KHEM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence. both dated April 2, 1986 passed by the then learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot, whereby the appellant has been convicted for an offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and as a result thereof sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years.

(2.) FOR the disposal of this appeal there is no need to refer to the facts of the case. Suffice it to say that the appellant was initially charged and put to trial by the learned Sessions Judge Faridkot for offences under Sections 302, 324 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Vir Pal Kaur and for causing the evidence of murder to disappear and also for causing injuries to Balwinder Kaur, PW-3

(3.) I am afraid if the impugned order of conviction of the appellant under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code can be sustainable in law, once the appellant has not been found guilty for the substantive offence i. e. murder. This view is supported by a judgment of the Apex Court reported as Palvinder Kaur v. The State of Punjab, AIR 1952 SC 334, relevant para of which reads as under :-