Page 1

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2099 OF 2008

Darshan Singh … Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab        …Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Prafulla C. Pant, J.

This  appeal  is  directed  against  judgment  and  order  

dated  02.09.2008,  passed  by  High  Court  of  Punjab  and  

Haryana, Chandigarh, whereby the High Court has disposed  

of Criminal Appeals No. 209 D.B. and 568 DBA, both of 1998  

and Criminal Revision No. 654 of 1998. The appeal filed by  

the State qua Darshan Singh (present appellant) against his

Page 2

Page 2 of 15

acquittal by the trial court, was allowed and his acquittal was  

reversed.  The present appellant  has been convicted by the  

High Court under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860  

(for short “IPC”), and sentenced to imprisonment for life and  

directed to pay a fine Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment  

of fine he is directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a  

further period of six months. Appellant Darshan Singh has  

been further found guilty of the charge of offence punishable  

under Section 324 of IPC, and sentenced to undergo rigorous  

imprisonment for a period of one year and directed to pay  

fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default clause directing to undergo  

rigorous imprisonment for further period of two months.

2. We  have  heard  learned  counsel  for  the  parties  and  

perused the papers on record.

3. Prosecution  story,  in  brief,  is  that  there  was  dispute  

between  complainant  and  his  relatives  on  one  side  and  

accused persons on the  other  side regarding  their  turn of  

irrigating their fields. On account of this, earlier there had  

been  incidents  of  assaulting  each  other.  In  the

Page 3

Page 3 of 15

circumstances,  both  the  parties  were  facing  proceedings  

under Section 107/151 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  

(for short “Cr.PC”) before Executive Magistrate, Faridkot. On  

17.02.1995, complainant Amrik Singh (PW-1) along with Raj  

Singh (PW-3), Sukhchain Singh (PW-2) , Harbans Singh (one  

of the deceased), and their father Mander Singh and cousin  

Gursewak Singh with maternal uncle Santa Singh (another  

deceased)  and  Boota  Singh  had  gone  to  attend  the  

proceedings of the court. From the side of accused Surain  

Singh,  Jasmail  Singh,  Darshan  Singh  (present  appellant),  

Jhanda Singh and Boota Singh had also come to the court on  

said  date.  At  about  11.00  a.m.  both  the  sides  started  

quarrelling and had a heated exchange of words, as Surain  

Singh objected to presence of Bhajan Singh who was relative  

of  complainant  Amrik  Singh  and  not  a  party  to  the  

proceedings. He (Surain Singh), a Amritdhari Sikh, took out  

his Siri Sahib (Small Kripan, a sharp edged weapon) and gave  

blow to Bhajan Singh. When complainant party attempted to  

separate them, Surain Singh gave Kripan blow on the person  

of Mander Singh. He assaulted also on the left shoulder of

Page 4

Page 4 of 15

the  complainant  Amrik Singh,  and gave  two blows on the  

person of Suckhchain Singh. He did not stop there and also  

assaulted  Harbans  Singh  (deceased)  with  Kripan.  Accused  

Darshan  Singh  (appellant)  also  took  out  his  Kripan  and  

inflicted  injuries  on  the  person  of  Santa  Singh  (another  

deceased).   Accused  Darshan  Singh  (appellant)  is  said  to  

have given blows also to Raj Singh. Pal Singh and Jhanda  

Singh caught hold of Gursewak Singh, and Darshan Singh  

assaulted them also. Accused Boota Singh instigated other  

accused that  no one should  be escaped alive.  The injured  

were taken to Guru Gobind Singh Medical Hospital, Faridkot,  

where Santa Singh and Harbans Singh succumbed to their  

injuries.

4. Report of the above incident was lodged by complainant  

Amrik Singh (PW-2). On the basis of  it,  FIR No. 14, dated  

17.02.1995 was registered at  Police  Station,  City Faridkot.  

The  investigation  was  taken  up  by  Sub-inspector  Ranjit  

Singh (PW-17), who took the dead bodies in his possession,  

sealed it, prepared inquest report and got sent them for post-

Page 5

Page 5 of 15

mortem  examination.  Dr.  Sarabjit  Singh  Sandhu  (PW-4)  

conducted post-mortem examination on the dead bodies of  

Santa  Singh  and  Harbans  Singh  on  17.02.1995,  and  

prepared  autopsy  reports.  The  other  injured  were  also  

medically examined by PW-4 Dr. Sarabjit  Singh Sandhu and  

PW-5  Dr. Manjit Singh. There were injuries also on the side  

of  the  accused,  and  from  their  side  accused  Pal  Singh,  

accused Surain Singh and accused Jhanda Singh suffered  

injuries. After interrogating witnesses and on completion of  

investigation PW-16 Assistant Sub-inspector Ram Singh (who  

took  over  investigation  from  S.I  Ranjit  Singh)  submitted  

charge-sheet against accused persons in the court.

5. It appears that after the committal of the case it was  

registered  as  Session  Case  No.  33  of  1995.  On  7.7.1995,  

Additional  Sessions Judge,  Faridkot framed charge against  

all  the  accused,  namely,  Surain  Singh,  Darshan  Singh  

(present appellant), Pal Singh, Jhanda Singh , Jasmail Singh,  

Boota  Singh  and  Lachman  Dass  relating  to  offences  

punishable under Section 148, 302/149 (on separate counts

Page 6

Page 6 of 15

of death of two persons), 307/149, 324/149, 218 and 201  

IPC to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be  

tried.

6. Thereafter prosecution got examined PW-1 Amrik Singh  

(informant), PW-2 Sukhchain Singh, PW-3 Raj Singh (all the  

three  injured  eye  witnesses),  PW-4  Dr.  Sarabjit  Singh  

Sandhu who conducted post-mortem examination, PW-5 Dr.  

Manjit  Singh,  PW-6  Gurcharanjit  Kaur,  Ahalmad,  PW-7  

Ujjagar  Singh,  Steno  to  A.D.C.  Moga,  PW-8   ASI  Basant  

Singh, PW-9 Head Constable Shagan Singh, PW-10 Inspector  

Prithvi  Singh,  PW-11 Prithi  Pal  Singh,  S.S.Teacher,  PW-12  

Dharam Singh, Draftsman, PW-13 MHC Baljit Singh, PW-14  

Dr. S.P. Singla, PW-15 Sub Inspector Shivraj Bhushan, PW-

16 Sub Inspector Ram Singh, PW-17 Inspector Ranjit Singh,  

PW-18  Constable  Jagjit  Singh  and  PW-19  Satish  Kalia,  

Ahalmad.

7. The evidence  adduced by prosecution was put to  the  

accused by the trial  court under Section 313 of  Cr.PC. In  

reply  to  which  the  accused  persons  alleged  that  evidence

Page 7

Page 7 of 15

against them was incorrect.  Appellant Darshan Singh took  

the specific plea of alibi stating that on 17.02.1995 he was  

attending  his  duty  as  a  Laboratory  Assistant  in  Senior  

Secondary School, Janerian. Other accused took pleas of self  

defence. On behalf of the defence DW-1 Satnam Kaur, DW-2  

Rajinder Kumar, DW-3 Darshan Singh (Teacher in primary  

school, Pakhi Khurd), DW-4 Pawan Kumar, Ahalmad, DW-5  

J.V. Tiwari, DW-6 Mukhtiar Singh, DW-7 Om Parkash and  

DW-8 ASI Harvinder Pal Singh were examined.

8. The  trial  court  after  hearing  the  parties  found  that  

charge as against accused Boota Singh, Darshan Singh and  

Lachman  Dass  is  not  proved  and,  as  such,  they  were  

acquitted.  However,  accused  Surain  Singh  was  convicted  

under Section 302 of IPC for committing murder of Harbans  

Singh and also under Section 307 of IPC for attempting to  

murder  Sukhchain  Singh.  He  (Surain  Singh)  was  further  

convicted  under  Section  324  of  IPC.  Rest  of  the  accused  

Jhanda Singh, Jasmail Singh and Pal Singh were convicted  

under  Sections  302/34,  307/34 and 324/34 of  IPC.  After

Page 8

Page 8 of 15

hearing the sentence, the trial court sentenced the convicts  

to various sentences.

9. Convicts  Surain  Singh,  Jhanda  Singh,  Jasmail  Singh  

and Pal  Singh  challenged their  conviction  before  the  High  

Court, and by the impugned order the High Court allowed  

appeal of Jhanda Singh, Jasmail Singh and Pal Singh, but  

appeal of Surain Singh was dismissed. The connected appeal  

No. 568 DBA of 1998 filed by the State qua Darshan Singh  

against  order  of  his  acquittal  was  allowed,  and  he  was  

convicted under Section 302 of IPC for committing murder of  

Santa  Singh  and  sentenced  to  imprisonment  for  life  and  

directed to pay fine of  Rs. 5,000/- with default clause. He  

was  further  convicted  under  Section  324  of  IPC  for  

voluntarily causing hurt with a deadly weapon on person of  

Gursewak Singh and Raj Singh and sentenced to rigorous  

imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.  

1,000/- with default clause. Aggrieved by said judgment and  

order  dated  02.09.2008,  passed  by  the  High  Court,  this  

appeal is filed by accused Darshan Singh who was acquitted

Page 9

Page 9 of 15

by the trial  court, but order of  acquittal  was reversed and  

was convicted by the High Court.

10. Mr.  K.T.S.  Tulsi,  Senior  Advocate,  on  behalf  of  the  

appellant,  has  argued before  us  that  where  two views are  

possible on the basis of evidence on record, the High Court  

should not have reversed the order of acquittal recorded by  

trial  court.  It  is  further  contended that  appellant  Darshan  

Singh  was  discharging  his  duties  in  the  school  on  

17.02.1995  and  was  not  present  at  the  place  of  incident  

when  occurrence  took  place  and  as  such,  the  acquittal  

recorded by  the  trial  court  was not  liable  to  be  interfered  

with.  Our  attention  is  drawn  to  the  evidence  adduced  in  

defence in support of plea of alibi.

11. On  the  other  hand,  learned  counsel  for  the  State  

pointed out  that  in  the incident in  question,  while  Surain  

Singh  committed  murder  of  Harbans  Singh,  the  appellant  

(Darshan  Singh)  committed  murder  of  Santa  Singh.  It  is  

further submitted that plea of alibi taken by the defence was  

correctly found false by the High Court after re-appreciation

Page 10

Page 10 of 15

of  evidence.  Learned  counsel  for  the  State  referred  to  the  

statements of injured eye witnesses.

12. We have considered rival submissions and perused the  

entire  record  of  the  case.  There  are  three  injured  eye  

witnesses in the present case, namely, PW-1 Amrik Singh,  

PW-2 Sukhchain Singh and PW-3 Raj Singh. It is a case of  

day  light  incident.  Injuries  on  the  person  of  said  eye  

witnesses have been corroborated by PW-4 Dr. Sarabjit Singh  

Sandhu, PW-5 Dr. Manjit Singh and PW-14 Dr. S.P. Singla.  

Ocular  testimony  of  eye  witnesses  cannot  be  discarded  

lightly. Once the prosecution has discharged its burden, the  

burden  to  prove  that  appellant  Darshan  Singh  was  not  

present with other accused at the place of incident and had  

gone  elsewhere,  lies  on  him.   Injured  eye  witnesses  have  

assigned specific  role as to how he assaulted Santa Singh  

who suffered ante mortem injuries which gets corroborated  

from the autopsy report of Santa Singh. There are as many  

as five stabbed wounds out of the six ante mortem injuries.

Page 11

Page 11 of 15

The same are being reproduced below from autopsy report of  

Santa Singh:-

“1. Transverse stab wound 3 x 0.5 cm was present  on the anterior side of chest on the left side, 6 cms  below  and  lateral  to  left  nipple  at  4.00  O’  clock  position.  C.B.P  was  present.  On  dissection,  it  is  going in wards and medially through 6th inter costal  space,  piercing  the  pericardium and  left  vertical.  Pericardial  sac  contains  about  200  C.C  of  fluid  blood.

2. Transverse stab wound 3 x 0.5 cm on the lateral  side of left side of chest 6 cms lateral to the injury  no.1. It was bone deep C.B.P.

3. Transverse stab wound 2 x 0.5 cm was present  at the back of the left side of abdomen 3 cms lateral  to midline and 15 cm above the posterior superior  iliac spine of left side on dissection, the peritoneum  large intestia was cut.  Peritoneal cavity contained  about 500 C.C. of fluid and clotted blood.

4. Transverse stab wound 2.5 x 0.5 cm was present  on  the  back  of  the  left  side  of  abdomen,  6  cms  lateral to the injury no.3 C.B.P. It was skin deep.

5. An oblique stab wound 1.5 x 25 cm on the back  of left side of chest, 2 cms from the midline and 20  cms below the nape of the neck, it was bone deep  C.B.P.

6.  A transverse  stab wound 4 x  0.5  cms on the  back of left side of chest, 5 cms from the midline  and 12 cms below the nape of the neck. C.B.P. It  was bone deep.”

Page 12

Page 12 of 15

13. From the record, PW-1 Amrik Singh (eye witness)  

appears to have suffered following injuries at the time of  

the incident:-

“2.4cm x 1cm incised wound-10.5 cms below and  posterior  to  left  shoulder  joint.  X-ray  of  left  shoulder joint advised.

Injury  was  kept  under  observation  and  duration  was  within  6  hours  weapon  used  was  sharp  weapon”

Injuries were declared simple in nature as per x-ray  report and was result of a sharp weapon.”

14. Another  eye  witness  PW-2  Sukhchain  Singh  found  to  

have  suffered  following  injuries  as  per  the  injury  report  

proved on the record:-

     “1.   1.0 cm x 0.25 cm incised wound on the middle  of forehead. X-ray advised.

2.   2 cm x 1 cm incised wound on right  side of  chest 17 cms from xiphisternum. Profuse bleeding  was present. X-ray advised.

3.   3  x  2  cms  incised  wound  on  right  lumber  region-10 cms below injury no.2. Surgical opinion  and X-ray advised.”

15. Third  eye  witness  PW-3  Raj  Singh  suffered  following  

injuries on the date of incident, as proved on the record:-

Page 13

Page 13 of 15

“1.   1.9  cm x  1  incised  wound  in  right  Gluteal  region-6 ½ cms below the right. Anterior superior  iliac spine. X-ray advised.

2.   2cms  x  1  cm incised  wound  on  right  lower  chest. Bonedeep 22 cms below the right anterior,  Axillary  fold-17 cms below and slightly  lateral  to  right memory gland. Surgical opinion was advised.”

16. Now, we come to the defence plea of appellant Darshan  

Singh which was accepted by the trial court but rejected by  

the High Court. There is no cavil over the fact that appellant  

Darshan Singh was posted as Lab Assistant with the Senior  

Secondary School, Janerian. After carefully going through the  

statements  of  defence  witnesses  and  other  evidence  on  

record, we agree with the High Court that accused Darshan  

Singh has taken false plea of alibi. It is proved on the record  

that  in  the  proceedings  under  Section  107/151  of  Cr.PC  

before Executive Magistrate, Faridkot, he was to be present  

in  said  case  on  17.02.1995.   His  presence  and  role  is  

narrated in detail by the injured eye witnesses. In view of his  

role in the incident narrated by the eye witnesses, it is hard  

to  believe  that  after  moving  application  on 16.02.1995 for  

casual  leave  for  17.02.1995,  Darshan  Singh  attended  the

Page 14

Page 14 of 15

school next day in the first half and sought half day leave  

thereafter.  The  attendance  register  was  not  seized  

immediately after the incident. His plea of alibi is vacillating.  

17.     The word alibi means “elsewhere”. The plea of alibi is  

not one of the General Exceptions contained in Chapter IV of  

IPC. It is a rule of evidence recognized under Section 11 of  

the Evidence Act. However, plea of alibi taken by the defence  

is required to be proved only after prosecution has proved its  

case against the accused. In the present case said condition  

is fulfilled.  

18. After scrutinizing the entire evidence on record, we do  

not  find  any  illegality  in  appreciation  of  evidence,  or  in  

arriving  at  the  conclusion  as  to  the  guilt  of  the  present  

appellant by the High Court.

19.   Therefore, for the reasons discussed above, we find no  

force in this appeal which liable to be dismissed.

Page 15

Page 15 of 15

20.  Accordingly,  the  appeal  is  dismissed.  Appellant  be  

taken  into  custody  by  the  court  concerned  to  make  him  

serve out the remaining part of  sentence,  awarded by the  

High Court.

………………….....…………J.          [Dipak Misra]

     .………………….……………J.               [Prafulla C. Pant]

New Delhi; January 06, 2016.