{"id":247087,"date":"2009-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009"},"modified":"2015-11-27T20:44:50","modified_gmt":"2015-11-27T15:14:50","slug":"vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009","title":{"rendered":") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
) vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009<\/div>\n
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA\n                   AT CHANDIGARH\n1)\n                                 Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008\n                                 Dated of Decision:- July 30, 2009\n\nThe State of Punjab                          ...Prosecutor\n\n                        Versus\n\nDarbara Singh                                ...Accused\/Respondent\n\n2)\n                                 Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008\n\n\nDarbara Singh\n                                             ....APPELLANT\n\n                        Versus\n\nThe State of Punjab\n                                             ....RESPONDENT\n\n\nCORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL\n            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN\n\n\nPresent:-   Mrs Vandana Malhotra, Advocate\n            for the appellant.\n\n            Sh. Satinder Singh Gill, Addl. A.G. Punjab.\n\n                        ------\n\nMEHTAB S.GILL, J.\n<\/pre>\n
            This is a murder reference sent by the learned Additional<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Jalandhar for confirmation of death sentence<\/p>\n
awarded to Darbara Singh son of Jagjit Singh.\n<\/p>\n
            We will be deciding both Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No.138-DB of 2008 by a common order, as they arise out<\/p>\n
of the same order\/judgment dated 7.1.2008 of the learned Additional
\n                                                                             2<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Jalandhar, whereby he convicted Darbara Singh<\/p>\n
son of Jagjit Singh under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to death. He<\/p>\n
was directed to pay a fine of Rs.20,000\/-, in default to further undergo R.I.<\/p>\n
for two years. Darbara Singh son of Jagjit Singh was further convicted<\/p>\n
under Section 364 IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I. and to pay a<\/p>\n
fine of Rs.5,000\/-, in default to further undergo R.I. for six months. Darbara<\/p>\n
Singh was also convicted under Section 201 IPC and sentenced to undergo<\/p>\n
R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000\/-, in default to further<\/p>\n
undergo R.I. for six months.\n<\/p>\n
             The case of the prosecution is unfolded by the statement<\/p>\n
Ex.PFF of Mohammad Vakil given to Inspector Pritam Singh at Basti<\/p>\n
Mithu, Jalandhar.\n<\/p>\n
             Mohammad Vakil stated, that he is a resident of Sugrain, Police<\/p>\n
Station Bissar, District Darbhanga (Bihar). Now he is staying in Basti<\/p>\n
Mithu, Police Station Sadar, Jalandhar. On 25.10.2004 at about 2.00 p.m.,<\/p>\n
his son Khursheed aged about 5 years, height about 2 feet, hair cut, wearing<\/p>\n
light brown shirt and knicker of black colour, bare footed and his niece<\/p>\n
Ronku d\/o Mohammad Pappu, who had come 7-8 days earlier from Village<\/p>\n
Nahalan, were missing. Ronku was six years old. She had hair cut. She<\/p>\n
was wearing printed shirt of red and had worn red colour bangles. She was<\/p>\n
wearing scissors chappal. They were playing near Kherra Palace, which is<\/p>\n
near their house. They did not come home. They had been searching for<\/p>\n
them till that day i.e. till 27.7.2004 but had not been found there.
\n                                                                           3<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
             This entry (statement of Mohammad Vakil) was made in the<\/p>\n
Rapat Roznamcha and was endorsed vide Rapat No.13, dated 28.10.2004.<\/p>\n
Inspector Pritam Singh along with a police party was present in Basti Mithu,<\/p>\n
in connection with verification of Rapat No.13, that Pritam Singh Jathedar,<\/p>\n
son of Labh Singh, resident of Basti Mithu told him, that he saw a man at<\/p>\n
about 2.15 p.m. whose description was aged about 50 years, height 5′-8″,<\/p>\n
clean shaven, hair having mixture of black and white and a mole on the<\/p>\n
right eye brow and wearing a coca-cola pant, carrying two children on his<\/p>\n
cycle, whose age appeared 5\/6 years. One of the children was wearing light<\/p>\n
brown shirt and black colour knicker and another child was wearing a<\/p>\n
printed shirt of red colour and bangles of red colour. They were going<\/p>\n
towards Basti Bawa Khel to canal minor. He could identify the man. He<\/p>\n
has suspected, that he was taking the children with the intention to murder<\/p>\n
them. Inspector Pritam Singh sent this statement through HC Atma Singh<\/p>\n
for registration of a case under Section 364 IPC to Police Station Sadar<\/p>\n
Jalandhar.\n<\/p>\n
             On the basis of this statement, FIR Ex.PFF\/2 was registered at<\/p>\n
Police Station Sadar Jalandhar on 28.10.2004 at 7.00 p.m. and the special<\/p>\n
report reached the J.M.I.C., Jalandhar on 29.10.2004 at 4.00 a.m.<\/p>\n
             The prosecution to prove its case brought into the witness box,<\/p>\n
Dr. Gurpal Singh PW1, C.Charanjit Singh PW2, C.Baljinder Singh PW3,<\/p>\n
HC Gopal Singh PW4, C.Gurnam Singh PW5, MHC Gurpal Singh PW6,<\/p>\n
Dalip Singh Draftsman PW7, Nar Bahadur PW8, Balkar Singh Naib<\/p>\n
Tehsildar PW9, SI Harbhajan Kaur Finger Print Expert PW10, Akbir Singh
\n                                                                            4<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
PW11, Dr.Ashok Chanana PW12, HC Mohinder Singh PW13, Sh. Gurnam<\/p>\n
Singh Dhillon, JMIC, Jalandhar PW14, HC Raghu Nath Singh PW15, C-I<\/p>\n
Nirmal Singh PW16, C.Jagiri Lal PW17, Manohar Lal Naib Tehsildar<\/p>\n
PW18, Parbodh Kumar Patwari PW18, Inspector Pritam Singh PW19, HC<\/p>\n
Tarlochan Singh PW20, HC Gopal Krishan PW21, DSP Rajinder Singh<\/p>\n
PW22, Mohd. Pappu PW23, Mohd. Vakil PW24, Pritam Singh PW25,<\/p>\n
Prabhjot Singh PW26, ASI Mohinder Singh (Retd.) PW27 and SI Nirmal<\/p>\n
Singh PW28.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the appellant has argued, that there is an<\/p>\n
unexplained delay in lodging of FIR Ex.PFF\/2.        Jathedar Pritam Singh<\/p>\n
PW25 saw the appellant taking two children on a cycle on 25.10.2004 at<\/p>\n
2.15 p.m. He heard a hue and cry, but still did not report the matter to the<\/p>\n
police or to the parents of the deceased. He kept quiet till 28.10.2004. The<\/p>\n
father of Khursheed deceased, Mohd. Vakil PW24 and the father of Ronku<\/p>\n
deceased, Mohd. Pappu PW23 did not inform the police for two days. They<\/p>\n
had come to know about the missing of their children on 25.10.2004 in the<\/p>\n
afternoon, but reported the matter to Inspector Pritam Singh, who was<\/p>\n
standing at Basti Mithu on 27.10.2004. Strangely it has been mentioned in<\/p>\n
DDR Ex.PFF by the Investigating Officer, that no case was made out. It is<\/p>\n
strange that the parents kept quiet for two days and the police also wrote in<\/p>\n
DDR Ex.PFF, that no case is made out. Till 27.10.2004 nothing was known<\/p>\n
either to the parents of the deceased or the police. FIR Ex.PFF\/2 came into<\/p>\n
existence on 28.10.2004 at 7.00 p.m. and the special report was sent to the<\/p>\n
Ilaqa\/Duty Magistrate on 29.10.2004 at 4.00 a.m., though it had to be sent
\n                                                                           5<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
from the police station, which is situated at Jalandhar, to the J.M.I.C. who<\/p>\n
also stayed at Jalandhar.\n<\/p>\n
              The finger prints, which have been taken of the appellant on<\/p>\n
the liquor bottle and glass from the sugarcane fields, have not been<\/p>\n
mentioned in Inquest Reports Ex.PD and Ex.PH. In Site plan Ex.PEE,<\/p>\n
which was made by Parbodh Kumar Patwari PW18, there is no mention of<\/p>\n
the liquor bottle or glass. These articles kept lying with the police for 10<\/p>\n
days and they were sent to the FSL on 10.11.2004.          This is a clear<\/p>\n
concoction, as alleged the liquor bottle and glass were recovered on<\/p>\n
30.10.2004.\n<\/p>\n
              The last seen evidence as propounded by Jathedar Pritam Singh<\/p>\n
PW25 has loopholes. This witness (PW25) has stated, that he saw appellant<\/p>\n
taking the two children i.e. Khursheed and Ronku on his cycle on<\/p>\n
25.10.2004 at about 2.15 p.m. He heard the hue and cry in the Basti<\/p>\n
(Locality) of the children being taken away, but strangely he did not say<\/p>\n
anything till 28.10.2004. It was on 28.10.2004 that he gave his statement to<\/p>\n
the police, he strangely kept quiet for three days, though at the time when<\/p>\n
the children were being taken away, he apprehended that they would be<\/p>\n
killed.\n<\/p>\n
              The chain of events and circumstances are not complete. No<\/p>\n
DNA test was conducted of the appellant or blood samples were taken to<\/p>\n
prove that he is the one who had committed the crime on the deceased<\/p>\n
Khursheed and Ronku. Nor was the appellant medically examined as to<\/p>\n
whether he was sexually fit or not.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                             6<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel for the State has argued, that there is no delay<\/p>\n
in lodging of the FIR. Occurrence had taken place on 25.10.2004 at 2.00<\/p>\n
p.m. DDR Ex.PFF was lodged on 27.10.2004 by Mohd. Vakil PW24 and<\/p>\n
thereafter the police came into action. Jathedar Pritam Singh PW25 is an<\/p>\n
independent witness. He has no axe to grind against the appellant. He is<\/p>\n
the one who saw the appellant taking away the deceased children. In these<\/p>\n
times, no independent person is ready to come forward to depose against the<\/p>\n
accused lest he himself also become a victim.\n<\/p>\n
             The recovery of liquor bottle, which had finger prints on it, was<\/p>\n
witnessed by senior officers i.e. Rajinder Singh DSP PW22, Manohar Lal<\/p>\n
Naib Tehsildar PW18, SI Harbhajan Kaur PW10 and ASI Mohinder Singh<\/p>\n
PW27. The owner of the sugarcane field from where the recovery was<\/p>\n
made, Akbir Singh PW11 has stated in his testimony, that the recoveries<\/p>\n
were made in front of him.          The order of taking finger-prints of the<\/p>\n
appellant was passed by Sh. Gurnam Singh Dhillon, JMIC PW14; order<\/p>\n
being Ex.PY\/1. The finger-prints impressions of the appellant were taken<\/p>\n
vide Ex.PZ and Ex.PZ\/1.       The delay of 10 days was only due to the<\/p>\n
exigencies of police duties and administrative reasons.      It has come in<\/p>\n
evidence that the liquor bottle and glass were kept in safe custody and were<\/p>\n
not tampered with.\n<\/p>\n
             The motive for the commission of the offence is very clear.<\/p>\n
The medical evidence shows that there are ruptures on the private parts of<\/p>\n
both the deceased and the appellant had sexually intercourse with them.<\/p>\n
             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused<\/p>\n
the record with their assistance.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                            7<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
            The testimony of Jathedar Pritam Singh PW25 is crucial to<\/p>\n
establish the guilt of the accused. In his statement before the Court, Pritam<\/p>\n
Singh PW25 has stated, that he is a member of the working committee of<\/p>\n
Akali Dal. On 25.10.2004 at 2.15 p.m., he was coming from the side of<\/p>\n
Basti Bawa Khel towards Basti Mithu. When he tried to come on the road,<\/p>\n
he saw a person going on a bicycle with two children, one was sitting on the<\/p>\n
front rod and the other was on the carrier. The cycle was proceeding<\/p>\n
towards the canal. When he reached Basti Mithu, he heard a hue and cry<\/p>\n
that a person had kidnapped the children. Pritam Singh PW25 rushed back<\/p>\n
to the place where he had seen the accused, but the appellant was not<\/p>\n
traceable. Mohd.Vakil PW24 and Mohd. Pappu PW23, the fathers of the<\/p>\n
children were telling about the description of the children. The boy was the<\/p>\n
son of Mohd. Vakil PW24 and the girl was the daughter of Mohd. Pappu<\/p>\n
PW23. On 28.10.2004 he (PW25) gave his statement to the police. He also<\/p>\n
gave description of the appellant. On 29.10.2004 he was going from the<\/p>\n
Leather Complex to meet one of his friends and he stopped at the police<\/p>\n
naka. He asked the police officials as to why they were holding a naka. In<\/p>\n
the meanwhile, he saw the appellant coming on a bicycle from the opposite<\/p>\n
direction and told the police that he was the same person, who had<\/p>\n
kidnapped the children.\n<\/p>\n
            This testimony of Pritam Singh PW25 has glaring holes in it.<\/p>\n
Pritam Singh PW25 strangely kept quiet for three days in spite of he<\/p>\n
knowing that two children had been kidnapped from the locality. He even<\/p>\n
identified those children by giving the description. Pritam Singh PW25 did
\n                                                                              8<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
not tell both Mohd.Pappu PW23 and Mohd Vakil PW24 or the police about<\/p>\n
what he had seen on 25.10.2004 at 2.15 p.m. It is on 28.10.2004 that he<\/p>\n
gave his statement to the police. He noticed that the children were being<\/p>\n
taken for some ulterior purpose. This witness is not telling the truth. If he<\/p>\n
had been present at the time, when the children were kidnapped, he would<\/p>\n
have immediately told what he had seen to Mohd. Pappu PW23 and Mohd.<\/p>\n
Vakil PW24. If not the parents of the deceased, he would have gone to the<\/p>\n
police to inform them, as he was a political man, who are not hesitant or shy<\/p>\n
to go to the police. Pritam Singh PW25 has further stated, that he knew a<\/p>\n
number of incidents of child lifting were taking place. The testimony of this<\/p>\n
witness is not credible. His conduct is not natural. He is a planted witness<\/p>\n
and does not give any credence to the prosecution case.<\/p>\n
            In Tara Chand Vs. State of Haryana, 2001(2) R.C.R. (Criminal)<\/p>\n
496, it has been held by this Court that where there is no eye witness to the<\/p>\n
occurrence and the witness who had seen the deceased with the appellant<\/p>\n
and he kept mum for two days, his evidence could not be relied upon. His<\/p>\n
conduct was unnatural indicating that he is a witness introduced later on.<\/p>\n
            There is an unexplained delay of 40 hours. Occurrence had<\/p>\n
taken place on 25.10.2004 at about 2.00 p.m. FIR Ex.PFF\/2 came into<\/p>\n
existence on 28.10.2004 at 7.00 p.m. and the special report reached the<\/p>\n
J.M.I.C., Jalandhar on 29.10.2004 at 4.00 a.m. The police station Sadar<\/p>\n
Jalandhar and the residences of the Judicial Officers are in Jalandhar.<\/p>\n
Pritam Singh PW25 saw the appellant taking away the children on<\/p>\n
25.10.2004 at 2.15 p.m. He did not report the matter to the police or to the<\/p>\n
parents i.e the father of deceased Khursheed, Mohd. Vakil PW24 and the
\n                                                                             9<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
father of deceased Ronku, Mohd. Pappu PW23.              He kept quiet till<\/p>\n
28.10.2004. In DDR Ex.PFF, which was recorded on 27.10.2004 on the<\/p>\n
statement of Mohd. Vakil PW24, it has been stated by the Investigating<\/p>\n
Officer that no offence is made out for investigation. How and why he<\/p>\n
came to this conclusion has not been explained by the prosecution.<\/p>\n
Strangely on 29.10.2004 Pritam Singh PW25 was standing on the naka with<\/p>\n
the police that he recognized the appellant and he was thereafter taken into<\/p>\n
custody by the Investigating Officer, Inspector Pritam Singh PW19.<\/p>\n
            The next piece of evidence is the finger prints on the liquor<\/p>\n
bottle and the glass, which were taken from the fields of Akbir Singh PW11.<\/p>\n
Strangely, there is no mention of this crucial piece of evidence of the liquor<\/p>\n
bottle and glass being recovered in both Inquest Reports of Khursheed<\/p>\n
deceased Ex.PD and Ronku deceased, Ex.PH.           In the scaled Site Plan<\/p>\n
Ex.PEE Parbodh Kumar Patwari PW18, there is no mention of the liquor<\/p>\n
bottle and glass. Both these articles i.e. the liquor bottle and glass tumbler<\/p>\n
were kept in the police station for 10 days, as they were allegedly recovered<\/p>\n
on 30.10.2004 and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory on 10.11.2004.<\/p>\n
Keeping the liquor bottle and glass in custody for 10 days and not sending<\/p>\n
them to the Forensic Science Laboratory, a suspicion does arise in our mind<\/p>\n
that the finger-prints were tampered with.\n<\/p>\n
            Manohar Lal Naib Tehsildar PW18 has stated in his testimony,<\/p>\n
that Sarpanch and Panch of the village were present. The witnesses to the<\/p>\n
recovery of the liquor bottle and glass and dead-bodies were Rajinder Singh<\/p>\n
DSP PW22, Manohar Lal Naib Tehsildar PW18, SI Harbhajan Kaur PW10<\/p>\n
and ASI Mohinder Kaur (Retd.) PW27, all official witnesses. No effort was
\n                                                                                10<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
made by the Investigating Officer to get the signatures of the independent<\/p>\n
witnesses i.e. the Sarpanch and Panch on the recovery memos.               If the<\/p>\n
recovery memos. i.e.Ex.PCC and Ex.PDD were also attested by these<\/p>\n
witnesses i.e. Sarpanch and Panch, it would have given a lot of authenticity<\/p>\n
to the recovery.       Coupled with this, Rajinder Singh DSP PW22 has<\/p>\n
contradicted the statement of Manohar Lal Naib Teshildar PW18 by stating<\/p>\n
that the Sarpanch and Panch were not joined, but only the owner of the land<\/p>\n
was present.\n<\/p>\n
               Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Aman Vs.State of Rajasthan,<\/p>\n
1997 AIR (SC) 2960 has held that the finger-prints being lifted and articles<\/p>\n
being kept in the police station for five days, accused is entitled to acquittal;<\/p>\n
which is as under: –\n<\/p>\n
               “8.   After careful perusal of the evidence adduced in proof of
\n               the above circumstance we notice a glaring missing link, in
\n               that, the prosecution has failed to establish that the seized
\n               articles were not- or could not be- tampered with before it
\n               reached the Bureau for examination. Though evidence was led
\n               to prove that after seizure the articles were packaged and then
\n               sealed, no evidence was led to indicate what was the mark
\n               given in the seals and whether the Bureau received the
\n               packages with the marked seals intact.         Indeed, even the
\n               contemporaneous letters exchanged between them (Ext.P.59
\n               and P.60) do not throw any light on this aspect of the matter.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
               Rather, other circumstances appearing on record make the
\n               prosecutikon case doubtful in this regard; first, the articles were
\n               kept in the police station for five days without any justifiable
\n               reason, secondly the Investigating Officer (PW20) admitted
\n               that the seal, mark of which was put on the articles, was with
\n               him since the time of seizure and lastly his letter (Ext.P.59)
\n                                                                            11<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
            forwarding the seized articles to the Bureau contains
\n            admittedly, an overwriting as regards the date of its
\n            writing\/dispatch and no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming
\n            for the same.    Apart from the above missing link and the
\n            suspicious circumstances surrounding the same, there is
\n            another circumstance which also casts a serious mistrust as to
\n            genuineness of the evidence. Even though the specimen finger
\n            prints of Mohd. Aman had to be taken on a number of
\n            occasions at the behest of the Bureau, they were never taken,
\n            before or under the order of a Magistrate in accordance with
\n            Section 5 of the Identification of Prisoners Act. It is true that
\n            under Section 4 thereof police is competent to take finger prints
\n            of the accused but to dispel any suspicion as to its bona fides or
\n            to eliminate the possibility of fabrication of evidence it was
\n            eminently desirable that they were taken before or under the
\n            order of a Magistrate”.\n<\/p>\n
\n            In the case in hand, the articles were kept in custody for 10<\/p>\n
days without any explanation from the prosecution.<\/p>\n
            Every criminal case has got to be decided on the totality of the<\/p>\n
circumstances and the evidence before the Court. Two little children have<\/p>\n
been sodomised and raped, but it was incumbent upon the prosecution to get<\/p>\n
a foolproof case with all the circumstances linking the appellant with the<\/p>\n
crime before the Court. Unfortunately, the prosecution has miserably failed<\/p>\n
to complete the chain of circumstances, but in fact has implanted false<\/p>\n
witnesses, whose testimony is not worthy of any credence. Time has come<\/p>\n
for the police to use scientific methods of investigation in such like cases<\/p>\n
and to drop the archaic methods of investigation.
\n                                                                            12<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
            It has also been held by this Court in Ved Parkash @ Bhagwan<\/p>\n
Dia Vs. State of Haryana, 2006(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 992 as under: –<\/p>\n
            “16. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence against the
\n            appellants.      The prosecution has rested its case on
\n            circumstantial evidence. It has been consistently laid down by
\n            the Apex Court that when a case rests squarely on
\n            circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified
\n            only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are
\n            found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or
\n            the guilt of other person (see Hukam Singh v. State of
\n            Rajasthan, AIR<\/a> 1977 SC 1063; Eradu v. State of
\n            Hyderabad, AIR<\/a> 1956 SC 316).           In the case of Sharad
\n            Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, AIR<\/a> 1984 SC
\n            1622, the Apex Court has laid down the tests which are pre-
\n            requisites before conviction should be recorded. They are: –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            1. The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to
\n               be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances
\n               concerned ‘must or should’ and not ‘may be’ established;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            2. The facts so established should be consistent only with the
\n               hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they
\n               should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except
\n               that the accused is guilty;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            3. The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and
\n               tendency;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the
\n               one to be proved; and<\/p>\n
            5. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to
\n               leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent
\n               with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all
\n                                                                           13<\/span><\/p>\n
Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008<\/p>\n
                human probability the act must have been done by the
\n                accused”.\n<\/p>\n
             Similarly in the case in hand, the circumstances and the link<\/p>\n
evidence is not complete.\n<\/p>\n
             With the above discussion and observations, Murder Reference<\/p>\n
No.2 of 2008 is declined.\n<\/p>\n
             Criminal Appeal No.138-DB of 2008 is allowed. Benefit of<\/p>\n
doubt is given to the appellant. His conviction and sentence is set aside. He<\/p>\n
is acquitted of the charges framed against him. If in custody and not wanted<\/p>\n
in any other case, he be set free forthwith.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                               (MEHTAB S.GILL)\n                                                   JUDGE\n\n\n\n                                           (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)\nJuly 30, 2009                                     JUDGE\nSKArora\n\n\n\n\n             WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES\/NO\n                                      14<\/span>\n\nMurder Reference No. 2 of 2008 and\n\nCriminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court ) vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1) Murder Reference No. 2 of 2008 Dated of Decision:- July 30, 2009 The State of Punjab …Prosecutor Versus Darbara Singh …Accused\/Respondent 2) Criminal Appeal No. 138-DB of 2008 Darbara Singh ….APPELLANT […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-247087","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\n) vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 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\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-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=\"2009-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-27T15:14:50+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\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-27T15:14:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3415,\"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\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009\",\"name\":\") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-27T15:14:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 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\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-27T15:14:50+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\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-27T15:14:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009"},"wordCount":3415,"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\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009","name":") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-27T15:14:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-state-of-punjab-on-30-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":") vs The State Of Punjab on 30 July, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247087","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=247087"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247087\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=247087"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=247087"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=247087"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}