STATE OF PUNJABversusCHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS.

                         [2008] 16 S.C.R. 23


                        STATE OF PUNJAB                               A
                                 v.
                  CHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS.
                 (Criminal Appeal No. 352 of 2002)
                       NOVEMBER 11, 2008.
                                                                      B
        [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM
                       SHARMA,· JJ.]

         PENAL CODE, 1860:
         ss. 376,366, 363 and 308 - Accused prosecuted on' the        C
    basis of dying declarations and statements of eye witnesses
    - During trial, eye witnesses did not support prosecution
    version - Acquittal by trial court finding discrepancies in two
    dying declarations - Upheld by High Court- HELD: Reasons
    recorded by courts below do not warrant interference ~            D
    Evidence - Dying declarations.
           The respondents were prosecuted for commission of
      offences punishable u/ss 376, 366, 363 and 308 IPC. An
      FIR was lodged against the accused-respondents on the           E
      basis of the statement made by the deceased victim of
      the crime. She alleged that she was taken under the
      threat of her broth.er's life and was ravished by the
      accused and as she had been defamed, she poured
t
      kerosene on her clothes and set herself afire; Another
      dying declaration of the victim was recorded by the             F
      Executive Magistrate. The trial court found discrepancies
      in the dying declarations and acquitted the accused. The
    . High Court upheld the ac~uittal.
         Dismissing the appeal filed by the S,ta~e, the .Court        G
          HELD: 1.1. PWs 13 and 15 the so-called eye-
     witnesses, who happen to be the brother an·d the friend
     of the deceased did not support the prosecution version
     and resiled from their statements made during·
                                  23                                  H
    24        SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2008] 16 S.C.R.

                                                                    y
A investigation. Therefore, the residual question is the
  acceptability of the two dying declarations. The trial court
  did not place"any reliance on the dying declarations. [Para
  7] [27-B-C]
        1.2. When two courts on analysis of the evidence
B found the respondents not guilty, there is no scope for
                         '                                          ,.
  interference in the appeal. The reasons indicated by the
  trial court and affirmed by the High Court discarding the
  two dying declarations do not suffer from any infirmity.
  [Para 9] [27-F-G]
c       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
    No. 352 of 2002.
        From the Judgmerit and Order dated 20.12.1999 of the
    High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. Appeal
    No. 167-DBA/1991.
D
         Ajay Pal for the Appellant.
         NareshBakshi, D.P,. Singh and Subramonium Prasad for
    the Respondents.
         The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
E       DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is
  to the judgment of th·e Punjab and Haryana High Court
  upholding the judgment of acquittal passed by learned
  Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar. The respondents faced trial
  for alleged commission 'of offences punishable under Sections
F 376, 366, 363 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short
  IPC).
         The background facts as projected by the prosecution
    during trial are as follows:
         The FIR, Exhibit PD'3 in this case was recorded on July
G
    29, 1989 at 9.30 P.M. in Police Station Mohali under Sections
    383 and 378 IPC on the basis of statement (Exhibit PD) made
    by Kumari Poonam (since deceased) recorded by Head
    Constable Bishnu Dutt in PGI Chandigarh at 1.30 P.M. on July
    29, 1989. In the said statement it was alleged by Kumari
H
         STATE OF PUNJAB v. CHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS.                25
                     [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]

         Poonam (since deceased) aged about 16-1/2 years that she A
         was a student of 9th Class in Senior Secondary School, Mohali
         and that on that date i.e. on July 29, 1989 at about 10.15 A.M.
         she had committed suicide by putting kerosene oil on her
         clothes and putting the same on fire on account of misbehaviour
         by accused Honey who was resident of H.No. 112, Phase II, B
    -i   Mohali. It was alleged that on July 17, 1989 when she was going
         to the school at about 7.00 a.m. along with her brother Anil, on
         the way Honey accused met them and he asked her to
         accompany him, failing which he would not spare her brother
         and out of fear she went with him and he took her to Rose
         Garden, Chandigarh in an Ambassador car. It was further
                                                                             c
         alleged that on that previous day i.e. July 28, 1989, in the same
         manner she was coming to the school at about 7.00 a.m. along
         with her brother Anil and her friend Rajni when accused Honey
         along with two others who she could recognise met them in
         white coloured Ambassador car and they made her brother Anil D
          sit in the said car and told her that if she wanted her brother
          then she should sit with them and out of fear she sat in the car
          and they also made Rajni sit in the said car. Thereafter they took
<
          them to a hotel in Sector 22, Chandigarh and there they forcibly
          committed rape on her and thereafter they left them at Mohali E
          at about 1.00 P.M. on that day. It was further alleged that
          thereafter she had told the entire occurrence about these two
          dates to her mother. It was further alleged that on that day i.e.
          July 29, 1989, the said boy i.e. Honey came to their house and
          rang the door bell and went away after giving a signal to her F
         and at that time there was no one else in the house.
               Her mother had stopped her from going to the school. It
         was alleged that she put herself on fire as she had been
         defamed in the eyes of the public and it was useless to live.
         She further alleged that on hearing her cries, another tenant G
     \   Darshan Singh who was residing in the adjoining room came
         there and he put off the fire and he also called her mother and
         thereafter they brought her to PGI Chandigarh where she was
         under treatment. She further stated that she had put herself on
         fire because of the earlier incident concerning Honey accused H
    26         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2008] 16 S.C.R.


A   and hence accused Honey and his friends were responsible for
    the same. This statement Exhibit PD was recorded by Head
    Constable Bishnu Dutt in the presence of PW3 Dr. A.S. Bawa.
    Further, Head Constable Bishnu Dutt recorded the statement
    Exhibit PD of Kumari Poonam after obtaining opinion Exhibit
· B PC/1 of Dr. A.S. Bawa about the fitness of Kumari Poonam to
    make the statement..                                                       ~--



        After recording the said statement, HC Bish nu Dutt sent
  the same to Police Station Mohali as the case pertained to the
  said Police Station. Th~reafter, AS! Avtar Singh of Police
C Station, Mohali moved an application before the SOM for
  making necessary arrangements to record dying declaration of
  Kumari Poonam by a Magistrate. Thereupon, ShriP.K. Sharma,
  Executive Magistrate, Chandigarh was deputed for this purpose.
  Shri P.K. Sharma moved application Exhibit PH to the Doctor.
o in charge about the fitness of Kumari Poonam and the doctor              y
  on duty declared her fit to make the statement at 7.30 P.M. on
  July 29, 1989 vide endorsement Exhibit PH/1. Thereafte~ Shri
  P.K. Sharma, Executive. Magistrate recorded the statement
  Exhibit PJ of Kumari Poonam at 8,10 P.M.-on July 29, 1989 in
E PGI Chandigarh in English.
        After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.
    The accused persons pleaded innocence and therefore trial
    was held.
       In order to establish the accusations, prosecution examined
F 17 witnesses. After considering the materials on record, learned
  Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar directed acquittal of the four
  accused persons of the various charges. State filed an appeal
  before the High Court. The stan1i of the State before the High
  Court was that even though Pws 13 and 15 i.e. the brother of
G the deceased (Anil Kumar) and her friend (Rajni) had not
  supported the prosecution case, the two dying declarations POI           I
  and PJI clearly established the accusations. The accused ·
  persons took the stand that in the so-called two dying
  declarations there were various inconsistencies which were
H irreconciliable. Therefore, the trial court was justified in directing
        STATE OF PUNJAB v. CHATINDER PAL SINGH & ORS.                27
·';-                [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]

        the acquittal. The High Court accepted the plea of the accused A
        persons and upheld the acquittal.
            The stand taken before the.High Court by the prosecution
        and the accused persons have been reiterated in the present
        appeal.
\                                                                          B
             We find that two so-called eye-witnesses examined by the
        prosecution i.e. Pws 13 and 15 who happen to be the brother
        and the friend of the deceased did not support the prosecution
        version and resiled from their statement made during
        investigation. Therefore, the residual question is the             c
        acceptability of the two dying declarations. The trial court did
        not place any reliance on the dying declarations.
              The discrepancy pointed by the trial court is that in Ex. PD
         there is mention about one incident of rape on her on July
         28, 1989 in a hotel at sector 22 Chandigarh by Honey and two D
         either accused. She does not state in the dying declaration in
         Ex PJ that she was raped on July 17th and stated that accused
         Honey had simply taken her to Rose Garden. In ExPJ she does
       . not mention the date of the first incident as July 17th but states
         that her friend Rajni was also with her and they were taken to E
       . some unknown hotel while Honey raped her and accused .
         Longowal raped Rajni. She also did not mention the second
         incident to have taken place on 28th July and stated that it was
         2/3 days ago and not yesterday, when the boys took them to a
         hotel in Sector 22 and raped them. There are several F
         inconsistencies and contradictions in the Ex PD1 and PJI.
              Above being the position, when two courts on analysis of
        the evidence found the respondents not guilty, there is no scope
        for interference in this appeal. The reasons indicated by the trial
        court and affirmed by the High Court discarding the two dying G
        declarations do not suffer from any infirmity. The appeal fails
        and is dismissed. If the respondents have been released on
        bail pursuant to the order dated 20th April, 2001, the bail bonds
        stand discharged.
                                                    Appeal dismissed.      H
        R.P.