Sajjan Singh, Dule Singh And Another VS. State Of Madhya Pradesh

Supreme Court of India

Reporting JudgeM.K. Mukherjee,d.P. Wadhwa

Linked as:



Extract


Sajjan Singh, Dule Singh And Another VS. State Of Madhya Pradesh

PETITIONER: SAJJAN SINGH, DULE SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/09/1998

BENCH: M.K. MUKHERJEE, D.P. WADHWA

ACT: JUDGMENT: WITH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 138 OF 1997

J U D G M E N T

D. P. WADHWA, J.

Sajjan Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 137/97), Dule Singh and Meharban Singh (Appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 138/97) are aggrieved by judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court convicting them for offences under Section 302/149 Indian Penal code ('IPC' for short) and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life.

Originally before the Sessions Court, there were 11 accused being tried including the appellants. Two of the accused were also charged for offence under Section 404 IPC.

After the conclusion of the trial, Sessions Judge acquitted Banesingh and convicted rest of the 10 sentencing each of them to life imprisonment. These 10 went in appeal before the High Court. State also filed appeal against the acquittal of Banesingh, Appeals were heard by a Division Bench comprising of Shukla and Chitre, JJ. Both the Judges upheld the acquittal of banesingh and dismissed the appeal filed by the State. So far as the 10 appellants were concerned, the Judges were divided in opinion. While Chitre,

J. give his opinion that the conviction of all of them should be upheld and their appeal dismissed, Shukla J. felt that conviction of three of them should be upheld and the rest acquitted. The matter was then referred to a third Judge, Prasad, J. under Section 392 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the 'Code') who by judgment dated February 24, 1996 upheld the conviction of six persons and dismissed the appeal while remaining four were acquitted.

Out of the six appellants whose appeals have been dismissed by the High Court, there are before us. Remaining three, it appears, did not appeal. As to how these persons were armed as per prosecution and how the trial ended in con...

See the full content of this document