SUKHCHAIN SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

SUKHCHAIN SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

The order of the High Court acquitting the accused was perverse and based upon assumptions not referable to any legal or factual presumption. On proper appreciation of evidence, the prosecution witnesses, especially PW-1 and PW-2, were credible eye witnesses. The trial court rightly convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court judgment, and restored the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

Parties
Appellant: Sukhchain Singh; Respondents: State of Haryana and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court (appeal From Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquittal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court's acquittal set aside; conviction and sentence by trial court restored.
Legal Topics
Murder, Appreciation of Evidence, Section 302 Read With Section 34 IPC, Interference Under Article 136 Constitution, Evidence Eye Witnesses, Conviction and Acquittal
Criminal Law Murder Appreciation of Evidence Section 302 Read With Section 34 IPC Interference Under Article 136 Constitution Evidence Eye Witnesses Conviction and Acquittal

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 2 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sukhchain Singh

Appellant

State of Haryana and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court (appeal From Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether High Court was justified in acquitting accused by rejecting testimony of eye witnesses
  2. 2 Whether Supreme Court can interfere with findings of fact under Article 136 Constitution when perverse
  3. 3 Whether the evidence and prosecution version prove murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC

Ratio Decidendi

The order of the High Court acquitting the accused was perverse and based upon assumptions not referable to any legal or factual presumption. On proper appreciation of evidence, the prosecution witnesses, especially PW-1 and PW-2, were credible eye witnesses. The trial court rightly convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court judgment, and restored the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court's acquittal set aside; conviction and sentence by trial court restored.

Orders

  • Respondents convicted under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.
  • Fine of Rs. 10,000 each imposed and, upon realization, to be paid to the widow of the deceased in terms of trial court directions.