Title: DARSHAN SINGH V STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 163 of 2010
Dated on: 5.1.2024
Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR, J.
Facts of the case
In this present case the late Amrik Kaur got married to Darshan Singh in 1988. Melo Kau, Amrik Kaur’s cousin sister, made the arrangements for their union. However, because of the reported extramarital relationship between Darshan Singh and Rani Kaur, what started off as a happy marriage quickly descended into turmoil. According to the prosecution, the tense marriage served as a fertile foundation for a covert affair that lasted for an important three years. Allegations of the Night: The prosecution’s case is cantered on the dreadful events that transpired on the nights of May 18, 1999, and May 19, 1999. It claims that Amrik Kaur was purposefully poisoned by Darshan Singh and Rani Kaur, who were motivated by a desire to kill her. Dismissing any possibility of suicide, the Trial Court declared the incident to be a homicide. It was predicated on the idea that Darshan Singh had a strong reason for planning the murder of his wife. The court gave great weight to the fact that both of the accused were there in the house on that pivotal night. The dismissal of the suicide theory was rooted in the absence of visible injuries on the deceased’s body, with the court asserting that this alone did not negate the possibility of a forceful administration of the poisonous substance. Subsequently in the High court cleared Rani Kaur conviction despite maintaining Darshan Singh’s conviction. The Court’s reasoning was based on the benefit of doubt that was given to Rani Kaur because there was no hard proof other than evidences testimony.
Legal proceeding
In the present case Darshan Singh and Rani Kaur faced charges under Section 302 r/w- punishment for murder Section 34- joint liability of criminals of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court, after a thorough examination of the evidence and circumstances, delivered a verdict that shook the accused a conviction for the offense under Section 302 r/w Section 34 as the court (Trial) came to the conclusion that the two in a joint act committed the act of murder and subsequently Life imprisonment was the consequential sentence imposed on both. But in the high court the co-accused (lady rani Kaur) escaped liability since the sole proof of her crime was dependent upon a statement testimonial.
Issues
Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt the presence of the appellant and the co-accused in the house of the deceased on the night of the murder, based on the statement given in the testimony?
Whether the death of the deceased (Amrik Kaur) was caused by poisoning with aluminium phosphide, and whether it was a case of homicide or suicide?
Whether the appellant had a motive to kill his wife due to his illicit relationship with the co-accused?
Court Judgement and analysis
The Supreme Court granted the appeal and reversed the concurrent verdicts of guilt. The Court determined that the prosecution did not demonstrate the appellant’s and Rani Kaur’s presence in the residence firmly and convincingly, testimony. The Court further determined that the appellant had aroused doubts in the minds of the judges about his argument that the dead had committed suicide, and that the prosecution had failed to rule this out. The Court further found that the appellant could not be convicted purely based on his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and that he deserved the benefit of doubt.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh
