Chandigarh Administration Vs. Dharam Singh

Chandigarh Administration vs Dharam Singh

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Jul 29, 1985

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/641884

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/641884
Court: Supreme Court of India
Judge: A.N.Sen and; R.S. Pathak, JJ.
Decided On: Jul 29, 1985
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 306 of 1975
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- [B.P. Sinha, C.J.,; J.R. Mudholkar,; K. Subba Rao,; N. Rajgopala Ayyangar, JJ.] The appellants were members of the East India Cotton Association which was an association recognised by the Cen- tral Government under the Forward Markets Regulation Act, 1952. Prioi to December 1955, they had entered into "hedge cont...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34 and 302; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 378(3)

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Chandigarh Administration

Respondent

Dharam Singh

Legal References

Acts: Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34 and 302; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 378(3)
Reported In: AIR1985SC1671; 1985CriLJ1859; 1985(2)SCALE663; 1985Supp(1)SCC266; 1985(17)LC1043(SC)

Excerpt

.....and advisory in nature; the functions described in cl. (f) were analogous to these and could only be supervisory or advisory. the commission had no administrative functions or powers of management or powers of interference in the internal management of registered association which were vested in the association. the power conferred upon the commission was not conferred "under the act". the words did not include a rule or a bye-law, and applied only to an assignment made in the exercise of an express power conferred under the act. the central government had no power tinder s. 12 to make a bye,law assigning any function to the commission. union of india v. madan gopal kabra (1954) s.c.r. 541, modi food products ltd. v. commissioner of sale's tax, u.p., a. i.r. 1956 all. 35, strawboard manufacturing co. ltd. v. gupta hill workers' union, (1953) s.c.r. 439, india sugar & belineries ltd. v. state of mysore, a.i.r. 1960 mys. 326, c.w. motor service (p) ltd. v. state of kerala, a.i.r. 1959 kerala 347, howell v. falmouth boat construction co. ltd. (1951) a. c. 837; the western india theatres ltd. v. municipal crporation of the city of poona, (1959) supp. 2 s.c.r. 71 and hubli electricity co. ltd. v. province of bombay ( 1948) 76 i.a. 57, referred to. - 3. we have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the entire evidence on the record, and we are not satisfied that the high court has erred......appellant, the chandigarh administration, applied to the high court for leave to appeal, but the application was summarily dismissed. against that order this court granted special leave to appeal confined to the case against the respondent, dharam singh.3. we have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the entire evidence on the record, and we are not satisfied that the high court has erred. the learned sessions judge carefully considered the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, surinder kumar gupta and ram look and took into account all the evidence and after weighing the facts and circumstances of the case he was unable to hold that the charges were substantiated, we have been taken through the record by learned counsel and we see no reason to differ. it does appear that the respondent and his family suspected that the deceased was carrying on an illicit affair with ajit kaur but that is wholly insufficient by itself to establish that the deceased was murdered by the respondent. there are several weaknesses in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses to which the learned sessions judge has drawn pointed attention and, to our mind, it is difficult to find fault with his appraisal of the evidence. the evidence and circumstances may conceivably give rise to the suspicion that the respondent was involved in the incident, but suspicion cannot serve as evidence. the high court was justified in refusing leave to the appellant to appeal to it, and we see no reason to hold a different view4. the appeal is dismissed and the bail bond tendered by the respondent shall stand cancelled.

Full Judgment

R.S. Pathak, J.

1. This appeal by special leave is directed against an order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana declining leave to the appellant under Sub-section (3) of Section 378 of the Cr PC to appeal to the High Court against an order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh acquitting the respondent.

2. The respondent, Dharam Singh and his father, Karam Singh were charged for an offence Under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Vinod Kumar. In addition, a substantive charge was framed Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the respondent. It appears that Vinod Kumar occupied a barsati above a shop-cum-flat in Sector 18D, Chandigarh along with Ram Lok. The respondent and his brother and their family lived on the floor immediately below the barsati. The case of the prosecution is that on March 1, 1974 at about 4.30 in the afternoon the two accused went up to the barsati and while Karam Singh caught hold of Vinod Kumar the respondent stabbed him with a knife in the abdomen. The motive suggested by the prosecution is that the accused suspected that Vinod Kumar was carrying on an illicit relationship with their sister Ajit Kaur. The learned Sessions Judge recorded evidence in the case and after considering the material before him he held that it was not sufficient to establish the charges beyond doubt against the accused, and he acquitted them. The appellant, the Chandigarh Administration, applied to the High Court for leave to appeal, but the application was summarily dismissed. Against that order this Court granted special leave to appeal confined to the case against the respondent, Dharam Singh.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the entire evidence on the record, and we are not satisfied that the High Court has erred. The learned Sessions Judge carefully considered the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, Surinder Kumar Gupta and Ram Look and took into account all the evidence and after weighing the facts and circumstances of the case he was unable to hold that the charges were substantiated, We have been taken through the record by learned counsel and we see no reason to differ. It does appear that the respondent and his family suspected that the deceased was carrying on an illicit affair with Ajit Kaur but that is wholly insufficient by itself to establish that the deceased was murdered by the respondent. There are several weaknesses in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses to which the learned Sessions Judge has drawn pointed attention and, to our mind, it is difficult to find fault with his appraisal of the evidence. The evidence and circumstances may conceivably give rise to the suspicion that the respondent was involved in the incident, but suspicion cannot serve as evidence. The High Court was justified in refusing leave to the appellant to appeal to it, and we see no reason to hold a different view

4. The appeal is dismissed and the bail bond tendered by the respondent shall stand cancelled.

Same Court & Year Supreme Court of India · 1985 Same Parties Chandigarh Administration vs Dharam Singh Same Subject Criminal Same Judge A.N.Sen and; R.S. Pathak, JJ. Acts & Sections Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34 and 302; Code of Crimin...

Criminal