/p>\n
Investigator that “the ruqa which was received by me is not on the judicial<\/p>\n
file.” As would be apparent from his cross-examination, he was questioned
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                                -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
as to why he had not arrested Pala Ram on that day? He replied that “the<\/p>\n
accused was admitted in hospital, therefore, he had not arrested him nor he<\/p>\n
put guard”.      It is also in his cross-examination that “medico legal<\/p>\n
examination of Pala Ram was got done on 7.6.1996 at 12:45 P.M. When I<\/p>\n
got him medico legally examined, the accused was not arrested.”             The<\/p>\n
question recorded in his further cross-examination is “when you had got<\/p>\n
medico legally examined Pala Ram accused on 7.6.1996, why you had not<\/p>\n
recorded the statement of Pala Ram accused regarding the injuries suffered<\/p>\n
by him and why you had not arrested him on that day?” The note recorded<\/p>\n
in the answer is “the witness is not giving any reply to the question.” It is in<\/p>\n
his further cross-examination that “there were three injuries on the person of<\/p>\n
Pala Ram accused.      These injuries were on the head and the Doctor had<\/p>\n
advised X-Ray for two injuries. It is correct that the injuries were declared<\/p>\n
by me as simple before the receipt of the X-Ray report. I have not obtained<\/p>\n
the report from the Doctor with regard to the X-Ray report of Pala Ram<\/p>\n
accused.” Obviously, he has not assigned any reason for declaring the<\/p>\n
injuries as simple on his own. He has also not given any reason for not<\/p>\n
obtaining the X-report from the Doctor. This conduct shows that he was too<\/p>\n
bent upon to help the complainant party. A suggestion has been put to him<\/p>\n
in his further cross-examination that “it is wrong to say that I have sided<\/p>\n
with the complainant and conducted partial investigation.”<\/p>\n
              To sum up, there is unexplained inordinate delay of as many as<\/p>\n
17 to 18 hours in getting the prosecutrix medico legally examined.<\/p>\n
Secondly, as alleged by her, she has sustained injuries on her back, arms and<\/p>\n
legs, which were not found by Dr. Sarita during the course of medico legal<\/p>\n
examination of the prosecutrix. Thirdly, as per Annexure P.1 as well as
\n Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998                              -12-<\/span><\/p>\n
Annexure P.2, Beelu PW brother of the prosecutrix had forced her to make a<\/p>\n
statement in the Court that the accused Pala Ram had committed rape on her<\/p>\n
though as per these documents, she was not ravished.           Fourthly, the<\/p>\n
prosecution has not tendered in evidence the Chemical Examiner’s Report to<\/p>\n
affirm the presence of spermatozoa on the vaginal swabs, salwar and kamiz<\/p>\n
of the prosecutrix.   Fifthly, smegma was absent on the person of the<\/p>\n
accused- appellant.    Sixthly, the prosecutrix was habitual to sexual<\/p>\n
intercourse. Seventhly, the age of the prosecutrix was not got determined by<\/p>\n
way of ossification test despite the direction given by the Doctor. Eighthly,<\/p>\n
the presence of the accused- appellant at the time and palce of occurrence is<\/p>\n
rendered highly doubtful.\n<\/p>\n
            In the ultimate analysis, it boils down that the prosecution has<\/p>\n
not been able to bring home guilt against the accused- appellant beyond a<\/p>\n
shadow of reasonable doubt. Consequently, this appeal is accepted, setting<\/p>\n
aside the impugned judgment\/ order of sentence. The accused- appellant is<\/p>\n
hereby acquitted of the charged offence.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
February 03, 2009                                 ( HARBANS LAL )\nrenu                                                   JUDGE\n\nWhether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009 Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Appeal No.312-SB of 1998 Date of Decision:03.02.2009 Pala Ram …..Appellant Vs. State of Punjab …..Respondent CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. Samir […]<\/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-223711","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 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\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-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=\"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-22T21:30:32+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\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-22T21:30:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3482,\"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\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-22T21:30:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 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":"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 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\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-22T21:30:32+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\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-22T21:30:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009"},"wordCount":3482,"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\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009","name":"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-22T21:30:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pala-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pala Ram vs State Of Punjab on 3 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\/223711","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=223711"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223711\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=223711"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=223711"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=223711"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}