http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7

PETITIONER:

JARNAIL SINGH AND ANR. ETC.

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF HARYANA

DATE OF JUDGMENT20/01/1993

BENCH:

SINGH N.P. (J)

BENCH:

SINGH N.P. (J)

REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)

CITATION:

1993 SCR (1) 260 1993 SCC Supl. (3) 91

JT 1993 (1) 207 1993 SCALE (1)153

ACT:

Criminal Law:

Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Sections 3O2, 149 and Motive-Relevancy of-Held where

positive evidence is cogent, clear and reliable motive is of

no importance-Family members-Eye-witnesses-Whether

independent evidence required.

Evidence Act, 1872:

Chapter IX-Murder-Evidence of family members as eye-

witnesses-Reliability of.

HEADNOTE:

The first appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 192/1980 and his

four sons were convicted under Section 302 read with Section

149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1908 and sentenced to undergo

rigorous imprisonments for life. They were also convicted

and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment under

Section 148 of the Code.

According to the prosecution, a son of the first appellant

and a daughter of P.W. 4 fell in love with each other but

due to opposition from P.W. 4's husband, their marriage

could not take place and both of them committed suicide, and

therefore, the first appellant and his four sons had a

grudge that P.W. 4's husband was responsible for the death

of the first appellant's son; that two months thereafter

when P.W. 4's husband and his elder brother were returning

to the village from town in a bullock-cart along with P.W.

4, P.W. 5,her daughter and P.W. 6, her son-in-law, the five

accused, who were coming in a truck from the opposite

direction got down from the truck, chased P.W. 4's husband

and his elder brother, who were running away, and assaulted

them with Gandasa and Lathies and after boarding the truck,

drove the truck over the two brothers, that when P.W. 4 to 6

went near the two brothers they found them dead and a First

Information Report was lodged, and a postmortem was held.

261

On the basis of the evidence adduced on behalf of the

prosecution, including that of PWs 4 to 6, the Session Judge

came to the conclusion that the charges levelled against the

five accused were fully established. This finding was

upheld by the High Court.

In the appeal before this Court, on behalf of the accused

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7

persons it was contended that a false case had been set up

against them by PW 4, who had not seen the occurrence but

having learnt the death of her husband and his elder

brother, became an eye-witness along with PWs 5 and 6, her

daughter and son-in-law respectively, only to implicate the

accused persons, that there was no immediate motive for

commission of such a serious offence in the facts and

circumstances of the case, that it would not be proper to

accept the motive alleged on behalf of the prosecution and

that the eye-witnesses being only the members of the family,

some independent evidence was required.

Dismissing the appeals, this Court,

HELD: 1.1. Where the positive evidence against the

accused is clear, cogent and reliable, the question of

motive is of no importance. But, at the same time, motive

behind a crime is a relevant fact and normally prosecution

is expected to adduce evidence in respect thereto.

Experience shows that one or other motive moves the culprit

to a certain course of action.

Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1956 S.C. 460;

Narayan Nathu Naik v. The State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 1971

S.C. 1656; Podda Narayana v. State of A.P., A.I.R. 1975 S.C.

1252; Faquira v. State of U.P., A.I.R. 1976 S.C. 915 and

Molu v. State of Haryana, A.I.P. 1976 S.C. 24", relied on.

1.2. Normally there is a motive behind every criminal act

and that is why the investigating agency as well as the

Court while examining the complicity of an accused, first

try to ascertain as to what was the driving force which

compelled the accused to commit the crime in question. But

with complex growth of society and which has 'also produced

complex characters, the actions and reactions of person

either on the accuse side or on the prosecution side are not

very easy to ascertain and judge. It is a matter of common

experience that even a small or trifle incident has

different reaction on different persons. That is why it is

not always easy for the Court to weigh and judge as to

whether under the circumstances

262

brought on record by the prosecution, In normal course the

accused concerned could have acted as alleged by the

prosecution.

13. In cases where prosecution is not able to establish a

motive behind the alleged crime it assumes importance

specially in cases where the prosecution rests on

circumstantial evidence or on witnesses who have an inimical

background. Proof of motive on the pad of the accused

persons to commit an offence satisfies the judicial mind

about the likelihood of the authorship but in its absence it

is only proper on the part of the Court to have a deeper

search. But if the Court is satisfied that evidence

adduced, oral or circumstantial, establishes the charge

against the accused, the prosecution case cannot be rejected

saying that there was no immediate impelling motive on the

part of the accused persons to commit the crime.

1.4. In the present case, the son of the first appellant

committed suicide two months before the date of occurrence

because of the attitude taken by PW 4's deceased husband.

It can be said that there was no immediate motive which

impelled the accused persons to commit the murder of the two

brothers in broad day light in such cruel manner. But the

death of the son in a tragic circumstance must have shaken

the family and there is nothing unnatural or unusual that

because or that, the first appellant and his four sons

having seen the deceased coming to village on bullock cart

decided to eliminate him.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7

1.5. That apart, if the evidence adduced on behalf of the

prosecution is accepted, then whether there was immediate

motive for committing the offence looses all significance.

The present case has many special features which weigh

heavily against the accused persons and it is not easy on

their part to dislodge them. In cases relating to murder

the time taken in lodging the F.I.R. assumes special

significance. The fact that P.W. 4 lodged the F.I.R. within

an hour of the occurrence giving the details of the manner

of occurrence lends corroboration to her testimony in Court

regarding the participation of the accused persons in the

present occurrence. The manner of occurrence disclosed by

P.W. 4 in the F.I.R. was fully corroborated by the

postmortem examination reports. The two doctors during

postmortem examinations found that injury No. 7 on the chest

of P.W. 4's husband and injury No. 11 on his brother could

have been caused by the wheel of the truck passing over the

chest of P.W. 4's

263

husband and any blunt part of the truck striking against the

body of his brother. This not only corroborates the version

disclosed by P.W. 4 in the F.I.R. but goes a long way to

establish the correctness thereof.

1.6. The members of the family, if present at the time of

occurrence are the most natural witnesses. The version

disclosed in the F.I.R. has been supported by 3 eyewitnesses

P.W. 4, P.W. 5 and P.W. 6. There is no reason to doubt their

testimony only on the ground that they were closely related

to the victims. There is no evidence to show that any

person after the occurrence appeared at the scene to

engineer the present case against them. P.W. 4, whose

husband and elder brother of her husband had succumbed to

the injuries, was left alone to pursue the post occurrence

steps without help or assistance from anyone else.

1.7. There is no reason to interfere with the finding

recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court.

JUDGMENT:

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal Nos. 192-

193 of 1980.

From the Judgment and Order dated 4.9.1979 of the Punjab and

Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 760 and 759 of

1977.

R.L. Kohli, U.R. Lalit and K.K. Mohan for the Appellants.

A.M. Singhvi, Ms. Renu George, Ms. Indu Malhotra and I.S.

Goyal for the Respondent.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

N.P. SINGH, J. These appeals have been filed on behalf of

five accused persons, who have been convicted under section

302 read with section 149 of the Penal Code for committing

murder of Gurbux Singh and Wasava Singh and have been

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonments for fife. They

have also been convicted under section 148 of the Penal Code

and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for

one year.

It is the case of the prosecution that Rulwant Kaur, the

daughter of Gurbux Singh (deceased) and Raghbir Singh, son

of Jarnail Singh, one of the accused fell in love with each

other. As the marriage could not materialise due to

opposition, two months prior to the date of occurrence,

264

both of them committed suicide. It is said that accused

Jarnail Singh and his four sons who are the other four

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7

accused had a grudge against Gurbux Singh that the latter

was responsible for the death of Raghbir Singh aforesaid.

On 25.9.1974 before noon Gurbux Singh, his elder brother

Wasava Singh along with Surjit Kaur (PW 4) the wife of

Gurbux Singh, Sukhwant Kaur (PW 5) the daughter of Gurbux

Singh, and Surinder Singh (PW 6) son-in-law of Gurbux Singh

were returning to their village from Sirsa in a bullock-cart

after selling green fodder and making some purchases in the

market. On the way they saw from the opposite side the five

accused coming in a trust which stopped in front of the

bullock cart. All the five accused persons got down from

the truck and raised a Lalkara "DUSHMANO KO JAN SE MAR DO

JANE NA PAYEN". Accused Karma was armed with a Gandasa

whereas the three brothers and Jarnail Singh were armed with

lathis. Seeing the accused persons Gurbux Singh and his

brother Wasava Singh got down from the bullock-cart and

started running away. They were chased and the accused

persons assaulted both of them with their respective

weapons. Ultimately they fell down. The accused persons

then raised an alarm "BAHANCHOD BACH NA JAWEN TRUCK BHE UPAR

PHER DO". Thereafter all the five accused persons boarded

the truck. Accused Mohani sat at the steering wheel and

drove the truck over the bodies of two victims Gurbux Singh

and Wasava Singh. After the accused persons left Surjit

Kaur (PW 4), her daughter (PW 5) and son-in-law (PW 6) went

near the victims and found them dead.

The First Information Report was lodged at 12.30 P.M. A copy

of the said F.I.R. reached the Magistrate concerned by 2.15

P.M. The Investigating Officer reached the place of

occurrence, held inquest and recorded the statement of

witnesses including the aforesaid Sukhwant Kaur and Surinder

Singh. PW 2 and PW 3 are doctors who held the post mortem

examination of Gurbux Singh and Wasava Singh respectively

the same day at 5.30 P.M. During the post mortem examination

on the persons of Gurbux Singh 13 injuries were found.

Injury No. 7 was contusion 14' x 7 1/4 on the front of

chest. On dissection, collection of blood was found and

upper seven on right side and upper eight on left side of

the ribs were found to have been fractured. Both lungs were

badly lacerated. Heart was also badly lacerated along with

pleura. According to the opinion of the Doctor (PW 2), who

held the post mortem examination of the body of

265

Gurbux Singh, the aforesaid injury No. 7 could be caused by

wheel of the truck passing over the portion of chest of the

deceased. The Doctor (PW 3), who held the post mortem

examination of the dead-body of Wasava Singh, found 21

injuries on his person. Injury No. 11 found on the person

of Wasava Singh was raddish contusion 11" x 1 1/2 on the

middle of the upper part of the chest. According to the

Doctor, the said injury No. 11 could be possible by any

blunt part of a truck striking against the body. During the

investigation at the instance of accused Karma, the Gandasa

with blood stain was recovered and lathis were also

recovered from the possession of the accused persons,

In view of the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution

including that of Surjit Kaur (PW 4), Sukhwant Kaur (PW 5)

and her husband Surinder Singh (PW 6), the learned Sessions

Judge came to the conclusion that the charges levelled

against the five accused persons have been fully established

which finding has been upheld by the High Court.

According to the appellants, a false case has been set up

against them by Surjit Kaur (PW 4), the widow of Gurbux

Singh, who had not seen the occurrence, but having learnt

the death of Gurbux Singh and Wasava Singh became an eye

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7

witness along with her daughter and son-in-law only to

implicate the accused persons. The counsel appearing for

the accused aforesaid pointed out that there was no

immediate motive for commission of such serious offence in

the facts and circumstances of the case and it shall not be

proper to accept the motive alleged on behalf of the

prosecution that as the son of accused Jarnail Singh and

daughter of Gurbux Singh had committed suicide, as their

marriage could not materialise because of the objection

raised by Gurbux Singh, accused Jarnail Singh and his four

sons chased the two victims on the road, and not only

assaulted them but also crushed them by the truck.

It is true that normally there is a motive behind every

criminal act and that is why the investigating agency as

well as the Court while examining the complicity of an

accused, first try to ascertain as to what was the driving

force which compelled the accused to commit the crime in

question. But with complex growth of society and which has

also produced complex characters, the actions and reactions

of persons either on the accused side or on the prosecution

side are not very easy to ascertain and judge. It is a

matter of common experience that even a small or trifle

266

incident has different reaction on different persons. That

is why it is not always easy for the Court to weigh and

judge as to whether under the circumstances brought on

record by the prosecution, in normal course the accused

concerned could have acted as alleged by the prosecution.

That is why this Court has repeatedly expressed the view

that where the positive evidence against the accused is

clear, cogent and reliable, the question of motive is of no

importance. Reference may be made to the cases of Gurcharan

Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1956 SC 460, Narayan Nathu

Naik v. The State of Maharashtar AIR 1971 SC 1656 = [1971] 1

SCR 133, Podda Narayana v. State of A.P., AIR 1975 SC 1252 =

[1975] 4 SCC 153, Faquira v. State of U.P., AIR 1976 SC 915

= [1976] 1 SCC 662, and Molu v. State of Haryana, AIR 1976

SC 2499 = [1976] 4 SCC 362. But at the same time it must be

impressed that motive behind a crime is a relevant fact and

normally prosecution is expected to adduce evidence in

respect thereof. Experience shows that one or other motive

moves the culprit to a certain course of action. In cases

where prosecution is not able to establish a motive behind

the alleged crime it assumes importance especially in cases

where the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence or on

witnesses who have an inimical background. Proof of motive

on the part of the accused persons to commit an offence

satisfies the judicial mind about the likelihood of the

authorship but in its absence it is only proper on the part

of the Court to have a deeper search. But if the Court is

satisfied that evidence adduced oral or circumstantial

establishes the charge against the accused, the prosecution

case cannot be rejected saying that there was no immediate

impelling motive on the part of the accused persons to

commit the crime.

In the present case Raghbir Singh, the son of accused

Jarnail Singh, committed suicide two months before the date

of occurrence because of the attitude taken by the deceased

Gurbux Singh is not in dispute. It can be said that there

was no immediate motive which impelled the accused persons

to commit the murder of Gurbux Singh and Wasava Singh in

broad day light in such a cruel manner. But the death of

Raghbir Singh in a tragic circumstance must have shaken the

family and there is nothing unnatural or unusual that

because of that Jarnail Singh and his four sons having seen

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7

Gurbux Singh coming to village on bullock-cart decided to

eliminate him.

Apart from that if the evidence adduced on behalf of the

prosecution

267

is accepted then whether there was immediate motive for

committing the offence loses all significance. The present

case has many special features which weigh heavily against

the accused persons and it is not easy on their part to

dislodge them. The occurrence took place before noon. The

F.I.R. was lodged at 12.30 P.M. within an hour. A copy of

the F.I.R. was received by the concerned Magistrate by 2.25

P.M., the same day. The Investigating Officer reached the

place of occurrence before 4 P.M. Even the port mortem

examinations of the two victims were held by two doctors

mentioned above by 5.30 P.M. the same day. In cases

relating to murder the time taken in lodging the F.I.R.

assumes special significance. The F.I.R. being the first

version of the occurrence disclosed to the police acts as

check on the part of the prosecution. The fact that Surjit

Kaur (PW 4) lodged the F.I.R. within an hour of the

occurrence, giving the details of the manner of occurrence

lends corroboration to her testimony in Court regarding the

participation of the accused persons in the present occur-

rence. The manner of occurrence disclosed by Surjit Kaur

(PW 4) in the F.I.R. was fully corroborated by the post

mortem examination reports. She stated in the F.I.R. at

12.30 P.M. that accused persons after having assaulted the

two victims with Gandasa and Lathis, crushed them with the

wheel of the truck. The two doctors during post mortem

examinations found that injury No. 7 on the chest of Gurbux

Singh and injury No. 11 on Wasava Singh could have been

caused by the wheel of the truck passing over the chest of

Gurbux Singh and any blunt part of the truck striking

against the body of Wasava Singh. This not only

corroborates the version disclosed by Surjit Kaur (PW 4) in

the F.I.R. but goes a long way to establish the correctness

thereof. It Surjit Kaur (PW 4) had not witnessed the

occurrence as suggested by accused persons then how she

could have mentioned in the F.I.R. that after assaulting the

two victims the accused persons entered into the truck and

crushed the victims with the wheel of the truck, which is

supported by the post mortem examination.

The learned counsel could not point out from the evidence of

Surjit Kaur (PW 4) which has been fully accepted by the

Trial Court as well as the High Court as to on what ground

that should be rejected. The same is the position so far

the evidence of Sukhwant Kaur (PW 5) and Surinder Singh (PW

6). About Sukhwant Kaur (PW 5) it was pointed out that she

was not present at the place of occurrence when the

Investigating Officer reached and she came only later.

However, so far Surinder Singh (PW 6) is concerned, he was

present when the Investigation. Officer reached the

268

place of occurrence. It was urged on behalf of the accused

persons that although Surjit Kaur (PW 4) had claimed in her

evidence that she had made purchases in the market before

returning to the village but no such article was found in

the bullock-cart. On behalf of the accused the traditional

and conventional argument that the eye witnesses being only

the members of the family, some independent evidence was

required, was also advanced. This argument has been

repeatedly rejected by this Court saying that the members of

the family if present at the time of occurrence are the most

natural witnesses. According to us, all these submissions

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7

are of no significance, in view of the fact that the first

information report was lodged within an hour of the

occurrence; a copy whereof was received by the Magistrate

within two hours of the recording thereof. The version

disclosed in the F.I.R. has been supported by three eye

witnesses PW 4, PW 5 and PW 6. We find no reason to doubt

their testimony only on the ground that they were closely

related to the victims. There is no suggestion much less

evidence on behalf of the accused persons to show that any

person after the occurrence appeared at the scene to

engineer the present case against them. It appears Surjit

Kaur (PW 4) whose husband and elder brother of her husband

had succumbed to the injuries, was left alone to pursue the

post occurrence steps without help or assistance from anyone

else.

We find no reason to interfere with the finding recorded by

the Trial Court and affirmed by the High Court. Therefore,

the appeals fail and are accordingly dismissed.

N.P.V. Appeals dismissed.

269