REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 847 OF 2006

STATE OF HARYANA .....APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

KRISHAN & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

A.K. SIKRI, J.

In December, 1980, a very brazen, bizarre and outlandish

incident took place, commonly known as ‘hooch tragedy’.   The

deleterious  consequence  was  that  36  persons  who  had

purchased  liquor  from  a  licensed  vend  in  Village  Kalanwali,

District Sirsa, Haryana lost their lives after consuming the same.

Another 44 persons who too had purchased the liquor from the

same  shop  and  consumed  that  liquor  lost  their  eye-sight

permanently.   Numbers  of  FIRs  were  registered  in  which  the

investigation was carried out by the police.  All these cases were

clubbed together for the purpose of trial.  Orders of consolidation

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 1 of 30

of  trials  of  these  FIRs  were  passed  by  the  Session  Judge

resulting into a joint trial  in which 48 persons were arrayed as

accused.  This joint trial culminated into passing of judgment by

the  Session  Judge  dated  August  18,  2000.   It  resulted  into

conviction  of  only  two  accused  persons,  namely,  Krishan  and

Som Nath,  for  the  offences  under  Section  302  IPC  read  with

Section 120B IPC who were directed to undergo imprisonment for

life and also to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-  each.  They were also

convicted for offence under Section 328 IPC read with Section

120B IPC for which they were to suffer imprisonment for a term of

5 years with fine of Rs.5,000/- each.  Conviction against these

two persons were also recorded under  Section 61(1)(a)  of  the

Punjab  Excise  Act,  1914  for  which  sentence  of  six  months

rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- was imposed on the

two  convicts.   All  the  sentences  were  to  run  concurrently.   It

appears that case against two persons had abated because of

their demise during trial.  Apart from these accused persons, all

other accused persons were acquitted.   

2) The two convicts  (respondents herein)  challenged the order  of

their conviction by filing appeal in the High Court.  This appeal

has been allowed by the High Court vide judgment dated May 09,

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 2 of 30

2006.  The High Court has also indicted the appellant/State of

Haryana for its negligence which led to the said tragedy and has

directed the State to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- each to

the heirs of 36 persons who died after consuming the liquor and

pay a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- to those persons who are

rendered blind by consuming a spurious liquor.  State of Haryana

is in  appeal  questioning the aforesaid outcome of  the appeals

which were filed by the respondents herein.  Before coming to the

reasons  which  weighed  with  the  High  Court  acquitting  the

respondents, certain developments which took place during the

pendency of the appeal filed by the respondents in the High Court

need a mention at this stage.

3) As  pointed  out  above,  only  two  persons  were  convicted  and

others acquitted.  Neither State nor any of the aggrieved persons

challenged the acquittal of those accused.  Appeal was only filed

by the respondents challenging their conviction.  With this, appeal

came up for  admission before  the Division Bench of  the High

Court.  It passed the order dated May 9, 2001 making prima facie

observation to the effect that acquittal of other persons was not

called for  and the matter  required reconsideration by the High

Court.  Accordingly, the Advocate General, Haryana was directed

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 3 of 30

to file an application for leave to appeal against the acquittal of

those persons.  That order was challenged by filing special leave

petition in this Court in which initially the notice was issued and

stay was granted in respect of the aforesaid order of the High

Court.  Ultimately, the order dated May 9, 2001 passed by the

High  Court  directing  the  State  to  file  application  for  leave  to

appeal  against  the  acquittal  of  persons  was  set  aside  by this

Court  on  November  13,  2002.   In  the  meantime,  the  State

Government had filed application for leave to defend in the High

Court  in  which  leave  had  been  granted  and  the  case  was

assigned Criminal Appeal No. 348-DBA of 2001.  Following the

aforesaid  order  dated  November  13,  2002  of  this  Court,  said

appeal was dismissed by the High Court on February 17, 2003.

In these circumstances, the High Court was left with the Criminal

Appeal filed by respondents herein which was to be dealt with by

the Court.  This appeal took yet another turn.  On February 23,

2005, when it  came up before the Division Bench of  the High

Court, it took note of observations made by the trial court in its

judgment  wherein  trial  court  had  castigated  the  State

instrumentality as well and observed that its negligence had also

contributed to the unfortunate incident.  Taking note thereof, the

Division Bench vide its order dated February 23, 2005 framed the

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 4 of 30

following questions for decision by a Larger Bench.   

“(1) How the investigation is to be conducted in such like  cases  where  number  of  persons  die  and become disabled?

(2) Whether the State is liable to pay compensation to the families of the victims, if the accused are acquitted on account of  faulty investigation and intricacies of law?”

4) The  matter  was  referred  to  the  Full  Bench.   However,  while

dealing with the aforesaid reference, the Full Bench felt that for

giving effective answer to the aforesaid questions, main appeal

needed to be heard in the first instance and this necessity was

reflected in the order passed by it.  Having regard to that order of

the Full Bench, the Chief Justice of the High Court directed that

criminal appeal be also listed before the Full Bench so that the

appeal itself along with the aforesaid two questions referred to the

Full Bench is decided by it.  That is how the Full Bench of the

High Court while deciding the appeal of the respondents herein

also  dealt  with  the  aforesaid  two  issues  and  awarded  the

compensation to the families of the victims.   

5) Insofar  as  order  of  the  High  Court  directing  payment  of

compensation  is  concerned,  when  this  matter  came  up  on

July 13,  2012,  a statement  was made by the learned counsel

appearing  for  the  appellant  State  that  the  said  amount  had

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 5 of 30

already been deposited by the Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa on

October 23, 2011 as per the directions of the High Court.  After

recording  the  aforesaid  statement,  this  Court  directed  that  the

aforesaid amount  be released in  favour of  the victims or legal

heirs of the victims after due verification.

6) When the present appeal came up for hearing before us, we were

informed  that  the  said  amount  already  stands  disbursed.

Because of this development, when the amount is already paid to

the victims or their families, this Court expressed that there was

no question of recovering the said amount now, more particularly,

when the victims or their family members who have been paid

compensation have not  been impleaded as parties  before  this

Court.   Learned  counsel  for  the  State  could  not  dispute  the

aforesaid position.  As a result, this Court is not interfering with

the directions pertaining to payment of compensation contained in

the  impugned  judgment.   In  this  conspectus,  both  the  parties

argued the case limited to the acquittal  of  respondents by the

High Court.   

7) The case of the prosecution, as noted by the High Court, can be

recapitulated at this stage, as there was no dispute that there is

no error in recording the prosecution case.   

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 6 of 30

On December 02, 1980, Om Prakash son of Puran Chand

resident of Mandi Kalanwali had while, reporting about the death

of his father Puran Chand, informed the police that in deference

to the wishes of his father, he had purchased a pint of country

liquor from the local liquor vend on December 1, 1980.  The pint

had been sold to him by Surender Pal for Rs.6.50.  Om Prakash

had then handed over the liquor to his father Puran Chand, who

had consumed it in his presence and retired for the night in the

Chaubara of his house.  In the morning, at about 7.00 a.m. Puran

Chand  had  complained  of  some  restlessness,  which  was

accompanied  by  a  continuous  and  irresistible  desire  to  vomit.

Om Prakash had consequently sought the services of Dr. Vijay

Kumar PW3, who had prescribed and administered the medicine

but  without  much  relief.   When the  condition  of  Puran  Chand

deteriorated, he was shifted to Civil Dispensary at Kalanwali but

the efforts made by the Medical Officer to save him failed and he

died  at  2.30  p.m.  on  December  2,  1980.   According  to  Om

Prakash,  the  death  of  his  father  was  definitely  as  a  result  of

consumption of spurious liquor sold by the local liquor contractor

and  consequently  FIR  No.  211 dated  December  2,  1980  was

registered at Police Station Kalanwali.

ASI  Umed  Singh  initiated  the  inquest  proceedings  and

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 7 of 30

forwarded the dead body to the Civil Hospital, Sirsa for autopsy.

He also took into possession the pint which still contained a few

drops of liquor.  In the meantime, the police received information

about Moola Ram and Rura Ram having been admitted in Civil

Dispensary, Kalanwali in a precarious condition.  According to the

inputs,  these  two persons had also purchased liquor  from the

same vend on December 1, 1980.  During the investigation, the

police collected information that Som Nath son of Lachhu Ram,

Krishan son of Ram Chander, Dwarka Dass son of Lal Chand,

Gajjan Singh son of  Dalip  Singh,  Jagdish son of  Kaur Chand,

Ram Bhaj son of Hari Ram, Jagdish alias D.C. son of Brij Lal,

Surenderpal son of Desh Raj, Moti son of Brij Lal and Desh Raj

son of Duli  Chand had in conspiracy with each other prepared

spurious liquor as per the directions of Lal Chand son of Brahma

Mal and Lachhu son of Lal Chand from spirit which was labelled

as poison and unfit for human consumption.  This was put into

bottles and thereafter put up for public sale.  In all, the spurious

liquor supplied by the liquor vend at Kalanwali was stated to have

led to the deaths of  36 persons, namely, Puran Singh, Amarjit

Singh, Madan Lal,  Baja Ram, Budh Ram, Ved Prakash son of

Mulakh Raj,  Madan Lal,  Jagwant  Singh,  Net  Ram,  Panna Lal,

Darshan Singh,  Nathu Ram,  Labh Singh,  Gurdial  Singh,  Mulla

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 8 of 30

Ram,  Rura  Ram,  Tara  Chand,  Hardatt  Singh,  Pirthvi  Chand,

Sahab  Singh,  Mohan  Lal,  Hanuman,  Darbara  Singh,  Darshan

Singh, Sukhdev Singh son of Hazur Singh, Sukhdev Singh son of

Hari  Singh,  Mita  Singh,  Balwant  Singh,  Naib  Singh,  Bachitar

Singh, Ved Prakash son of Mam Chand, Major Singh, Niranjan

Singh, Bhola Singh, Kartar Singh, Ved Prakash son of Madan Lal,

Nand Singh son of Kunda Singh and Balbir Singh son of Gurdial

Singh had between December 1, 1980 and December 4, 1980

suffered from the ill effects of poisonous liquor and had lost their

lives.  It also transpired that owing to the poison contained in the

liquor that  was sold from the liquor  vends of  the respondents,

namely,  Krishan  son  of  Ram Chander  and  Som Nath  son  of

Lachhu Ram, who were admittedly licensed holders of the vend,

43  persons,  namely,  Sampuran  Singh  son  of  Harnam  Singh,

Kartar  Singh,  Sahab Ram, Hans Raj,  Tek Chand,  Naib  Singh,

Sampuran Singh son of Dal Singh, Waryam Singh, Gurdev Singh,

Boota Singh, Jaswant Singh, Surjit Singh, Darshan Singh, Khem  

Chand, Gurtej Singh, Babu Ram, Mithu Singh, Babu Ram son of

Jug Lal,  Gian Chand,  Kaur  Singh,  Lila  Ram,  Sher  Singh,  Jorr

Singh, Gurnam Singh, Pyare Lal, Harphul, Harnek Singh, Surjit

Singh  son  of  Buggar,  Gurcharan  Singh,  Harnek  son  of  Jang

Singh,  Shyam Singh, Mukhtiar  Singh son of  Chanan,  Mukhtiar

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 9 of 30

Singh son  of  Jagir  Singh,  Mohinder  Singh,  Om Prakash,  Hari

Singh, Gurcharan alias Guddu, Banta Singh, Makhan Lal, Kartar

Singh, Buggar Singh, Charan Dass, Sham sunder and Lila Singh

son of Pritam Singh had lost their vision.  Apart from FIR No.211,

which  was  registered  in  Police  Station  Baragudha  and  upon

completion of the investigations 48 persons were sent up to stand

their trial and proceeded against as indicated hereinbefore.

After commitment, the charges were framed against them

as indicated hereinbefore to which the accused pleaded not guilty

whereupon  the  prosecution  was  called  to  lead  evidence  in

support of this case.

In all prosecution examined 291 witnesses.  Out of them, 28

were doctors, who had either performed post mortem on the dead

bodies or medico legally examined the persons.  Majority of the

remaining witnesses examined were the relations of the victims

while some of these were the police officials, who were at various

stages associated with the investigation of the case.

On  the  closure  of  the  prosecution  evidence,  only  the

statements of  Som Nath,  Dwarka Dass,  Gajjan Singh, Jagdish

son of Brij Lal, Moti Ram, Mukhtiar Singh, Sewa Singh, Krishan,

Jagdish Rai son of Kaur Chand and Labha Chand were recorded

in  order  to  obtain  their  explanation  regarding  the  incriminating

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 10 of 30

circumstances appearing in evidence against them.  All of them

pleaded  innocence  and  asserted  that  they  had  been  falsely

implicated in the case.

The  Additional  Sessions  Judge,  Sirsa  did  not  record  the

statements  of  the  remaining  accused  as  according  to  him  no

incriminating  fact  had  appeared  in  the  prosecution  evidence

about  their  involvement.   In  defence,  14  witnesses  were

examined by the accused.

The trial  court  after  hearing  arguments  had  come to  the

conclusion that the prosecution has been able to prove its case

only against Krishan and Som Nath and convicted and sentenced

them as indicated hereinbefore whereas the remaining accused

were acquitted of the charge framed against them.

8) As is already observed, both the respondents were convicted by

the trial court for offences under Sections 302 IPC as well as 328

IPC with the aid of Section 120B IPC as well.  Questioning this

basis  of  conviction,  counsel  for  the  respondents  had  argued

before the High Court that there was no evidence of conspiracy

on the basis whereof the respondents could be convicted under

Section 120B IPC.  It was further argued that once it is found that

conviction under Section 120B IPC is unsustainable, necessary

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 11 of 30

consequences thereof  would be that  there was no substantive

charge  under  Section  302  IPC  framed  against  the  convicted

persons nor there was any evidence of their complicity in relation

to  this.   According to  the counsel  for  the  respondents,  further

consequence was that charge as framed against the respondents

were not sustainable inasmuch as the trial court was required to

frame separate charges in each of the murders that are stated to

have  been  committed  by  the  respondents  in  view  of  the

provisions  of  Sections  218  and  226  of  the  Code  of  Criminal

Procedure (Cr.P.C.).  It was also argued that even on merits, the

conviction against the respondents could not be sustained in the

absence of any material on record depicting their culpability in law

as no material was proved to show that respondents were in any

way connected with the preparation and sale of spurious liquor.

Likewise,  there  was  no  evidence  to  prove  that  these  two

respondents had any knowledge about liquor being spurious or

that they were responsible for preparing the spurious liquor for

sale.  It was also argued that there is no material on record to

show that methanol which was used to adulterate the liquor had

been provided to the persons working at the liquor vend by or

with the consent  of  the respondents and there is  no evidence

available on the file from which the complicity of the respondents

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 12 of 30

could be inferred in the preparation and sale of spurious liquor.  It

was also submitted that in the case of none of the victims had,

the investigating agency, collected evidence to prove that that the

respondents had directed their  Karindas to adulterate the liquor

and in the absence of this no tacit or implied consent for the sale

of  liquor  can  be  attributed  to  them and,  therefore,  the  charge

under  Section 302 IPC cannot be sustained.  Even otherwise,

there  is  no  proof  of  the  fact  that  any of  the  deceased or  the

persons who lost their vision had actually consumed liquor sold to

them  from  any  of  the  liquor  vends  that  belonged  to  the

respondents and, therefore, the findings of the trial court cannot

be sustained.

9) The  High  Court  while  allowing  the  appeal  of  the  respondents

herein  accepted  most  of  the  aforesaid  submissions  of  their

counsel.   It  found  that  the  trial  court  had  convicted  the

respondents as they were the contractors who had been given

the licence to run country liquor vend at Kalanwali for the year

1980-1981.  The accusation of the prosecution was that they had

sold adulterated alcohol containing methanol  poison and,  thus,

they committed an act so imminently dangerous that it must in all

probability  cause  death  or  such  bodily  injury  as  was  likely  to

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 13 of 30

cause death and, in fact,  it  did result  in the death of so many

persons.  The trial court had also observed that the respondents

were in the field of sale of alcohol since long and they definitely

had the knowledge of toxicity of methanol poison.  They also had

a  definite  knowledge  that  sale  of  such  liquor  would  cause

methanol  poisoning  to  the  consumers  and  the  possible  result

would  be  death  or  bodily  injury.   On  this  basis,  invoking  the

provisions of Section 300 ‘fourthly’ of  IPC and the ratio of this

Court in Joseph Kurian Philip Jose v. State of Kerala, (1994) 6

SCC 535, the respondents were convicted.  According to the High

Court,  this  was hardly  any justifiable  reason for  convicting the

respondents.  The High Court discarded the aforesaid conclusion

of the trial court as according to it, no evidence was produced to

show that the victims died after consuming liquor from the bottles

that have been purchased by the deceased, even though it was

proved on record that  cause of  death was the consumption of

methyl alcohol which was present in the viscera taken from the

bodies of the deceased.   

10) To put it succinctly, as per the High Court, though the cause of

death was established, namely, consumption of methyl alcohol,

but  no  connection  was  established  by  the  prosecution  of

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 14 of 30

consuming the said alcohol by the deceased and other victims

from the bottles that had been purchased by the victims from the

vends of  the respondents.   Relevant  portion of  the discussion

contained  in  the  judgment  of  the  High  Court,  highlighting  the

aforesaid aspect is reproduced below:

“The reasoning put  forth  by the trial  Court  cannot  be faulted with if there is material on the record in support of the same.  The prosecution, in our opinion, was duty bound to prove:-

(a) that  the  deaths/loss  of  vision  was  due  to  the presence  of  methyl  alcohol  in  the  bodies  of  the victims;

(b) that  this  methyl  alcohol  was  traceable  to  the contents of a bottle of liquor bought from the liquor vend of the appellants; and

(c) that  the deleterious ingredient  was  introduced in the bottle by the employees of the appellants on their instructions.

While there is oral and expert evidence available to prove that  methyl  alcohol  was present  in  the viscera taken from the bodies of the deceased during the post mortem yet there is no material on the record to prove that the methyl alcohol which was found in the viscera was  consumed  from  the  bottles  that  had  been purchased  by  the  deceased  or  some  one  known  to them from the liquor vends of  the appellants.   In  an answer  to  a  categorical  question  put  up  by  us,  the learned Advocate  General,  has  not  been able  to  pin point  any  evidence  to  prove  that  a  sample  from the container in which the liquor was purchased from the vend  of  the  two  appellants  was  also  sent  to  the Forensic Expert to prove that methyl alcohol found in the  body  of  any  one  of  the  deceased  was  possibly ingested  on  account  of  the  same  having  been consumed from the aforesaid bottle.  Even in relation to the cases where the victims have lost their vision, there is  no  evidence to  connect  the  methyl  alcohol  that  is

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 15 of 30

stated  to  be  responsible  for  the  blindings  with  the bottles  which  have  been  purchased  from  the  liquor vends of the appellants.  While there is no doubt that the investigating agency had recovered a large number of  bottles  which  had  been  put  in  the  canal  by  the employees of the appellants to cover up their default of selling liquor from the vend other than country made liquor  i.e.  Santra,  Kesar  Kasturi,  Jagadhari  No.  1 prepared by the distilleries in contravention of the terms of the licence yet the contents of none of these bottles were  got  sampled  for  proving  that  they  contained methyl  alcohol  which  was  ultimately  found  to  be injurious to the health of the consumers.  We are afraid that  the  Investigating  Officer  in  this  case  was  so overwhelmed by the magnitude of the tragedy that he forgot  to  collect  the  basic  evidence  which  would  be required to bring home the charge against the culprits who were responsible for the tragedy.  It is unfortunate that  at  no  level  of  the  State  administration  any  one deemed  it  appropriate  to  have  even  an  enquiry conducted  into  the  circumstances  which  led  to  the tragedy for pin-pointing the short comings in the system which permitted sale of  spurious liquor from licensed liquor vend.  No effort was made to find out how and why such a lapse could occur in relation to a subject which provides at least 1000 crores of revenue annually by  way  of  excise  tax  to  the  State  Government. Although it might not have occurred to an Assistant Sub Inspector that the case would also involve the violation of  the  provisions  of  the  1954  Act  inasmuch  as according to the 1954 Act the liquor would fall within the term “food” and the sale  of  spurious liquor would be punishable  for  imprisonment  for  life  yet  even  the supervisory officers dealing with the incident seem to be blissful ignorant of their obligations to ensure that all loop holes are identified so as to plug the same in order to  prevent  the  recurrence  of  a  tragedy  of  this magnitude.  The political  masters as well  as the civil servants  responsible  for  running  the  administration were satisfied with doing what appears to be a cover up job  and  this  approach  of  theirs  stood  in  the  way  of collection of adequate evidence required to prove the case  against  the  persons  responsible  for  the perpetration of the crime.  In view of the fact that the learned counsel for the State has not been able to pin point the evidence which would fasten to the appellants the  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  liquor  which  was

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 16 of 30

being sold out at their licensed vend contained methyl alcohol as also on account of the fact that there is no evidence  to  prove  that  the  remanents  of  the  bottled which are alleged to have been brought from the liquor vend  contained  traces  of  methyl  alcohol  and  in  the absence  of  any  proof  to  show  that  the  appellants shared with  their  employees  the  intention  to  prepare spurious liquor with the help of methyl alcohol it would not be possible for us to uphold the conviction of the appellants.”

 11) In  fact,  in  the  process,  the  High  Court  indicted  the  State

authorities in not discharging their duties properly and made the

adverse comments qua the State administration.

12) Another reason given by the High Court is that except the two

respondents, all other accused persons were acquitted by the trial

court under Section 120B of IPC and no appeal was filed by the

State to challenge this acquittal.  It had inevitable consequence of

upsetting the conviction of the respondents as well upon whom

criminal  liability  was  sought  to  be  fastened  with  the  help  of

Section  120B  of  IPC.   To  put  it  otherwise,  the  High  Court

concluded  that  there  cannot  be  charge  of  criminal  conspiracy

under  Section 120B of  IPC in respect of  two persons  qua  the

respondents  when  others  stood  acquitted  meaning  thereby

charge of conspiracy of the respondents along with other accused

persons was not proved.  High Court referred to the judgment of

this Court in Fakhruddin v. State of M.P., AIR 1967 SC 1326, in

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 17 of 30

support of this conclusion.   

13) It  is  clear from the above that  though there is  no dispute that

hundreds of the people had consumed the poisonous liquor and

scores  of  them  had  died  and  many  more  were  rendered

permanently blind, the factor which has weighed in acquitting the

respondents  is  that  there  is  no  evidence  to  connect  the

consumption  of  methyl  alcohol  by  the  victims  with  the

respondents.  Therefore, it is required to be seen as to whether

this finding of the High Court of lack of evidence connecting the

accused persons with the tragedy is correct or not.   

14) In the first instance, we would like to reiterate the evidence about

the cause of death, on which there is no dispute.  The unfortunate

tragedy, which came to be known as ‘Kalanwali Hooch Tragedy’,

saw the messenger of death taking away the lives of as many as

44  unfortunate  persons  who  fell  prey  to  it  by  consuming

poisonous liquor.  36 persons, though were spared the extreme

consequence  of  death,  were  still  inflicted  with  a  very  serious

consequence, as losing the eye-sight permanently for the rest of

the life makes the life difficult and challenging in many ways.  This

gruesome  occurrence,  where  so  many  persons  became  the

victims, happened was proximate to the place where vends of

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 18 of 30

respondents are situate.  Post mortem of the deceased persons

were conducted which led to a common finding, namely, methyl

was found in the viscera of the dead bodies and the cause of

death was consumption of alcohol containing methyl.  Likewise,

those who lost their vision were also medically examined.  All the

Doctors who examined these persons arrived express opinion,

namely, the damage to the vision of  their  eyes was the direct

result of intake of methyl alcohol.   These Doctors were more than

25 in number who deposed in the Court and their conclusion was

identical,  which  cannot  be  a  mere  coincidence.   It  can  be,

therefore, unhesitatingly concluded that cause of death or loss of

eye-sight is the result of consuming spurious liquor.  There is also

sufficient  evidence on record to believe that  many people had

been rushed to the different hospitals with symptoms of alcoholic

poisoning out  of  whom 36 persons had lost  their  lives and 44

others  had  rendered  permanently  blind.   The  report  of  the

Chemical  Examiner  submitted  in  each  case  of  death  was  the

direct result of consumption of methyl alcohol which had caused

methanol poison.  There is impeccable and unshaking evidence

in the form of depositions of all those doctors who had conducted

autopsy on the bodies of the deceased and who had examined

those  who  lost  their  eye-sight.   They  have  appeared  in  the

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 19 of 30

witness  box  and  testified  to  the  aforesaid  effect  which  is

supported by medical records.  This was a kind of maelstrom, a

whirlpool, wherein 36 persons drowned in spurious liquor.  Other

44 persons, though could be rescued from fatality, but lost their

most vital limbs i.e. the eye-sight.   

15) With  this,  we  come  to  the  core  issue,  which  is  the  bone  of

contention, as to whether the respondents were responsible for

the same?

16) As  pointed  out  above,  in  the  opinion  of  the  High  Court,  no

evidence  is  led  to  connect  the  respondents  with  the  sale  of

spurious liquor.  We do not agree with the said observation and

the conclusion of the High Court on that basis.  It has come on

record, and is duly recorded by the trial court in the impugned

judgment,  that  with the spread of  news that  so many persons

were losing their lives or eye-sight after consuming the poisonous

liquor  adulterated  with  methyl  alcohol  containing  methanol

poison,  ASI  Umed  Singh  landed  at  the  Civil  Dispensary  of

Kalanwali on December 2, 1980 and recorded the statement of

Om Prakash, who had lost his father Puran Chand just then as a

result of the consumption of adulterated liquor purchased by him

from the liquor vend of Krishan and Som Nath located in the area

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 20 of 30

of Kalanwali.  ASI Umed Singh had barely put his pen down after

recording  the  statement  of  Om  Prakash  that  more  and  more

patients  with  identical  symptoms  started  reporting  in  different

hospitals of the town.  All these persons had, immediately after

suffering the aforesaid consequence of consuming liquor, made a

specific and categorical statement that they had purchased the

liquor from the vends of the respondents.  Even those who lost

lives,  their  immediate near relations had informed to the same

effect.  Such contemporary statements of those very persons who

suffered loss of eye-sight immediately after the incident cannot be

ignored  and  there  is  no  reason  to  disbelieve  them.   Such

statements also become relevant under Section 7 of the Indian

Evidence Act, 1872.   

17) That apart, the prosecution also led the evidence to the effect that

two respondents herein were given the licence for running liquor

vends in Kalanwali  town at  the relevant time.  This fact  is not

disputed by the respondents.  Another shocking fact which was

brought on record,  and which is taken very lightly by the High

Court,  is  that  when  this  tragedy  struck  and  was  given  wide

coverage by the Media, the respondents and their staff tried to

destroy the evidence in the form of other bottles which were lying

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 21 of 30

in  the  stock/vends  by  throwing  them  away  in  the  river/canal.

Though  the  High  Court  has  accepted  this  fact,  but  same  is

brushed aside with the observation that no attempt was made to

get the same tested.  Even if this is a lapse on the part of the

prosecution,  this  very  conduct  of  the  respondents  in  throwing

away remaining stock becomes a supporting piece of evidence

along with other evidence brought on record.     

18) Evidence is also produced to the effect that 2560 pints of liquor

were seized by the police from the liquor vends between 3rd and

5th of December, 1980.  A bottle containing 50 mls of liquor and a

bottle containing 100 mls of liquor were produced by Dharam Pal

and  Harphool  Singh  respectively  before  ASI  Umed  Singh  on

December 2, 1980 which were seized by him and were sealed.

Similarly,  another  bottle  containing  100  mls  of  liquor  was

produced by one Jaswant Singh on December 6, 1980 which was

also  seized  and  sealed.  One  Ganga  Singh  produced  another

bottle containing spurious liquor which was seized and sealed.

The accused were  consequently  interrogated  which  led  to  the

recovery of empty bottles and corks for preparing and storing the

spurious liquor.  22 bottles of spurious liquor were recovered from

the Bhakra canal on the identification of the accused which were

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 22 of 30

sealed and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban

for chemical analysis.  The sprit was procured in the fictitious and

imaginary name of ‘Ram Lal’.  The entire record maintained at the

liquor vend Kalanwali was seized and it was found that the entire

record had been forged by the contractors.  The interrogation of

the  accused  further  led  to  the  information  that  the  corks  and

labels for the bottles were supplied by one Ram Prakash Gupta, a

resident of Sri Nagar, Delhi who was arrested on December 30,

1980.  The labels were printed in the name of Haryana Distillery

and other distilleries by Gurbachan Singh alias Pappa and were

supplied  to  Dwarka  Dass.   Sufficient  evidence  is  led  by  the

prosecution to prove that the entire liquor had been supplied from

the local country liquor vend situated at the town of Kalanwali.

The contractors of the licensed vend were identified as Krishan

son of Ram Chand and Som Nath son of Lachhu Ram.  They had

adulterated  the  liquor  with  methyl  alcohol  which  contained

methanol  poison  and  had  sold  it  through  their  agents  to  the

customers.  The contractors were always aware that the sale of

alcohol  containing  methanol  poison  could  cause  hurt  to  the

customers but they were perhaps more interested in making easy

money.  That is how the planned sale of methyl alcohol caused

havoc in the area of Kalanwali and Baragudha of District Sirsa.  In

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 23 of 30

addition, direct evidence was produced showing the involvement

of the respondents herein in the commission of the ghastly crime.

The trial court specifically discussed the evidence of some of the

witnesses  who  had  deposed  that  the  spurious  liquor  was

purchased from the shops of respondents herein.  It is more than

apparent that the respondents took advantage of these gullible

villagers getting transient and falling to their prey.  It is this greed

and philistinism of the respondents to make quick money which

has led to this sordid episode.   

19) To recapitulate, it has come on record that Inder Singh (PW-43)

testified that his son Darshan Singh had died by consuming liquor

purchased by him from the liquor vend at  Kalanwali.   He was

working at local Petrol Pump and had consumed the liquor there.

Gurdev Singh (PW-44) testified that Darshan Singh son of Inder

Singh was his maternal nephew who was employed at the Petrol

Pump at Kalanwali.  He had gone to purchase the diesel at the

filling station about seven years ago.  Darshan Singh was lying on

a bed in delivered state.  He informed his maternal uncle that he

had taken liquor which was purchased from the liquor vend at

Kalanwali.   He had fallen ill  after consuming the liquor and his

vision was gradually falling.  Gurdev Singh had immediately taken

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 24 of 30

Darshan Singh to Dr. Vijay for instant medical aid but Darshan

Singh died at Sirsa on the next morning.  Gurtej Singh (PW-81)

testified  that  his  cousin  Sukhdev  Singh  had  lost  his  life  by

consuming poisonous liquor purchased from the liquor vend at

Kalanwali.  He was cremated at 3.30 pm on December 2, 1980.

Similarly,  Niranjan  Singh,  brother  of  Suranjan  Singh,  and  Tara

Chand  had  reportedly  lost  their  lives  after  consuming  the

poisonous liquor which they purchased from the liquor vend at

Kalanwali.  Harphool Singh (PW-225) testified that he had gone

to the market at Kalanwali on a tractor to sell his cotton crop on

December  2,  1980 along  with  Harnek  Singh  and Surjit  Singh.

They purchased a bottle of liquor from the vend of Som Nath.  All

three of them consumed the liquor and fell seriously ill.  They had

produced one half of the bottle before the doctor.  Surjit  Singh

had lost the vision in the eyes permanently.  Hari Singh (PW-220)

testified  to  the  same effect.   He  had purchased one bottle  of

liquor from the liquor vend of Som Nath son of Lachhu Ram.  He

knew the  vendor  personally.   He  consumed  half  of  the  bottle

along with Jarnail Singh.  Jarnail Singh expired after consuming

the  liquor  whereas  he  became  blind.   Charanjit  Singh,  DSP

(PW-288) was working as SI/SHO at Police Station Kalanwali on

December 3, 1980.  He had received information about the death

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 25 of 30

of  Panna  Lal,  Budh  Ram and  Baja  Ram after  consuming  the

spurious liquor and had investigated the matter.  He had arrested

the accused and had made recovery of articles at their instance.

These  events,  pellucid  as  crystal,  point  towards  the

culpability of the respondents.   

20) It is evident from the statements of Inder Singh (PW-43), Gurdev

Singh (PW-44), Gurtej Singh (PW-81), Hari Singh (PW-220) and

Harphool Singh (PW-225) that the spurious liquor had been sold

by the respondents herein and their agents at the liquor vend at

Kalanwali.  The trial court while convicting the respondents relied

upon  the  evidence  discussed  by  us  above,  to  pin  down  the

respondents.   

21) The High Court is, thus, totally wrong in upsetting the findings of

the trial court based on the aforesaid evidence and allowing the

respondents to go scot free.  Strangely, there is no discussion on

the abovementioned evidence which appeared on record and the

High Court has blissfully observed that no evidence is produced

to connect or to fasten the responsibility upon the respondents.

Interestingly, the High Court took note of the reasoning given by

the trial court and summarised the same in the following manner:

“The present case against the appellants is built on the premise that  they being  licensees  of  the  liquor  vend

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 26 of 30

from  which  spurious  liquor,  responsible  for  causing deaths of 36 persons and blindings of 44 persons, was purchased.  In view of this, according to the State, there is  no  legal  infirmity  in  the  conviction  and  sentence awarded to the appellants.  The fact that Krishan and Som Nath were holders of licence to sell liquor at the liquor  vend  catering  to  the  needs  of  Kalanwali  and Baragudha is not even disputed by the appellants.  On the  record,  we  have  documents  Ex.PW108/A  which evidences the acceptance accorded by the Excise and Taxation  Department  to  the  bids  offered  by  the appellants.  Shri Rajinder Singh, Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer, Hisar has gone on the record to assert that there is only one liquor vend in village Kalanwali and a host of witnesses have deposed to the effect that various  persons,  who had purchased liquor  from the vend of the two appellants and thereafter consumed the same on the fateful  day, had either lost  their lives or vision  and  this  can  only  be  due  to  the  presence  of methyl alcohol that was found in the viscera sent to the Forensic Scientist for examination.  It is on the basis of this presence of methyl alcohol in the viscera that the trial  court  has inferred that  the liquor purchased was spurious as it contained un-permissible methyl alcohol. It  being  common knowledge that  methyl  alcohol  has deleterious/fatal effect on the human body as also the fact  that  the  employees  of  the  liquor  vend could  not have  prepared  spurious  alcohol  without  requisite instructions from the liquor licenses i.e. the appellants that the trial court has come to the conclusion that the charges  framed  against  the  appellants  had  been proved.”

22) Immediately thereafter, following remarks are made by the High

Court:

“The reasoning put  forth  by the trial  court  cannot  be faulted with if there is material on the record in support of the same.”  

23) The  High  Court  committed  manifest  error  in  observing  that

evidence was not produced to connect the respondents with the

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 27 of 30

tragedy.  No doubt, there have been some lapses on the part of

the police authorities in not investigating the case with the vigour

that  was  necessitated.   The  High  Court  may  also  be  right  in

finding fault with the State administration for not conducting an

inquiry  into  the  circumstances  which  led  to  the  tragedy  for

pin-pointing the shortcomings in the system which permitted sale

of spurious liquor from licenced liquor vend.  At the same time,

insofar as culpability of the respondents is concerned, the same

was  proved  beyond  doubt  by  producing  plethora  of  evidence.

This Court is of the opinion that trial court had rightly come to the

conclusion holding respondents to be the guilty of crime.

24) Insofar  as  argument  predicated  on  Section  120B  of  IPC  is

concerned,  even  if  we  proceed  on  the  basis  that  charge  of

conspiracy  is  not  proved,  it  would  be  suffice  to  observe  that

adequate  evidence  is  produced  showing  the  culpability  of  the

respondents,  individually.   Once  it  is  shown  that  the  spurious

liquor was sold from the local vends belonging to the respondents

coupled  with  the  fact  that  after  this  tragedy  struck,  the

respondents  even  tried  to  destroy  remaining  bottles  clearly

establishes that the respondents had full  knowledge of the fact

that  the  bottles  contain  substance  methyl  and  also  had  full

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 28 of 30

knowledge  about  the  disastrous  consequences  thereof  which

would  bring  their  case  within  the  four  corners  of  Section  300

fourthly.  The respondents cannot be treated as mere cat’s paw

and naive.  They have exploited the resilience nature of bucolic

and rustic villagers.   

25) Accordingly, this  appeal  is  partly  allowed and judgment  of  the

High Court acquitting the respondents is hereby set  aside and

that of the trial court convicting the respondents is restored.  The

respondents shall surrender to undergo the sentence inflicted by

the trial court.  

.............................................J. (A.K. SIKRI)

.............................................J. (ASHOK BHUSHAN)

NEW DELHI; JUNE 09, 2017.

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 29 of 30

ITEM NO.1     COURT NO.4           SECTIONS IIB

              S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Criminal Appeal No. 847/2006

STATE OF HARYANA              Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS

KRISHAN AND ANOTHER                  Respondent(s)

[HEARD  BY  HON'BLE   A.K.  SIKRI  AND  HON'BLE  ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.]

Date : 09/06/2017 This appeal was called on for judgment today.

For the Appellant(s) Ms. Monika Gusain, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) Mr. S.K.C.Pasi, AOR

Mr. S.K. Dhingra, AOR

Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K.  Sikri  pronounced the judgment of the  Bench  comprising  His  Lordship  and  Hon'ble  Mr.  Justice Ashok Bhushan.

For the reasons recorded in the Reportable judgment, which is placed on the file, this appeal is partly allowed and judgment of  the  High  Court  acquitting  the  respondents  is  hereby  set aside and that of the trial court convicting the respondents is restored.   The  respondents  shall  surrender  to  undergo  the sentence inflicted by the trial court.  

  (H.S. Parashar)     (Parveen Kumar)     Court Master                                          AR-cum-PS

Criminal  Appeal No. 847 of 2006 Page 30 of 30