MAKHAN SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

MAKHAN SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

The prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt: the extra-judicial confession was uncorroborated and weak, the alleged last-seen circumstance was not proved conclusively in the absence of evidence contradicting the appellant's explanation, the Section 27 discovery could not be treated as incriminating because exclusive knowledge of the burial place could not be attributed to the appellant, and the alleged motive was not established; accordingly convictions and sentences were set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Makhan Singh; Respondent: State of Punjab
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 July 1988
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / On Appeal (special Leave)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences set aside
Legal Topics
Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Extra Judicial Confession, Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act, Motive, Identification of Dead Bodies, Death Penalty
Criminal Law Evidence Murder Circumstantial Evidence Extra Judicial Confession Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Motive Identification of Dead Bodies +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Makhan Singh

Appellant

State of Punjab

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / On Appeal (special Leave)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charge of murder was proved beyond reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence
  2. 2 What weight should be given to an extra-judicial confession
  3. 3 Whether a memorandum under Section 27 Evidence Act leading to discovery of bodies is a circumstance against the accused when exclusive knowledge cannot be attributed

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt: the extra-judicial confession was uncorroborated and weak, the alleged last-seen circumstance was not proved conclusively in the absence of evidence contradicting the appellant's explanation, the Section 27 discovery could not be treated as incriminating because exclusive knowledge of the burial place could not be attributed to the appellant, and the alleged motive was not established; accordingly convictions and sentences were set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences set aside

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Conviction and sentence passed against the appellant are set aside