Swaran Singh Vs. State of J and K

criminal - legality of conviction - sections 109, 302 and 307 of indian penal code, 1860 - appeal on special leave against conviction and sentence passed by trial court and upheld by high court - appellant convicted as he had exhorted other accused to kill deceased - no eye witness supported said exhortation - no other evidence available to show appellant's participation in killing - held, under circumstances conviction and sentence are liable to be set aside. - motor vehicles act (59 of 1988)section 149 (2)(a)(ii): [dr. arijit pasayat & a.k. ganguly, jj] exercise of power in the present case, a, not having a valid driving licence driving the vehicle carrying 14 persons meeting with accident - in claim for damages before consumer forum, one s, shown as driving the vehicle - entries in case diary and post-mortem report clearly showing a as driver of the vehicle and not s on ground that the vehicle was used in violation of terms of the policy appellant insurer had repudiated the claim district forum however allowed the claim and also awarded compensation to respondent - state and national commissions upheld the same held, relevance of entries in case diary and post-mortem report not considered in proper perspective by all the forums below. therefore, the case id remitted back to district forum for adjudicating it afresh. - the trial court did not attach any importance to this omission on the ground that it was on a minor point and inspite of it thought it fit to rely upon the evidence of the eye-witnesses that swaran singh had exhorted mohinder singh to act like that. if really swaran singh had exhorted mohinder singh like that and then the witnesses would not have failed to say so in their statements before the police......no. 15 of 1985.2. the appellant - swaran singh was tried alongwith mohinder singh for causing death of kesar singh and injuries to man singh. the trial court convicted mohinder singh under sections 302 and 307 rfc. swaran singh was convicted under sections 302 and 307 both read with section 109 rpc.3. the high court confirmed the conviction and sentence of both the accused. both of them then filed special leave petition in this court. special leave petition of mohinder singh was rejected and only swaran singh was granted leave to file an appeal.4. the only reason why swaran singh has been convicted is that he had exhorted mohinder singh to fire his gun and finish kesar singh and man singh and it was pursuant to this exhortation that mohinder singh had fired shots and killed kesar singh and injured man singh. what is urged by the learned counsel for the appellant is that no eye-witness in his statement before the police had stated that swaran singh had exhorted mohinder singh to kill either kesar singh or man singh. the trial court did not attach any importance to this omission on the ground that it was on a minor point and inspite of it thought it fit to rely upon the evidence of the eye-witnesses that swaran singh had exhorted mohinder singh to act like that. the high court also considered it as a minor omission and agreeing with the trial court confirmed the findings recorded against him.5. it is difficult to appreciate how this omission can be regarded as a minor omission. swaran singh has been convicted only on the basis of the said exhortation. there is no other evidence to show that he had taken any part in the killing of kesar singh and in injuring man singh. it was a material improvement made by the eye-witnesses on an important point and this aspect deserved to be given the due weight by both the courts below. if really swaran singh had exhorted mohinder singh like that and then the witnesses would not have failed to say so in their statements before the.....