{"id":80100,"date":"1995-01-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-01-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995"},"modified":"2016-04-16T01:42:07","modified_gmt":"2016-04-15T20:12:07","slug":"mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995","title":{"rendered":"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 686, \t\t 1995 SCC (1) 760<\/div>\n
Author: A Anand<\/div>\n
Bench: Anand, A.S. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nMUKHTIAR SINGH AND ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT04\/01\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nANAND, A.S. (J)\nBENCH:\nANAND, A.S. (J)\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1995 AIR  686\t\t  1995 SCC  (1) 760\n JT 1995 (1)   531\t  1995 SCALE  (1)56\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
DR.  ANAND, J.:\n<\/p>\n
1.   These  two appeals under Section 14 of  the  Terrorists
\nAffected Areas (Special Court) Act,1984 arise out of a\tcom-
\nmon   judgment\tof  the\t Special  Court,   Ferozepur   dated
\n19.4.1985.  While  Criminal Appeal No.434 of 1985  has\tbeen
\nfiled  by Mukhtiar Singh and Jasbir Sing  challenging  their
\nconviction and sentence, Criminal Appeal No.489 of 1985\t has
\nbeen  filed  by the complainant, Sohan Lal and\tis  directed
\nagainst\t the  acquittal\t of  the  acquitted  co-accused\t  of
\nMukhtiar Singh.\n<\/p>\n
2.   11\t accused  persons were put up for trial\t before\t the
\nlearned\t judge of the Special Court, Ferozepur\tfor  offense
\nunder Section 25 of the Arms Act.  The trial Court convicted
\nMukhtiar  Singh\t son  of Kartar\t Singh\tfor  offences  under
\nSection 302\/34, 397\/34, 460 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act\t and
\nJasbir\tSingh for offences under Section  302\/34,337\/34\t and
\n460  IPC.  Hazara Singh was convicted for an  offence  under
\nSection\t 25 of the Arms Act while Jagrup Singh for  offences
\nunder Section 411 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act.  The remaining
\naccused were acquitted of all the charges.\n<\/p>\n
3.   According\tto the prosecution case, on  10.6.1984\twhen
\nSohan  Lal,  PW5  father of the deceased  Jajpal  Singh\t was
\nwatching  television alongwith his other family members,  on
\nhearing\t the firing of 8 or 9 shots, he came out on  to\t the
\ncourtyard and saw two persons standing near his son,  Jajpal
\nSingh, deceased.  One of them was armed with a gandasa while
\nthe  other  had a pistol in his hand.  The  person  who\t was
\narmed with a gandasa in the presence of PW5, inflicted\tsome
\ninjuries  on Jajpal Singh while the other person  took\taway
\nthe  12 bore DBBL gun belonging to Sohan Lal, PW5 which\t was
\nlying  near the cot in the courtyard where Jajpal Singh\t was
\nsitting.   Sohan Lal, PW5 also noticed some 8 or 10  persons
\nstanding  at a distance in the darkness.  On hearing  noise,
\nthe  assailants as well as the other 8\/10 persons ran  away.
\nFinding Jajpal Singh in a seriously injured condition, Sohan
\nLal,  PW5  removed him to the Mission  Hospital,  Ferozepur.
\nDr. A.S. Mann, Emergency Medical Officer sent information to
\nthe  police  regarding\tthe arrival of Jajpal  Singh  in  an
\ninjured condition at the hospital.  On receipt of telephonic
\ninformation,  Ratan  Singh, SHO, police\t station  Mallanwala
\nproceeded  to  the hospital.  In the meanwhile,\t it  appears
\nJajpal\tSingh succumbed to his injuries.  Statement of\tPW5,
\nSohan  Lal was recorded by Ratan Singh, PW9 on reaching\t the
\nhospital and that statement, Ex.  P9, forms the basis of the
\nFIR  Ex.P-9\/B. After conducting the inquest proceedings\t and
\npreparing  the\tinquest\t report, Ex.P-2, the  dead  body  of
\nJajpal\tSingh  was sent for postmortem\texamination  by\t SHO
\nRatan  Singh, PW9.  Further investigation was taken in\thand
\nand the place of occurrence was inspected and its rough site
\nplan prepared.\tDuring inspection of the place of occurrence
\nsome empties which were found lying in the courtyard of\t the
\nhouse of PW5 were collected besides the blood stained  earth
\nSealed\tparcels were prepared of the empties and  the  blood
\nstained\t earth\tand the same were deposited  in\t the  police
\nMalkhana  and later sent to Forensic Science Laboratory\t and
\nchemical examiner respectively.\n<\/p>\n
4.Dr.\tJaspal\tSingh,\tEmergency  Medical  Officer,   Civil
\nHospital,  Ferozepur performed autopsy on the dead  body  of
\nJajpal
\n534<\/span>
\nSingh  on One 11, 1984 at 10.00 a.m. He found the  following
\ninjuries:\n<\/p>\n
\t      (i)   Incised  wound 20 cms x 3cms x  3cms  at
\n\t      the  middle of the frontal region\t oblique  in
\n\t      direction near the hairline with clotted blood
\n\t      present.\t On dissection the  underlying\tbone
\n\t      was  found  cut  completely.   Extradural\t and
\n\t      subdural\thaemotoma was present and the  brain
\n\t      matter visible.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (ii)  Incised  wound 14 cms x 2cms just 2\t cms
\n\t      below  injury  No. 1 with\t clotted  blood\t and
\n\t      underlying  bone cut completely.\tExtra  dural
\n\t      and subdural haemotoma was present.  The brain
\n\t      matter was visible.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (iii)Lacerated  punctured wound with  inverted
\n\t      and contused margins, dimensions being 0.75  x
\n\t      0.5  cm  at the right side of the\t abdomen  in
\n\t      middle with clotted blood present\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (iv)  Lacerated  punctured wound with  everted
\n\t      margins 3 cms x 2-1\/2 cms on the left side  of
\n\t      the  chest  middle  with\tclotted\t blood.\t  On
\n\t      dissection  under injuries No.3 & 4 the  track
\n\t      was  after  performing  the  intestine   going
\n\t      upward  and  towards left\t side  entering\t the
\n\t      thorax and impairing the left lung lower part.
\n\t      Injuries\tNo.  3 & 4 communicating  with\teach
\n\t      other.   The  abdominal  cavity  was  full  of
\n\t      clotted  blood.  The ribs under injury  No.  3<\/span>
\n\t      was  the wound of enterance and injury  No.  4<\/span>
\n\t      the  wound of exit.  There was  clotted  blood
\n\t      along the track.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (v)   Terminal 1\/4 parts of the index,  middle
\n\t      and  ring finger of the right hand were  found
\n\t      amputated\t with  the  margins  of\t the   wound
\n\t      incised.\t Level\twas in\tone  line.   Clotted
\n\t      blood was present.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (vi)  Lacerated punctured wound with  inverted
\n\t      and  contused margins 0.75 cm x 0.5 cm at\t the
\n\t      outer   surface  of  the\tright\tangle.\t  On
\n\t      dissection  the  underlying  bone\t was   found
\n\t      fractured.   A bullet was taken out  from\t the
\n\t      wound  which  was seized.\t Clotted  blood\t was
\n\t      present.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (vii)Lacerated  punctured wound with  inverted
\n\t      and  contused margins, dimensions\t being\t0.75
\n\t      cmx 0.5 cm at the outer and the middle of\t the
\n\t      left upper arm with clotted blood present.  On
\n\t      dissection  the  underlying  bone\t was   found
\n\t      fractured.   A bullet was extracted  from\t the
\n\t      wound which was seized.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (viii)Grazed  lacerated wound in the  form  of
\n\t      furrow  10 cms x 1-1\/2 cms superficial on\t the
\n\t      left fore-arm, oblique in direction.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
5.   In\t the opinion of the doctor, death was caused due  to
\nshock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries which
\nwere  sufficient in the ordinary course of nature  to  cause
\ndeath.\tDr. Jaspal Singh also opined that injuries No. 3 & 4
\nwere  the result of one shot while injuries No. 6 &  7\twere
\nthe result of two shots.  During the postmortem\t examination
\ntwo bullets MO-1 and Mo-2, were taken out from the dead body
\nand  the same were taken into possession by the police\tvide
\nMemo  Ex.P32.  Various recoveries were\teffected  front\t the
\naccused persons after their arrest on different dates by the
\npolice.\n<\/p>\n
6.   The  prosecution  examined Dr. Jaspal Singh,  PW1,\t Dr.
\nA.S.  Mann,  PW2,  Shri Bhupinder Singh,  PW3,\tShri  Sunder
\nSingh,\tPW4, Sohan Lal, PW5, Kashmiri Lai, PW6, Shri  Jamail
\nSingh,\tPW7, Shri Harcharan Singh, PW8 and Shri Ratan  Singh
\nPW9.  Some affidavits of police officials whose evidence was
\nof a formal character were admitted into evidence and placed
\non  record.   After close of the prosecution  evidence,\t the
\naccused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They  denied
\nthe prosecution allegations against
\n535<\/span>
\nthem and alleged false implication.  They, however, did\t not
\nlead any evidence in defence.\n<\/p>\n
7.   The  trial\t Court acquitted Surjit Singh  observing  in
\nparagraph 28:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “The learned Public Prosecutor in fairness  to
\n\t      the Court and the defence frankly conceded  at
\n\t      the  Bar\tthat there was no  evidence  on\t the
\n\t      record to connect Surjit Singh with the crime.
\n\t      The  charge against Surjit Singh\taccused\t was
\n\t\t\t    that  he  had conspired with  his  co-accused.
\n\t      The witness in that connection was Dwarka Dass
\n\t      who  had refused to support  the\tprosecution.
\n\t      As  such\tthe case of  the  prosecution  fails
\n\t      against  Surjit  Singh  accused  for  want  of
\n\t      evidence.\t Surjit Singh accused is acquitted.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
8.   The  Trial court also acquitted Satnam  Singh,  Sukhdev
\nSingh,\tSucha Singh, Kulwant Singh and Jagir Singh  accused.
\nParagraph 29 deals with their acquittal:\n<\/p>\n
\t      Satnam  Singh,  Sukhdev  Singh,  Sucha  Singh,
\n\t      Kulwant  Singh  and Jagir Singh  accused\twere
\n\t      arrested\tin  this  case.\t  The  statement  of
\n\t      Kashmiri Lai (PW6) brother of Sohan Lai  (PW5)
\n\t      is  that\the had seen  the  aforesaid  accused
\n\t      proceeding   towards   the   village    abadi.
\n\t      Thereafter there were reports of firing and he
\n\t      saw  them running away from the village  abadi
\n\t      towards the fields but from this\tcircumstance
\n\t      alone  I cannot spell out\t their\tcriminality.
\n\t      Accordingly  1  acquit Satnam  Singh,  Sukhdev
\n\t      Singh  Sucha  Singh, Kulwant Singh  and  Jagir
\n\t      Singh accused.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
9.   The conviction of Jagrup Singh and Hazara Singh for the
\nvarious\t  offences  as\tnoticed\t above,\t was  recorded,\t  in
\nparagraph 30 thus:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “Sohan  Lal (PW5) at the trial on oath  stated
\n\t      that  Jasbir Singh accused had given  gandassa
\n\t      blows  and Mukhtiar Singh had taken  away\t the
\n\t      gun.  The gun was subsequently recovered\tfrom
\n\t      Jagroop  Singh  accused in  pursuance  of\t his
\n\t      disclosure statement Exh.P-23. The gun is Exh.
\n\t      M.O. 3 which is the licensed gun of Sohan\t Lal
\n\t      (PW5).   In as much as the gun was taken\taway
\n\t      from  the\t spot by  Mukhtiar  Singh.   Jagroop
\n\t      Singh would be liable criminally under Section
\n\t      411 of the Penal Code and under Section 25  of
\n\t      the  Arms\t Act.\tThe  only  evidence  against
\n\t      Hazara  Singh accused is that he was  arrested
\n\t      by   Shri\t  Harcharan  Singh   Assistant\t Sub
\n\t      Inspector\t and his search brought out  pistol.
\n\t      315 bore Exh.  M.O. 4 and two cartridges\tExh.
\n\t      M.0.5  and M.0.6 for which he had to  licence.
\n\t      Hazara Singh accused has to be convicted under
\n\t      Section 25 of the Arms Act.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
10. The learned judge of the Special Court then proceeded to
\nconsider the case of the prosecution against Mukhtiar  Singh
\nand Jasbir Singh, appellants.  The discussion in that behalf
\nis found in paras 31 and 32 of the judgment which read thus:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “The two empties recovered from the spot\twere
\n\t      found  to\t have been Bred from the  pistol  of
\n\t      Jasbir  Singh  and two from  the\trevolver  of
\n\t      Mukhtiar Singh accused.  The Supreme Court  in
\n\t      the  case\t of Bhura 1985 Supreme\tCourt  Cases
\n\t      (Criminal)  33  in similar  circumstances\t had
\n\t      held  the accused guilty setting\taside  their
\n\t      acquital by the High Court.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Jasbir Singh and Mukhtiar Singh accused at the
\n\t      time  of their arrest  were directed  to\tkeep
\n\t      their  faces  muffled  and  they\trefused\t  to
\n\t      participate  in the identification  parade  on
\n\t      the  ground  that they had been shown  to\t the
\n\t      witness of the prosecution for which there  is
\n\t      not an iota of
\n\t      536<\/span>
\n\t      evidence.\t  Both the accused had\tcommitted  a
\n\t      tress pass and there were fire-arm injuries on
\n\t      the body of Jajpal.  Their act of taking\taway
\n\t      the gun would make them criminal liable  under
\n\t      section  397 r\/w section 34 of the Penal\tCode
\n\t      and  they would also be liable under the\tArms
\n\t      Act.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
11.After recording these findings, both Mukhtaiar Singh\t and
\nJasbir Singh were convicted for various offences as  noticed
\nabove and sentenced.\n<\/p>\n
12.We  have through the judgment of the learned trial  judge
\nand find that the same is far from satisfactory.  Both,\t the
\norder of acquittal as well as the order of conviction,\thave
\nbeen  made by the Trial Court in a most\t perfunctory  manner
\nwithout even noticing much less, considering and  discussing
\nthe evidence led by the prosecution or the arguments  raised
\nat  the bar.  The trial court noticed the prosecution  case,
\nthe  medical  evidence\tand material  collected\t during\t the
\ninvestigation  of the case besides the arrest  of  different
\naccused\t persons on different dates in paras 1 to 23 of\t the
\njudgment.   In\tparagraph  24 it noticed the  names  of\t the
\nprosecution witnesses and in paragraphs 25 and 26 it noticed
\nthe  names  of the fact that the accused had  been  examined
\nunder  Section\t313 Cr.P.C. It was in paragraphs 28  to\t 32,
\nnoticed\t above, that the orders of acquittal and  conviction
\nwe  mad, The Trial Court was dealing with a serious case  of
\nmurder.\t It was expected of it to notice and scrutinize\t the
\nevidence and after considering the submissions raised at the
\nbar  arrive  at\t appropriate  findings.\t  In  vain  have  we
\nsearched through the cryptic judgment of the Trial court the
\nreasons which prevailed with it to acquit the respondents in
\nCriminal Appeal No. 489 of 1985 or convict the appellants in
\nCriminal   Appeal  No.\t434  of\t 1985.\t On   the   plainest
\nrequirement  of\t justice and fair trial the least  that\t was
\nexpected  of  the trial court was to  notice,  consider\t and
\ndiscuss,   howsoever  briefly,\tthe  evidence\tof   various
\nwitnesses  as  well as the arguments addressed at  the\tbar.
\nThe Trial Court has not done so.  The Trial Court apparently
\nfailed\tin the discharge of its essential duties.  There  is
\nno  mention  in the judgment as to  what  various  witnesses
\ndeposed at the trial except  for the evidence of the medical
\nwitness.   The\tjudgment does not disclose as  to  what\t was
\nargued\tbefore\tit  on behalf of  the  prosecution  and\t the
\ndefence.   The judgment is so infirm that we are  unable  to
\nappreciate  as\tto how the findings were  arrived  at.\t The
\njudgment at the trial court is truly speaking not a judgment
\nin  the\t eye of law.  The trial court appears to  have\tbeen
\nblissfully  ignorant of the requirements of  Section  354(1)\n<\/p>\n
(b)  Cr.P.C. Since, the first appeal lay to this court,\t the
\ntrial court should have reproduced and discussed atleast the
\nessential  parts  of the evidence of the  witnesses  besides
\nrecording  the\tsubmissions made at the bar  to\t enable\t the
\nappellate court to know the basis on which the ‘decision’ is
\nbased.\t A ‘decision’ does not merely mean the\t“conclusion”
\nit embraces within its fold the reasons which form the basis
\nfor arriving at the “conclusions.” The judgment of the Trial
\nCourt  contains\t on, “conclusions” and\tnothing\t more.\t The
\njudgment of the trial court cannot, therefore, be sustained.
\nThe  case  needs to be remanded to the Trial Court  for\t its
\nfresh  disposal\t by writing a fresh judgment  in  accordance
\nwith law.\n<\/p>\n
13.We  are  conscious of the fact that the  occurrence\ttook
\nplace more than a decade ago and the conviction was recorded
\nalmost 9 years ago.  But, looking to the
\n537<\/span>
\nmanner in which the judgment has been rendered by the  Trial
\nCourt,\tit appears appropriate to us to remand case  to\t the
\nTrial  Court for writing a fresh judgment,  after  providing
\nopportunities  of hearing to both the parties, on the  basis
\nof  the material which is already on the record.   We  could
\nhave  undertaken  the exercise ourselves  and  analysed\t the
\nevidence to determine the guilt or otherwise of the  accused
\npersons\t but  we are of the opinion that our  doing  so\t may
\nprejudice  one\tor the other party as it would\tdeprive\t the
\nconcerned party of its right of first appeal to this  court.
\nWe  have,  therefore, considered it  proper,  after  setting
\naside  the judgment under appeal, to remand the case to\t the
\nTrial  Court  for  its fresh disposal in the  light  of\t the
\nobservations made by us above.\n<\/p>\n
14.The\tappellants  Mukhtiar  Singh and\t Jasbir\t Singh\twere
\ndirected  to be released on bail during the pendency of\t the
\nappeal\tin  this court by an order of the  leaned  judge  in
\nchambers dated 19.7.1990. We do not consider it\t appropriate
\nto  cancel the bail during the fresh hearing of the case  by
\nthe Trial Court but we direct that they shall remain present
\nbefore the Trial Court during the hearing of the case and in
\nthe  event  of\ttheir  being found  guilty,  they  shall  be
\nremanded  to custody.  In case they or either of  them\tdoes
\nnot  appear  before  the Trial\tCourt  during  the  hearing,
\ntheir\/his bail shall stand cancelled and they shall be taken
\ninto custody till the conclusion of the hearing by the Trial
\nCourt.\tThe respondents in Criminal Appeal No. 489\/ 85 shall
\nalso  remain present during hearing of the case\t before\t the
\nTrial Court and continue to remain on bail till the  hearing
\nof  the case.  The absence of either of the  respondents  in
\nthe  Trial  Court  shall  result  in  the  cancellation\t  of
\nhis\/their bail and he\/ they shall be taken into custody till
\nthe  conclusion of the hearing by the Trial Court.  In\tcase
\nof  conviction of any of the accused persons,  the  sentence
\nalready undergone by them as well as the period of detention
\nbefore and during the trial shall set off against the period
\nof sentence.\n<\/p>\n
15.Since,  it  is  an old case, we direct  the\tTrial  Court
\n(judge, Special Court, (sessions judge) – Ferozepur) to\t fix
\nan early date for the hearing of the case and dispose it  of
\non merits expeditiously preferably within a period of  three
\nmonths from the date of the communication of this order.\n<\/p>\n
16.Since,  we  are remanding the case for  writing  a  fresh
\njudgment by the Trial Court after hearing the parties in the
\nlight  of  the observations made by us, we clarify  that  we
\nhave  not expressed any opinion regarding the merits of\t the
\ncase  and nothing said by us hereinabove shall be  construed
\nexpressly  or impliedly as any opinion on the merits of\t the
\ncase.\n<\/p>\n
539<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 686, 1995 SCC (1) 760 Author: A Anand Bench: Anand, A.S. (J) PETITIONER: MUKHTIAR SINGH AND ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB DATE OF JUDGMENT04\/01\/1995 BENCH: ANAND, A.S. (J) BENCH: ANAND, A.S. (J) MUKHERJEE M.K. […]<\/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-80100","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nMukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 - 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\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\" \/>\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=\"1995-01-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-15T20:12:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-01-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-15T20:12:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\"},\"wordCount\":2692,\"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\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\",\"name\":\"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-01-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-15T20:12:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 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":"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 - 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\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-01-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-15T20:12:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995","datePublished":"1995-01-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-15T20:12:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995"},"wordCount":2692,"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\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995","name":"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-01-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-15T20:12:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mukhtiar-singh-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-4-january-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mukhtiar Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 4 January, 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\/80100","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=80100"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80100\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80100"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80100"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80100"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}