BALKAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "throughout the Web of the English Criminal Law one golden thread is always to be seen, that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner's guilt subject to what I have already said as to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception. If, at the end of and on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, created by the evidence given by either the prosecution or the prisoner, as to whether the prisoner killed the deceased with a malicious intention, the prosecution has not made out the case and the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained. " (Woolmington and the Director of Public Prosecutions, 1935, Appeal Case 462 ).

(2.) THE age old dictum of prosecution to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts has been exhibited not only in England, but the observations of the House of Lords have with practically no modification been adopted in the Indian jurisprudence with respect to criminal cases. The Supreme Court in the case of Sarwan Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab, reported as All India Reporter 1957 S. C. 637, in a like manner regarding the same principle held: "it is no doubt a matter of regret that a foul cold blooded and cruel murder like the present should go unpunished. It may be as Mr. Gopal Singh strenuously urged before us that there is an element of truth in the prosecution story against both the appellants. Mr. Gopal Singh contended that, considered as a whole the prosecution story may be true; but between 'may to true' and 'must be true' there is inevitably a long distance to travel and the whole of this distance must be covered by legal, reliable and unimpeachable evidence. "

(3.) ON March 9,1992, Assistant Sub Inspector Mohinder Singh, Head Constable Baldev Singh and Constable Labhu Ram were present at the bus stop and patrolling the area. Gurdev Singh, brother of the deceased and Kishan Singh made a statement that the two appellants have committed the murder of Smt. Kamaljit Kaur, deceased. It was also mentioned that he had solemnised the marriage to the best of his capability and that the deceased was being harassed by the appellants for bringing insufficient dowry and for not bringing scooter, the coloured T. V. and Refrigerator etc. On the relevant date, as per the complainant's statement, Gurdev Singh with Banta Singh, Member of the Panchayat and resident of village Ghambowal had gone to the village of the appellants. Ajit Singh Lambardar had met them. They saw that appellant Harbhajan Kaur caught hold of the deceased by her arms and appellant No. 1 had caught the deceased by her long hair. She was being given fist blows and was repeatedly being thrown on the ground. On seeing Gurdev Singh and Ors. , Appellant No. 1 started beating her mercilessly and had threatened Gurdev Singh that in case he came near them he will be killed.