Skip to content


Suba Singh Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 424 of 1981
Judge
Reported inAIR1982SC690; (1982)3SCC226
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302 and 304
AppellantSuba Singh
RespondentState of Punjab
Excerpt:
.....be tested by touchstone of law relating to circumstantial evidence laid down by supreme court indian penal code, 1890 sections 300 & 304,part i : murder or culpable homicide - circumstantial evidence - deceased was doing money-lending business - accused persons and deceased were quarrelling over issue of payment of commission - after half an hour, dead body of deceased was found - evidence of witness who had business transaction with deceased, that both parties were quarrelling and appellant was holding handle of soil cutter at time of quarrel held, mere exchange of hot words by deceased and accused would not give him impression that appellant would take life of deceased. fact that he left the place on being told by deceased to do so, cannot be a ground to disbelieve his evidence...........and that too by the blunt side of the (illegible), we are satisfied that the offence committed by the appellant would fall under section 304 part ii, indian penal code. looking to the fact that the victim (accused) was aged about 13 years and altercation on a minor dispute took place and in this trivial dispute only one blow was given a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years would meet the ends of justice. accordingly this appeal is allowed and the conviction of the appellant under section 302 and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life are set aside and he is convicted under section 304, part ii, indian penal code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. to the extent of this modification, the appeal is allowed.
Judgment:

1. Special Leave granted limited to the question of nature of offence and sentence.

2. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case in which only one blow was given and that too by the blunt side of the (illegible), we are satisfied that the offence committed by the appellant would fall under Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code. Looking to the fact that the victim (accused) was aged about 13 years and altercation on a minor dispute took place and in this trivial dispute only one blow was given a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly this appeal is allowed and the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life are set aside and he is convicted under Section 304, Part II, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. To the extent of this modification, the appeal is allowed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //